The RPG Duelling League
RPGDL Games => Forum Games => Topic started by: Sierra on June 30, 2008, 08:20:38 PM
-
It's a rough life, being a supporting character in a colorful multiverse. Oh sure, your big-name superheroes might get killed off once in a while, but they can rest assured that the wise and powerful lords of all creation will resurrect them just in time to save the day during a crucial crossover event. But for the throwaway villains and the powerless civilian cast? Anything can happen. For a few issues you might be just fine, going about your life as though it was perfectly normal for men in bright tights to run around on the rooftops fighting crime every night--and then, before you know it, some jerkass named Doctor Sick von Evil is stacking you in the hero's refridgerator just to piss him off. Congratulations, you were created to be fodder for a Shocking Plot Twist and now your job is done. Yes, it's a rough life being a minnor character in the comics...
~
The time? 199X.
The place? Belle Reve maximum security prison in Louisiana.
The event? This year's bloated, DC-wide, multiseries crossover CRISIS. Omens and portents are everywhere, natural disasters wrack the Earth, heroes and former archenemies band together to stem the tide of chaos, because THE WORLD IS AT STAKE. And all the while, the members of the Suicide Squad, a government-funded program attempting to rehabilitate super-powered criminals by using them to further national interests (supervised by a group of goody-two-shoes heroes, of course), sit on the sidelines. A rising ocean leaves them stranded in their headquarters, alone with their private vendettas.
The team maintains an uneasy peace at the best of times. In a situation like this? It's a POWDER KEG just waiting for someone to strike a match...so it can EXPLODE. And soon enough, as if on cue, an unknown party starts eliminating the team members, one by one...
NOTE: This scenario reflects no particular event in the comics. Characters who never met each other in the series are thrown together willy-nilly here. I have endeavored to make metagaming highly unproductive and avoid giving an advantage to people more familiar with the source material. In other words, if you attempt to infer someone's alignment based on a character name or roleclaim, you do so at your own risk.
ALSO NOTE: Despite the signup thread projecting a scenario in which the scum were the heroes, I have opted not to go with that angle because it's just too obvious. Again, see the above note. Character name cannot be taken as an indicator of alignment one way or the other.
ALSO ALSO NOTE: Brick is red.
---
RULES
- No editing your posts.
- No talking outside the thread unless your role specifically states that you may.
- No posting during game nights.
- No spectator posts. Period.
- No talking after hammer or during the night phase.
- Don't directly quote your role PM.
- PLAY TO WIN.
- Try to make at least one substantial post every twenty-four hours. Failing to meet this standard of activity will result in first a warning and then a modkill. If you know RL will keep you offline for a substantial amount of time, let the mods know.
- Game-days will not have deadlines.
- Town must KO someone every day. No Lynch may not be voted for.
- LYLO and/or potential LYLO will be announced.
- There may or may not be third parties with seperate win conditions from scum or town.
- There may or may not be 'scripted sequences' of events that change the rules of the game and things like that.
The standard format for voting is ##Vote. To remove a vote, use ##Unvote.
Finally, feel free to ask the mods if you have any questions about your role in particular or about mafia in general. Alex is the co-mod.
---
Still in Circulation:
3. Strago
5. QuietRain
6. Bardiche
9. Elfboy
11. Laggy
12. Shale
14. Corwin
Retconned out of existence:
7. EvilTom (Mindboggler, Town Zombie)
17. Deltaflyer2k8 (The Thinker, Town Messenger)
8. OblivionKnight (Deadshot, Self-aligned Jester)
10. Meeple (Major Victory, Self-aligned Miller Survivor)
15. Ashdla (Enchantress, Town Power Detector)
2. Taishyr (Poison Ivy, Town Lie Detector)
13. Jo'ou Ranbu (Count Vertigo, Town Roleblocker)
16. Excal (Javelin, Town Illinois Nazi)
1. AndrewRogue (Black Thorn, Town Lyncher/Vig)
4. Carthrat )Doctor Light, Town Voteless)
---
Link to final day one votecount: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=24589;topic=1398.150;num_replies=178;sesc=7553adf33f4043b1159cbbd95eeeaa97
Link to final day two votecount: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=25137;topic=1398.325;num_replies=328;sesc=16307c22593d97302c218aaf7a53562c
Link to final day three votecount: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=25606;topic=1398.450;num_replies=468;sesc=6c5f1098801ae7ddcdca4e544168a3f6
Link to final day four votecount: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=25989;topic=1398.550;num_replies=575;sesc=05b5bd5a8069d0b7b6e635db57e8295f
-
##Vote: Strago
An actor, so he's definitely likely to be pulling strings somewhere and playing us. Just look at Team America! Actors are powerful! Also, he's not coming to DL Con, so...yeah. Has to be one of us scum.
Also, hi everyone! Welcome to the game. I think we should be able to PM people outside of the game, any alignment. What say you, mod? It would be just like Touhou!
-
##Vote: OblivionKnight
Referencing MotK game. NEEDS NO FURTHER EXPLANATION.
-
##Vote Ciato
For pointing out my failings as a DL-er in the sign-up thread. ;)
But really, talking outside of the game in PM, OK? Way to buck the rules. Would be fun, don't get me wrong. But the Word of Mod is law, you know. (of course, we're all villains, so what do we really think about that, anyway...)
-
Hey, I pointed out your failings too! I demand you vote for me!!
...uh...wait. Nevermind that!
-
##Vote: Elfboy
Gee guys, such violence jumping in! Talking outside the game though, I guess it might be fun, but of course, wouldn't want to ruffle any feathers... Personally, I think the Elf is suspicious, mostly, because he has Elf in his name~ AND I HATE ELVES
-
##VOTE: EvilTom
Gentlemen (and ladies, I guess), a moment of your time.
EvilTom. Need I say more?
-
We affectionately call him Dread Thomas, actually.
This may or may not make an ounce of difference.
-
VOTE: Ashdla
I dont know why but there must be a crazy reason that i dont know yet! Gimme some time to think.
-
Delta: You forgot your [\b] tags.
Laggy: It doesn't matter! The clear implication is in his name! Verily, he is using SUBLIMINAL MESSAGING!
-
Oh yeah, we should be able to edit posts too. Seriously, that would be good - then if we make mistakes, we can cover them, and not have so many posts to read through! Easier for people to lurk! That can't POSSIBLY be bad!
Also, Ashdla...talking about not being a fan of violence and then...saying you HATE elves and are voting based on that? Mmm...so much irony! I think that's a bit...oh....hippoish.
...wait, hypocritical? Eh, hippoish sounds better.
-
Ok thanks Bardiche.
VOTE: Ashdla
-
HA! Hippos are things that i hate... :-\
-
No problem! You know me, always happy to help you kill someone that isn't me!
I think we need a thread for Dead People, too, so we can talk there and the living can use that as a pool of information.
We also should play hangman here to distract from the actual game.
-
WITHDRAW VOTE: Ashdla
VOTE: BARDICHE
Ashdla was a bit boring to vote for so im going to well... instigate an arguement.
*beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep*
-
##VOTE: Carthrat
This is obligatory.
Also, hello, everyone! ^_^
-
##Vote: Laggy
Attempting to defend the evil one by covering up evidence? You are clearly the scummiest here!
-
##Vote Deltaflyer. Death to the person I haven't met before!
-
##VOTE: Excal
I smell Canadian conspiracy.
-
Let's all roleclaim!
Otherwise, I think I do agree with voting the obviously scummy people.
##Vote: Carthrat
Carth is (nearly) always scum. Clearly the definite person to go after.
There may be a Canadian conspiracy here, but I'd be more suspicious of those damn Aussies.
-
Current votecount:
Ashdla (0): Deltaflyer2k8
Bardiche (1): Deltaflyer2k8
Carthrat (1): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (1): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (1): Shale
Elfboy (1): Ashdla
EvilTom (1): Bardiche
Excal (1): Ciato
Laggy (1): AndrewRogue
OblivionKnight (1): Laggy
Strago (1): OblivionKnight
OK's last vote was not counted because he failed to unvote Strago.
Deltaflyer2k8: The usual voting format here is ##Vote and ##Unvote (this one being for when you want to remove a vote). Please use this format from now on, as the #'s make votes and unvotes easier for the mods to spot. (I should've specified this in the opening post and will edit it in now). In case you were wondering, names bolded in the votecount above are active votes; names in italics are votes people have cast and subsequently removed.
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
What the...the game started while I was busy playing MMBN3? This is madness! Why was I not informed of such...
...ok, so it is entirely my fault. I'm so angry, I could, I could...
I'LL DO THIS!
##Vote: Andrewrogue
Do I really need to explain why at this point? If you're asking for a logic explanation from me, you guys have clearly been driven to a point of madness that is beyond repair!
-
My my my... vote for the one with the rat in his name you say?
All this talk of conspiracy makes my stomach turn! Though, I suppose there is some sort of a case for your opinion, OblivionKnight. However, I will wait for the Elf to defend himself before making any assumptions. You know what happens when you assume...
-
Waiting for the Elf to defend himself against... a joke vote?
-
OH YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
It's day one! My favourite part of the game! It's time to make up a whole bunch of bullshit, pretend it's legitimate, and then act all surprised when people vote for me! Along the way at least two people will say 'let's vote for lurkers' despite the game only having lasted like five minutes, at least one experienced player will spontaneously forget how to play and need reminding, and someone will roleclaim doctor like a moron so he can 'attract scum away from the cop', who will turn out to be paranoid anyway and only investigate himself because he keeps forgetting what side he's on.
At least Ciato actually voted before hell froze over, which means I have hopes that this game will develop in a different fashion than the usual. On the other hand, for the 412nd game in a row, we have someone voting Dread Thomas because he has 'evil' in his name.
What a retard!
Did he not read the fluff? We're villians, you numbskull! Evilness is a sign of trustworthiness! Everyone should vote for Bardiche immediately, he is clearly scum (which is alignment-neutral, just so we are clear.)
I can't actually vote because Cid is a jerk and likes giving out ironic roles, so I'll have you all do it for me. Kill Bardiche! DO IT NOW
-
Oh yeah OK voted for me.
That loser. Get your vote off me right now. It's not fair. I can't OMGUS you. Unsportsmanlike. Disgraceful.[/b] It's like picking on someone with no arms.
-
Rat...either he's pulling a Rando-Mafia Alex/Yakko and trying to make his posts as ridiculous as amusing as possible just to stand out, or he's lost his mind.
Either way, I applaud you.
-
Also, I totally didn't pay attention to anything and should probably accuse Snow instead of OK about this. Whatever. I'm gonna go take a shower. I'll keep you all posted on what happens in my daily life and how it'll affect my game of mafia (in this case, it'll prevent me from yelling at everyone for about twenty minutes.) I hope you guys all do the same, I care and so does everyone else.
-
I can't actually vote because Cid is a jerk and likes giving out ironic roles, so I'll have you all do it for me.
I hope you didn't intend on writing that and not having it bear at least some scrutiny. Are you planning to clarify this or no?
-
Do I have to remind you who exactly pulled the all-time boneheaded townie move recently? Hint: Not those of us who aren't you.
Did he not read the fluff? We're villians, you numbskull! Evilness is a sign of trustworthiness! Everyone should vote for Bardiche immediately, he is clearly scum (which is alignment-neutral, just so we are clear.)
Hey, maybe you losers are. I'm freakin' support staff. I may be paraplegic and forced to work tech support for B-list felons, but at least I'm not eating prison food!
(Those of you who have worked out my character from that, give yourself a prize. If you're not surprised to see said character in a Suicide Squad game, you're probably QR, or shockingly nuts. Maybe both!)
-
Laggy gets scumpoints++ for rolefishing and not reading my post, it quite clearly states everything important about my role that I am willing to disclose. I can't vote because Cid is a jerk. That's it. Really.
-
Hey Shale hey Shale hey Shale burn to ashes and die in obscurity.
-
Nothing is ever clear about you, genius of getting himself killed in perfectly avoidable situations. :(
-
Laggy gets scumpoints++ for rolefishing and not reading my post, it quite clearly states everything important about my role that I am willing to disclose. I can't vote because Cid is a jerk. That's it. Really.
Okay, but it didn't say that you weren't willing to disclose anything else. Just "Snark snark snark hay guys I can't vote snark." I can't fault him for asking you to be clear about it.
"Snark" is fun to say.
-
Hey Shale, you're not saying you're not going to roleclaim, so roleclaim already, you already told us some flavour.
Oh wait that's dumb kk nm.
-
I did a soft nameclaim, that's kinda different from giving role information.
-
(Those of you who have worked out my character from that, give yourself a prize. If you're not surprised to see said character in a Suicide Squad game, you're probably QR, or shockingly nuts. Maybe both!)
I resemble that. :) And hey, wheelchairs do NOTHING to diminish sexiness in redheads, Shale. You're with a bunch of felons, your social calendar should be amazingly full.
*wanders off to do housework and game this evening with sweet pictures in mind*
-
Apparently, all it took was a vote and the rodent got all feisty. And what's with rolefishing this -early- in a game? What are we, shrinemaiden.org? <_<
-
When someone puts up a post that's lolz h2u day 1 sux then goes I CAN'T VOTE BECAUSE MOD SUCKS, I don't think asking for clarification is rolefishing (especially since it was more in the line of "you gonna tell us more or no?") Frankly, if he didn't want it to be inquired into, he shouldn't have mentioned the restriction or made it more explicit. (This is all more or less what Shale already said, but reemphasis.)
-
Frankly, if he didn't want it to be inquired into, he shouldn't have mentioned the restriction or made it more explicit.
Too true! Usually only those wanting attention make such bold statements. Why oh why does the rat want us to look at him, I wonder?
-
Ah, Day 1. Of all the aspects of a mafia game, you were the one that most enticed me to take up playing again...
No, wait. That's not true at all.
##Vote: Meeple
We're what, 30 posts in and he doesn't have a vote yet? You all fail. Meeple should always be blamed when Dune is not available.
-
##Unvote: Strago
##Vote: Shale
Why? I don't know. For making Carth sad.
Ignore the fact I was going to vote him anyway.
-
I resemble that. :) And hey, wheelchairs do NOTHING to diminish sexiness in redheads, Shale. You're with a bunch of felons, your social calendar should be amazingly full.
*wanders off to do housework and game this evening with sweet pictures in mind*
When did I imply lack of sexiness? Redheads are hot.
-
Hmm, good timing for game to start. About to end DQ8, I actually have two of the next three days off work, and the day after that is less than seven hours! Sweet deal.
Regardless, since it seems I missed the joke phase, I would like to point one thing out. OK has already labled himself as scum. Don't believe me? Here it is!
##Vote: Strago
An actor, so he's definitely likely to be pulling strings somewhere and playing us. Just look at Team America! Actors are powerful! Also, he's not coming to DL Con, so...yeah. Has to be one of us scum.
Also, hi everyone! Welcome to the game. I think we should be able to PM people outside of the game, any alignment. What say you, mod? It would be just like Touhou!
And that is the most suspicious thing I've seen so far, along with his general flitting from topic to topic and already making two joke votes. So, all in all, I feel pretty good about...
##Vote: Oblivion Knight
As for the other thing worth noting, Rat being Rat, I think I agree that he is baiting folks and trying to encourage a train. However, given that these will generally lead to discussion which is good right now, I've got no issues with it at present.
Edit: Make that three votes, though this is the first time he's unvoted, and the unvote is on the first person he voted for, if not the second. So... let's toss not paying attention to himself on there so long as we're trumping up charges.
On a side note, you said you were going to vote Shale anyways, OK. Why were you? You said nothing as to your reasons, and I am mightily curious.
-
I resemble that. :)
##UnVote: Shale
##Vote: QuietRain
Hells no. You used the wrong word in that sentence. That's seriously scummy. You didn't read the text surely, so therefore...you aren't paying attention and are scum!
-
##Unvote: Elfboy
##Vote: Oblivion Knight
A little change of pace, perhaps~?
-
Frankly, if he didn't want it to be inquired into, he shouldn't have mentioned the restriction or made it more explicit.
Too true! Usually only those wanting attention make such bold statements. Why oh why does the rat want us to look at him, I wonder?
Prolly going along with the jote votes (see what I did there?) stage.
Of course, no one can deny Rat's not uh, noticable with his "I can't vote because Cid is a jerk" comment. Not sure how to interpret that. Not sure what to voice on it either, for fear of being accused of role fishing. Nasty comment, can't really discuss it without role fishing, even though it probably alarmed some senses. Not really anything worth lynching for, though.
-
Oh geez um I wonder why I would mention this, could it be because it'll come out by the end of the day anyway, so there's no point hiding it at all? May as well kickstart day one when we can!
Maybe I should've made it more explicit, I guess. Like 2+2. That's pretty explicit. I guess. I thought it was all pretty clear but I understand the need for detailed clarification of everything. So let's talk about one of the ramifications of my role.
-I'm not useful to town at LYLO because I have no voteweight. Functionally, LYLO is a day earlier than it would normally be for whatever numbers of town and scum we have. (Barring town doublevoter or whatever.)
-However, having this role is strangely liberating, and allows me to confidently make posts like my first post. Justified? Well, if the only thing I've got going for me is that I'm he-re!, may as well ramp it up to start.
<->
Also if I could vote I'd vote for OK now, yeah- wait, there's a tool for this!
##FoS: OK
Hahahahahahaha hilarity, I guess acting like this was completely meaningless. So I guess from this point on though I think I'll try and calm down. Sorry guys, I hate this role a lot. :V
-
It's day 1 madness, everything is worth lynching for until the jokevotes stop. </tongue tearing hole in the cheek>
Regardless, I'm pretty sure the slightly passive-aggressive comment towards the mod and the mild eyebrow-raising it brought will be one of the things we'll look back in hindsight and think "... ohhhhhhhhhhh. We were so dumb".
NINJA'D BY RAT WHAT. Also, RAT IS DEAD WEIGHT WHAT. God-damned-. That's... um. Wow.
-
Somehow I am comforted by Rat's weightlessness in the grand scheme of things, unless of course he is lying scum and is just using this all as a trick to throw us off. [/day 1 shenanigans]
Semi-more seriously, to Bardiche, you should really not be afraid to call someone out on something if you feel it deserves clarification and the discussion would help town as a whole. That kind of hesitation and "what if, maybe, I don't know, people might think it's scummish!" is exactly something scum would want people to play into. This doesn't justify bad play, but if you are able to reasonably explain your actions, better to speak up than to, uh, not. Same principle applies for hammering and all that.
-
Count me in as looking askance at OK. Rapid-fire jokevote switching plus the "us scum" slip of the tongue....neither looks great, both together make this either a giant gift or an equally-giant distraction. ##FoS for now, maybe I should vote here but I don't like jumping onto Day 1 dogpiles, this is not new.
Rat: Okay, that's nutso. Argue well, I guess.
Bardiche: What Laggy said, more or less. You did say something halfway-substantive about Rat's comment, if I'm reading you right, but assertiveness is good!
-
You're all jumping over something really random and stupid. Cid even said in the topic opening that we're evil, so of course town is scum! Read things! FoS on all of you going after me for that and not reading the opening of the topic. People jumping on me for a small meaningless slip is dumb. Easy scumtrain if needed.
##Unvote: QuietRain
##Vote: Ashdla
New person starting a train is worrying. Explain your not reading things.
-
So your jokevote justification was "he seems like town, so I'm voting him"?
-
Okay, mulling over Rat's claim... I'll admit I'm a bit confused by the idea of a vote-less person in a mafia game. Seems like it's pretty similar to not having the person in the game at all, except...
It is now day one. With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch. There is no deadline.
Well, I see no reason to disbelieve this, so Rat's presence does raise the lynch threshold. It's pretty artificial, though? I mean, if we get down to five people in the game, two of them scum, and three of them (town) Rat, then scum win. Much like if it were 2-v-2. This seems to make Rat entirely useless to the game unless he has a power role, but I haven't thought it all through. (No, I'm not rolefishing, just telling it like it is. I assume the scum are bright enough to figure out the same thing.)
Rat could also be lying as town in order to attract scum attention to himself I guess, not that I support lying as town basically ever (exception noted for zombie Captain K). Doesn't seem too likely anyway. Or lying as scum in hopes that we won't bother lynching him; after all he has no vote record! Won't fly for me, though; I for one will want to see some FoS action which I'll take as the next best thing. Rat, to his credit, seems to be doing just this.
Weird, anyway.
-
Eh, there was no need to discuss Rat's role, because it turned out to be what I expected (barring any compensatory roles to be an addition to it) and discussing it was moot. Hence why I mentioned it wasn't anything worth lynching over.
Which is a sentiment I'll contradict now: Rat can only place the lynching vote, according to what he says. This means he'll be nigh useless in a LYLO situation, since he can't add on to town votes. The question will be how long we'll (be able to) keep Carthrat for his insights and whatnot. We can elect to lynch him solely based on that role being useless to us near end-game, but I don't think it smart to base our first day lynch on that alone. Especially because I don't rule out the possibility that Rat may have been compensated for the role, in the form of another power role.
Oblivion, I don't agree with the "new person actions are worrying" sentiment, being a new person myself. Despite that, I do agree that Ashdla needs to talk more rather than short one-liners.
##UNVOTE: EvilTom
Because I see no reason for my joke vote to stand now that I am pretty set on entering SRS BSNS mode.
===----==
DHE: If I recall correct there is a Mafia role that cannot place a vote unless that vote is the vote to lynch. In other words, Rat can still be of use, but only limitedly so and that is when, in a 5P round, both townies are in consensus about the scum and Rat agrees. Still, no sense in thinking of endgame yet until we get there. With seventeen players and apparent role madness, I'm not going to think of endgame yet until we're a bit further in.
-
Everyone overreacts to everything in Mafia.
Hmm, Rat's claim is interesting. I will believe it for now, but I'd like to keep my eye on him of course. And Elfboy, why would that claim attract attention at all? OK's thing feels like a benign slip but Bard... I am not sure why we would even be alarmed by Rat for saying he can't vote. <_<
-
- There may or may not be third parties with seperate win conditions from scum or town.
One option, which has not been raised, I believe, is that Rat could win if he gets the town in that LYLO situation, even with no vote. Just throwing some random ideas into the mix. Thoughts? With that said, I agree with those who don't think Rat should be lynched on that alone, at least, not this early in the game.
New person starting a train is worrying. Explain your not reading things.
I didn't start the train, m'dear, perhaps you need to have a look back through the posts, hm~?
-
Bard... I am not sure why we would even be alarmed by Rat for saying he can't vote. <_<
There were inquiries as to what Rat meant. That says enough, to me, that it rang some bells for people.
-
The same reason that people yell at you sometimes for not voting quickly and complaining about the joke vote phase - there's no vote record. The town can't follow him, and as Carth is always a dirty bastard, why would we want to have one less bit of information to follow? At least when you vote, there's a bit of information to glean from potential motive. With Rat, it's just his text and, if he can only vote as a killing vote, then he's doing what the scum ask him to do, so we can't actually say that he voted badly, because he was told to do that.
-
Bard:
Maybe I should've made it more explicit, I guess. Like 2+2. That's pretty explicit. I guess. I thought it was all pretty clear but I understand the need for detailed clarification of everything. So let's talk about one of the ramifications of my role.
-I'm not useful to town at LYLO because I have no voteweight. Functionally, LYLO is a day earlier than it would normally be for whatever numbers of town and scum we have. (Barring town doublevoter or whatever.)
(emphasis mine)
Rat can't vote even as the decider, or that post of his was pretty misleading.
I agree, endgame specifics aren't worth thinking about yet, but it's worth thinking about exactly what impact Rat's role has on the game. The game will end sooner or later, one way or another, and anything that affects how it ends, it is in town's best interest to know about.
Elfboy, why would that claim attract attention at all?
As I said, Rat's role is useless unless he has powerz. (I mean, powers besides being unable to vote obviously. <_<) So it's more likely he has powers than average, metagaming things a bit. That means scum might be more likely to kill him. Since day 1 is often a crapshoot for nightkill and who docs protect, there's arguably a case for making a bit of a lightningrod as town. I doubt it, granted, and the more I think about it the less sense it makes.
-
Hmm, Rat's claim is interesting. I will believe it for now, but I'd like to keep my eye on him of course. And Elfboy, why would that claim attract attention at all? OK's thing feels like a benign slip but Bard... I am not sure why we would even be alarmed by Rat for saying he can't vote. <_<
I'll agree with OK's slip, given how he was pretty much in jokevote phase until now, seems minor.
Why wouldn't Rat's admission raise alarms, though? Unless you truly believe that the mod would place a completely functionless role in the game (a townie that can't vote is pretty much as close as it gets), it seems much more likely that he would have other powers of some sort. Also another reason why I asked for clarification. If he doesn't feel that it is wise to share this at this point, well, that's fair enough.
Also, did I miss something Rat said, because I don't recall him ever saying he had "just" lynchvote and more that he couldn't vote at all? I thought that was just a theory that Bardiche threw out rather than anything substantive. To my knowledge he can't vote nor hammer.
-
God dammit NEB ninjas me basically pre-empting me on everything. ;_;
-
It is odd that Rat might not have any special powers, so he most certainly does. If he can't vote period, it has to be supported by something else, like Governor (which makes a bit of sense politically, I'd support). It could always be that the scum would be populated by a person with no voting power - in fact, I'd almost say that's more likely, since it neuters town unless they have some super ability. Cid said skills aren't that uber, and Governor is pretty powerful, as would be other roles. Almost seems like a safer scum cover to me
-
Geezus no I can't cast any votes, I can't cast a lynch vote, I'm cannot vote at all. I've no idea how this conclusion was reached but ok, there it is, all cleared up.
-
Current votecount:
AndrewRogue (1): Meeplelard
Ashdla (1): Deltaflyer2k8, OblivionKnight
Bardiche (1): Deltaflyer2k8
Carthrat (1): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (1): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (1): Shale
Elfboy (0): Ashdla
EvilTom (0): Bardiche
Excal (1): Ciato
Laggy (1): AndrewRogue
Meeplelard (1): Elfboy
OblivionKnight (3): Laggy, Excal, Ashdla
QuietRain (0): OblivionKnight
Shale (0): OblivionKnight
Strago (0): OblivionKnight
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
OK, you're calling us out for not reading the opening? I'll admit that we are all evil, in our own special way. But who ever said that in order to kill an evil man, one has to be good? And, the designation of town and scum rarely has anything to do with good or evil, and more to do with who happens to be in the know, and doing the killing.
Now, looking ever more closely at your behaviour, you've actually been acting as a kind of impedement to discussion, and striving to extend the joke vote phase with your nonsensical ramblings and votes. Moreover, while there has been discussion over how Rat could be coming up with an excuse for why he doesn't have to leave behind a vote record, I'd like to point out that if you keep on voting as you have, you'll also obscure your own vote record simply by running over it so many times that the information provided there is meaningless. Especially since you have only once given a reason for your vote, and a second time you said you were going to vote for a person anyways, and yet you have never said why, even when challenged.
You do not defend yourself or your actions, only throw meaningless accusations back at those who accuse you.
These are several more concrete reasons besides your slip of the tongue in order to find your posts highly questionable, and to find you the most suspicious person here so far. And, I'd like to see something worth reading to suggest why we shouldn't end your participation in this thread.
-
Bwahaha, ah this game is off to a fantastic start already!
I applaud Rat for making me laugh, and I pooh-pooh those who leapt all over it in serious business style; way to dampen the fun.
As payment for his hilarity, I shall do as he says; ##Vote: Bardiche - the guy who votes for me because I'm evil; duh, we're supposed to be evil! And then you remove your 'joke vote' from me before I've had a chance to tell you my evil scheme? You're obviously a goody-two shoes townscum!
I'm going to continue the way of the Rat, and break this out in my first post too!
I am so evil, I warn you all now, that it is meaningless to try and kill me! Town will waste their votes trying to kill me, and by murdering me then scum will only make me more powerful in the process!
Mwahahaha!
But untill some idiot tries to kill me (a completely pointless and unproductive act, I assure you), I shall do my best to help root out the scum who must be punished.
*evil laughter, followed by booming thunder and crackling lightning*
PS. No, I will not elaborate on my evil scheme and/or powers.
PPS. I'll provide tea and cookies for those who visit me in my secret evil lair. It's behind the waterfall in the forest.
Ah, Ninja'd by Excal, being boorish. I'll have to install an anti-ninja device in my secret lair.
-
...
It feels so odd when I'm one of the few who isn't letting a role influence his posts.
Tom is also managing a fantastic job of making my head hurt with this... additional claim. For all that it does seem to be the biggest power claimed thus far. (Yes, even bigger than an inability to vote) Sadly, my first reaction is the push the shiny red button, but I know I'll most definatly have reconsidered by the time eight other people have also thought about it.
And while there's a few things that strike me the wrong way, they seem more flavour and the maintenance of the scum = good philosophy which seems vaguely harmful even in jest.
PS: Thank you for the cookies, but I'm afraid I had to decline the almond flavoured tea.
-
Stuff
I'm going to have to say that I am feeling very, very uncomfortable with this claim of "I cannot die, don't ask me to explain further, because I won't!" and the general excessive rhetoric that feels totally unnecessary. Furthermore, there was no prompting for such a claim, which leads me to wonder... what the heck why?
-
Can't be killed under any circumstances, huh.
Or, you know, an impressive lie.
One thing is for sure- claiming any kind of bulletproof in the early game is pretty silly. My intentions via claiming voteless early on were very clear; I'd have *no option* but to do so later in the day and saw no reason to hide it, anyhow. His? Uh.. if you're pro-town.. why give that away? Better to hope scum targets you to absorb a kill. :|
"Completely unkillable" screams third-party to me, anyhow, with some unique win condition not based on his own survival. It's going to be difficult to trust anything he's got to say.
-
Caveat: I just noticed that he didn't claim BP on death, but whatever his trigger-on-death mechanic is, I still don't get why you'd give away having one immediately. :V
-
Wow, its been busy whilst i was away.
-
I play MMBN3 for most of the day, come back, Elfboy is calling everyone crazy for letting me free without a vote...which is probably legit, and then hell breaks loose in ways that I only dream of causing.
...actually, this probably doesn't really sum up what happened, so I'll be more serious!
Rat, by claiming you can't vote, isn't that also basically saying "Scum! Leave me alone! I'm useless!" Granted, if you really have no vote power, I don't know what the best course of action is...if you never claim that, people will call you out for never voting, and you'd be forced to Role Claim anyway, so yeah, probably claiming that early is the best option.
Alternatively, Rat's a Jester or whatever that role is called, and he's TRYING to get himself lynched. Ludicrous claims like "I can't vote" "I'm useless" and the rest of his posts feel like he's trying to make himself stand out as much as possible...
...oh fuck it, I think I'm looking too deep into it.
Regarding OK's slip...eh, Day 1 silliness, don't feel it means much. When you're not being serious, you tend to not take what you're writing 100% either, so you tend to overlook some stuff.
Evil Tom's claim...now that's just weird. "unkillable"? Again, I'm leaning towards the Jester (if that's the name of the role.)
He's coming out saying "YOU CAN'T KILL ME, I'M INVINCIBLE!" So naturally, he's hoping we TRY to kill him and, succeed...and cause he got himself lynched, he wins!
...yeah, its late, I think I'm over analyzing this. All I can say is, if Rat really can't vote, and Evil Tom really can't die...
...I don't know how to finish that sentence. All I can say is this game is going to be interesting, to say the least!
But back to Rat...if Rat really can't vote, either...
A. He's lying. Always a possibility. Only reason I could see him lying about this is cause he's trying to get lynched...but maybe there is some other weird strategy he's working with.
B. He really can't vote, HOWEVER, he's got some sort of power role that makes him not useless.
C. He's a completely useless player, and was tossed in by the mod just to add to the insanity of the game.
How reasonable these situations are? A...well, can't really say much about that unless we know more of what's going on.
B, there's two possibilities. Obviously, those are "He knows his Power role" and "Hidden Power Role not revealed to he himself." I don't expect Rat to claim the former if he does have one this early, for a number of reasons, and obviously, he can't speak for the second. Telling us he can't vote this early does in fact mean quite a bit.
C...uh, El-Cid, you're mad if you indeed did do that.
Also...if Rat is in fact lying...he's pulling one heck of a gamble. Why? By saying he can't Vote, he pretty much has to follow through, and never actually vote the rest of the game. Should he slip in n actual vote, well, something's obviously up.
For that reason, I'd be willing to more believe B's the case. C's just silly, but then, maybe I'm underestimating how silly this game is suppose to be, and A puts him in a situation where he has to follow through.
...is it too early to make these assumptions? Yes, yes it is. Its also past 4 AM here, so I'm not really thinking at my best, so I'm probably missing some very obvious factors when I read over, but...that's all I can come up with for now.
-
Seems like we started, and I had the misfortune not to see it this morning, and then work got suddenly busy. And then the forum wouldn't load for me, what's up with that? So uncool.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24311#msg24311 -- Day one or not, I agree with the sentiment in that post. I'll totally keep it in mind, too, Ashdla.
Then, there's this post when he jumps on OK, who had just came under fire from Excal ( http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24340#msg24340 ).
BUT OK is kinda worth the extra scrutiny, so it's hardly proof of scumminess, even for day 1. If anyone should get a vote, it's really Tom. Why?
Let's examine the scenarios I'm seeing here:
-Tom is entirely, 100% truthful! He's town, and town lynching him gives him superpowers beyond measure! (or doesn't harm him, thus proving his claims to a point, I'm not certain which is supposed to happen)
Okay. How is this a bad option, then?
-Tom is lying scum. Tom dies.
Ditto!
-Tom is lying town/TP/a muppet. Lynching Tom... eliminates a third party player, a lying town or a muppet.
It's hard, it really is, to see the cons of this approach.
##Vote: EvilTom
In the worst case scenario, my vote gets 'wasted', a possibility I don't personally believe in and which I can live with here.
-
... This is where I face palm when EvilTom places a joke vote.
Meeple makes an excellent point about Rat, although I still don't think it's smart to lynch him just for hunches. EvilTom, on the otherhand... Yeah, accuse me of rolefishing, but I see absolutely no reason to announce such a role beforehand unless you're afraid we'd lynch you (which, at this point, we're still divided and most really don't have a concrete idea of who they want a vote in) or you have, indeed, some scheme up your sleeve that involves us lynching you or highly doubting your integrity as being town-aligned.
There's something odd, though. He explicitly says "town will waste votes trying to kill me" and "when murdered then scum will only grow more powerful". Almost as if he is trying to summon the town... And yeah, I'm one for lots of conjecture and theorizing... But at the moment I don't know what to make of it. Since uh, Rat's VOTELESS ROLE isn't one in traditional Mafia, I can only assume our dear El Ciddo threw in some unique roles not elsewhere observed.
So so far, these are my thoughts:
EvilTom: Confusing us isn't helping us. I'm not sure what to make of him, whether he is joking or being genuine... At this point, I don't yet support an EvilTom lynch until we've properly weighed out the alternatives.
Ashdla: Needs to talk more.
Deltaflyer: Needs to say more than "It's been busy while I was away". If you're catching up and intend to post something bigger later, tell us! Right now, you're veering into the "lurker" status, and that's not beneficial regardless of alignment.
OblivionKnight: I concur with Excal. You've got three votes on you and yet you've ignored it. To be fair, there's only one real motive for voting on you that you should defend ("I was going to vote on Shale anyway" sentiment), so it'd be nice if you could explain that. You know we'll pounce on everything you say!
Carthrat: Huh, can't vote at all. I concur with Meeple on this point, that it could be something like that... Mm, too little information as yet. I see no reason to lynch him for it, although I do consider it an option when we're going to "narrow" down the amount of players and cannot decide on an eligible target. For now, I appreciate Rat's analytical ability enough not to want to support a train on him yet.
For now I rather EvilTom explains himself a little more, but I'm not expecting he'll yield more information that easily.
-
Current votecount:
AndrewRogue (1): Meeplelard
Ashdla (1): Deltaflyer2k8, OblivionKnight
Bardiche (2): Deltaflyer2k8, EvilTom
Carthrat (1): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (1): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (1): Shale
Elfboy (0): Ashdla
EvilTom (1): Bardiche, Corwin
Excal (1): Ciato
Laggy (1): AndrewRogue
Meeplelard (1): Elfboy
OblivionKnight (3): Laggy, Excal, Ashdla
QuietRain (0): OblivionKnight
Shale (0): OblivionKnight
Strago (0): OblivionKnight
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
Pshaw, where's the sense of fun gone? Laggy why must you make the game so dry?
Don't the rest of you also have awesomely bizarre roles you want to gloat about? We are evil villains, isn't gloating what evil villains do?
Aaanyway; *plonks self down in grand throne and fills a glass of red wine*
It's going to be difficult to trust anything he's got to say.
Coming from the guy with no vote, that's rich *swirls glass of red wine*
Why should we trust you, Mr. I cannot assist town and have shown distaste towards the game thusfar, hmm?
Bardiche, I apologise for confusing you, but *sips wine* it would be no fun if it were all too simple. Don't you agree?
Corwin, tsk tsk, you didn't listen very carefully to my evil overlord announcement, did you? If town lynches me, I do not gain superpowers. If scum attempt to kill me overnight, well then, that's where things get interesting.
And Meeple/Rat, I never said I was invincible. I just said it wouldn't be very.. effective. Am I going to be more specific? No, it's more fun this way. It's not often I get such a fun role to play with, so I'm going to savor the taste and make the most of it *sips more wine*. Which is why a claim is just so much fun. Something that some of you have forgotten that Mafia is supposed to be *eyeroll*.
Can I tell you any more?
Simple answer: No.
Long answer: No, and I can't tell you why I can't tell you.
Take that as you will, but you'll hear no more from me about it.
Now, on to evil directive #1:
##Unvote: Bardiche - keep up the good work there chap. Some nice logic and reasoning. Good to see analysis etc. removing joke vote.
LAGGY! - Didn't spend much effort reading/thinking over my taunting post, instead he just went on the offensive, laying down 'eviltom is invincible? lolwat' without putting down a vote himself. Or really going into any detail. Very suspicious - definately a good way for scum to fish out public opinion before diving into the deep end. If you're so uncomfortable with my actions, why not vote? Also Laggy expertly follows it up with "why roleclaim this, now"? The clever thing about that question, is that's it's a combined role-fish attempt /and/ attack. I didn't really /claim/ anything in particular, and yet Laggy wants to know all the details. Well, too bad.
*presses the button marked "Shark-pool: Laggy"*
##Vote: Laggy
You always have to watch the quiet ones... the flamboyantly evil ones are obvious, always watch the quiet ones...
Therefore, to the shark-pool you go, Laggy! Where are your rebel friends now!?!?!
-
Well guys, since i have been voted for by Shale, i am going to keep voting for Bardiche. I may be wrong but, hey, im a retard ::) . Wow, i did not just say that...
Anyways...
Bard in his last statement told me to post sumthing or be a a lurker. Is that anything like a stalker? ;-)
I am just here talking about... well ill leave that up to you guys to decide.
Also, i am inactive for 18 hours at least due to school and sleep so i only have 2 hours to post etc. (a mans gotta eat)
So there you go, im going to sit back and see what you make of that. *edges towards exit*
-
Dread Thomas, there are a few reasons why my actions are justified and yours are not.
Firstly, I'm indisputably funnier than you are at this shit. Also, I'm better at formatting my posts. Can you please fix that before I tear my eyeballs out?
Secondly, it was completely necessary for me to claim my role. It was completely unecessary for you to claim what you have and inherently suspicious to do so, whereas- if I may be so bold- all the speculation Meeple and others have done on me is circular and noninformative. (The people going "we might be able to lynch rat later just for this" are particularly worrying, as my claim is actually neutral on town or scum vibes and should not be used as the basis for a case.) Comparing me to you early in your post is pretty stupid and displays ignorance (most likely willful) of the details.
Thirdly, what you HAVE claimed is, BP or no, "Hahaha, you guys shouldn't kill me, doing so is a waste of time." Um yeah good job, me too, in fact, that'll totally fly.
<->
As far as 'laggy didn't read my post properly!' - the specifics of your claim actually don't matter much, since it all amounts to my prior statement. Also your strategy is retarded. Trapping Laggy into fishing for a role here? No, in this case it was the right thing to do and you cannot have expected to be able to pull this strategy without running into that.
##FoS: Dread Thomas for the reasons above. I would also like to note that I find his posts farcical; it is actually like he's trying to dig his hole deeper (ironic, as usually he does this by accident.) I point to his comments about 'the point of the game is PLAYING FOR FUN' which is about as rilesome a comment as you can toss at me in particular (and Laggy, for that matter, and probably a couple of others around. At least, I hope.). There's also everything else he has said.
As a result of this, I would rather let him live through today and hope he gets NK'd; call it paranoia, but there's no rule stating that 'there are no parties that can win on day one or night one', and although there hasn't been a Jester yet, this is the kind of game in which I'd expect one to appear. If there is a vig, there's no need to claim; let him be the target.
If not, well, I'll be going for the lynch as our only recourse.
<->
The irony of my post content here is not lost on me.
Ninja'd by Delta. Wow. I have absolutely nothing to say to that post.
-
I think everyone is a little too hung up on Rat right now and mulling over what his role may or may not be; he's said what he's willing to say, and unless you believe the case is solid enough on him on account of his role wonkery alone, I can see perfectly reasonable explanations as to why he doesn't want to tip the hat further (if he is town, obviously).
Re, EvilTom:
I hate day 1. Frankly, the joke phase drives me batty insane. I jump straight to seriousness because it was clear no one else was really doing it at the time and furthermore the posturing and snarkiness that you do so seem to love are excellent ways to hide ulterior motives and a good way to bait without being entirely clear. I for the life of me cannot see why town would want to do this. Being concise and clear (including saying you can't reveal something-- but doing so in a concise and clear manner!) is, in general, advantageous for town; when you're vague about your communication, miscommunication happens, debates happen, arguments happen over a dumb point that derail the entire thread and play right into scum's hands.
I did not lay down a vote at the time because it was an instinct, quick response to your claim-but-not-really (right after Rat had just gone over and I had basically said the same thing: if you're going to lay something down, do it clearly. Rat, for his part, did this quite well without so-called "revealing his role." The fact that you think similar scrutiny on your side is scummish smacks me as nonsense, especially when what you're claiming is far more convoluted. Not laying down a vote is a valid point, but on my part, Excal's post right after that more or less reminding me the potential dangers of just going ahead and pushing the big red button swayed me away from doing so at the moment.
I really don't at all accept your claim that it's merely fun and keeps the game from being dry as sufficient justification with the risks noted above; your counterattack on me with "oh noes, Laggy be's rolefishin' again!" is basically an exact mirror of what I explained with Rat, and you seemed to merrily ignore what unfolded there and go on anyway.
Let's examine the scenarios I'm seeing here:
-Tom is entirely, 100% truthful! He's town, and town lynching him gives him superpowers beyond measure! (or doesn't harm him, thus proving his claims to a point, I'm not certain which is supposed to happen)
Okay. How is this a bad option, then?
-Tom is lying scum. Tom dies.
Ditto!
-Tom is lying town/TP/a muppet. Lynching Tom... eliminates a third party player, a lying town or a muppet.
It's hard, it really is, to see the cons of this approach.
I can't help but find myself in full agreement here.
##Unvote: OblivionKnight
##Vote: EvilTom
-
I don't have much to contribute to the debate at hand yet. I want to see how it plays out before I can decide where I stand on the matter.
I'm posting, however, to respond to Deltaflyer...
A lurker is someone who is playing, but only reads what others write and provides little to no input of their own. Often times this alarms suspicion among the town as it is a useful way of avoiding saying anything that might incriminate yourself or unduly make people suspect you of being scum. Generally a strategy that is adviced against. It doesn't work in games with no time limit.
-
Ok thanks bardiche. :)
-
...If town lynches me, I do not gain superpowers.
Merely quoting Corwin's post and saying "so there" does not help things, because Corwin's post had incorrect reasoning.
I suppose I can be a little more clear on my 'power' without risking dire consequences. But I can't just say everything. This is a key point! Rat was probably under no preconditions, when it comes to his role (or lack thereof). I'm not at the same liberty.
Town lynching me will waste the town's lynch. I will no longer be able to vote, but I'll still be here. So I'm partially unkillable, in that respect. But that would be a waste of an opportunity for town to kill scum, no? Scum killing me... will be fun and exciting. I promise.
Why did I come out and say this rather than keep it a secret? Because I'm enjoying myself here! This is loads of fun.
Is it hurting town? God no. Playing mind games with the scum and putting them on the back foot is great. I want to see whether or not they kill me tonight.. it's a kind of personal challenge to them; will they rise to it?
///- Time for tea -\\\
Anyway. Laggy has now posted more than "eviltom is suspicious", so he's looking less scummy. So!
##Unvote: Laggy
And...
Deltaflyer2k8 - I'm not sure whether a vote here would be useful at this stage, since he's going to be stalking for 18 hours, or whatnot. I find his last post extremely odd. And full of poor grammar & punctuation. The urge to lynch is rising, but my vote can do other things in the meantime.
No, he just posted again. So probe time!
Delta, don't you have anything to offer about... anything? Here's a reason to talk: ##Vote: Deltaflyer2k8
Rat: what's wrong with my formatting :\ or editing
____________________
Meta-game strategy talk:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think, meta-game wise, the best possible person to lynch is Carthrat. Reasoning (entirely objective)
1. Rat is town and telling the truth:
- As he himself said, he has no functional use, as he cannot vote. Scum won't even bother to kill him.
2. Rat is scum
3. Rat is town and lieing - well.. I'll leave that one out. See option 2 if in doubt.
In case of option 1, we haven't made any real loss if we lynch him. Statistically, as we all know, the chance of hitting town on day 1 is very high. At least a Rat lynch (if he is telling the truth) means we lose 0 town votes at worst, and we kill scum at best.
If option 1 is correct, I feel sorry for Rat, he's the victim of statistics and metagame & poor role balance. Then again, my role is quite powerful, so maybe that's the balance? Town has other powerful roles? *shrug*
If option 2 is correct, well, it's a bold (but clever) move for scum, and lynching him nets us scum.
The worst case scenario of lynching Rat is a possible net sum loss of 0 for town. Lynching anyone else provides the chance of the loss of a town vote.
So unless hard evidence other than vibes comes up against anyone else, he's the best target to lynch statistically.
+Yes, Rat is a thoughtful player etc., but if he's scum (as he often is), then that will absolutely kill us because he /never has to vote/, so he never has to give himself away. We could find ourselves at endgame where Rat comes in leaving us all looking dumb because nobody considered him a threat. On the other hand, lynching him is a great start to day 1 because we rid ourselves of uncertainty, rather than lynching someone based on more uncertainty.
Anyone else got thoughts on that? I'd like to hear other people's opinions weigh in.
-
First things first,
##Unvote: Meeple
##Vote: Strago
If you don't know why, you haven't been paying attention. Hopefully this vote won't stand for long.
Okay, so. The three people most attracting attention so far are Rat, EvilTom, and OK. Rat has been discussed. While I don't really care for the attitude he initially brought (which has since improved), I can see why it was there, and I think he is trying to contribute to the game. He's cool for now.
OK and EvilTom have both been pretty counter-productive for town so far. OK's just generally carried the joke phase for much too long, even with multiple votes on him. To a certain degree I was willing to ignore this, because lack of seriousness on Day 1 shouldn't be taken too seriously, and because, let's face it, it's OK. But it is a bit alarming, to the point where it almost seemed like he was having too much fun stirring up trouble. I don't think his slip was in fact a slip (though I don't dismiss the possibility), rather that it was chosen on purpose as a joke. OK, if you could make a serious post next, it would allay a lot of my fears.
EvilTom is just... yeah. In two posts he has come off as militantly anti-town. Dude, don't do this. It makes arguments against you like Corwin's pretty reasonable to me. Day 1 lynch candidates shouldn't have such strong arguments against them.
It seems possible to me that at least one of the two might be a jester. (Which, if so, sucks.) Now, I'm not entirely clear on how Jesters are played, since I don't think we've seen one here yet, but... how bad is it for town to lynch them? Aside from losing a townie (a townie too unproductive to live, anyway), does it somehow lessen the town's "victory"?
Of course, both are just one good explanation away from making this a moot question. C'mon, guys. EvilTom in particular, can you justify how your posts so far help town?
Corwin: What is a muppet?
Ninja'd: And EvilTom comes in and makes a post with decent content. Yay! Leaving the rest of my thoughts pre-his post here anyway.
-
The same reason that people yell at you sometimes for not voting quickly and complaining about the joke vote phase - there's no vote record. The town can't follow him, and as Carth is always a dirty bastard, why would we want to have one less bit of information to follow? At least when you vote, there's a bit of information to glean from potential motive. With Rat, it's just his text and, if he can only vote as a killing vote, then he's doing what the scum ask him to do, so we can't actually say that he voted badly, because he was told to do that.
Bolding is mine. I disagree. Especially after Carth's post where he specifically FOS-ed you. He may not be able to vote (that's just a really freaking weird restriction if true), but posting FOS-es instead will at least allow us to see a voting pattern, it just will have no weight behind it.
Now, having said that, I still find the restriction rather hard to fathom. I don't think he makes anything close to a good Day 1 lynch target, though (as if there is such a thing considering our usual luck with it). Just a really weird restriction.
Oh, out of jokephase, so ##Unvote Ciato
I'm going to continue the way of the Rat, and break this out in my first post too!
I am so evil, I warn you all now, that it is meaningless to try and kill me! Town will waste their votes trying to kill me, and by murdering me then scum will only make me more powerful in the process!
Mwahahaha!
You do realize Tom that after the game where you claimed to be a doc day 1 but lied through your teeth that the chances of my believing a day 1 claim out of you are non-existant, right? Just wanted to be sure you realized that. Personally, that makes me more likely to want you dead than not. And I agree with Carth that it screams third party to me. And with the craziness that seems to be lurking with people's comments and half-said abilities, I think a third party role with some ability where the longer they live the better they are makes sense in this game set up.
Putting my money where my mouth is: ##Vote EvilTom
-
##UNVOTE: Bardiche
##VOTE: EvilTom.
Something for you to talk about my freind...
-
##UNVOTE: Bardiche
##VOTE: EvilTom.
Something for you to talk about my freind...
That's not talking :\
-
Merely quoting Corwin's post and saying "so there" does not help things, because Corwin's post had incorrect reasoning.
Incorrect. Corwin's first point noted the possibility of you gaining superpowers or, at the worst, doing nothing and leaving you as confirmed town. This was because he reasoned this saliently before your recent admission of...
Town lynching me will waste the town's lynch. I will no longer be able to vote, but I'll still be here. So I'm partially unkillable, in that respect.
So before you continue to be under the impression that somehow Corwin was jumping the gun, let me assure you that was not the case, and all of this crap could have been cleared up if you had not been so insistent on making vague, thoroughly anti-town-sentiment posts in the first place.
Why did I come out and say this rather than keep it a secret? Because I'm enjoying myself here! This is loads of fun.
Is it hurting town? God no. Playing mind games with the scum and putting them on the back foot is great. I want to see whether or not they kill me tonight.. it's a kind of personal challenge to them; will they rise to it?
...
1. Rat is town and telling the truth:
- As he himself said, he has no functional use, as he cannot vote. Scum won't even bother to kill him.
First off, any argument that involves "scum will react like this! Scum will do this" will innately set off alarms in my head unless they are backed up by an obvious logical train of thought not originated in WIFOM. As it happens, this appears to be the case.
Rat has not revealed the entirety of his role - whether he truly is just a weightless non-voter townie or if he has other powers to counterbalance that out. Understandably so, because if he did, he would paint a bull's-eye target on himself for scum (assuming, again, that he's telling the truth). This leads to a WIFOM situation where scum may or may not kill him, which is why any assumption is dangerous.
That said, I am not entirely averse to the idea due to horrible lack of Day 1 leads, but I remain unconvinced that he's the best lynch target. (namely, that remains you, for reasons already stated; in fact, you losing your vote power and holding confirmed bulletproof townie, if you are indeed telling the truth, to me seems a far safer bet than lynching Rat.) Your scenario outlining him also misses out on the possibility that he is town, is not lying and cannot vote, but has other powers that he has pointedly left undisclosed - as I have said above, this is his discretion.
-
Also, so I don't seem single-minded: Delta, your posts are completely lacking in content, half of them are irrelevant to the game and your single-liner votes aren't helping in that regard either. Please improve in these regards; I know you are new to the game, but we can't let that be a freebie pass for every single occasion.
-
Delta: I am a proponent of lynching people who don't bother to use proper capitalization, not to mention punctuation. Not actually having much to show for yourself either in volume or content will make your playing experience a short one, if I have anything to do about this, so do shape up.
(And Laggy posts the same thing, pretty much, as Tom did earlier. Goes to show it's quite noticeable.)
EvilTom: Option 1 of those I suggested doesn't look as harmless with your clarifications, but even in our worst case scenario, we get you to contribute and be essentially unkillable. We lose a vote on our side, then, true. But the same would happen with any mislynch day 1, as you yourself have acknowledged. Therefore, to have the insight of a confirmed townie as the game goes on and you can adjust your opinions based on recent developments (unlike, say, the words of dead confirmed townies pre-death), giving town a unique benefit.
Or you could be scum/third party/etc. Either way, I'm still comfortable with your lynch. I disagree with your case on Rat, since FoS allows for a record and I usually get a better hang on Rat's alignment after a couple of days anyway.
DHE: Uhh, what? That was so bizarre.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/97/Fishinvid1024.jpg)
Enjoy.
Everyone not really participating: I'd like to see people contribute, pick a suspect, detail their case or lack of one, the works. Day 1 cases are often weak (there are notable exceptions; usually with Tom) but they do generate discussion.
-
Ok, now that its earlier and I've had sleep, I can look at things a little easier!
...maybe, I'll probably just end up rambling as I always do anyway...
...silly preliminary lead in aside...
Eviltom looks really weird at the moment. Though, another thing sparked up that occurred to me:
Tom is a bomb. He's trying to dissuade lynching as much as possible cause dying means not only does he die, but the Hammerer dies too (that's how Bombs work, right? They take out the person who killed them?) Given the game like this, I so expect a bomb to be SOMEWHERE, though, OOC, do Bombs know they're bombs, or is it usually a hidden a role?
For this reason, I'm a bit worried about Lynching Tom. Think I agree with Rat that I'd rather go after someone else, and if there's a Vig, request that they go after Tom tonight. If he's a Jester, he'll not have won. If he's a bomb...do Bombs work on NKs? I'd like someone to help elaborate that cause I know a role of "you die, lyncher dies too" exists as something we've used before (Monkey in WoT Mafia at least, I think it was?), but unsure of the specifics of how that role usually works.
REGARDLESS, I do feel lynching Tom this early is a bit...dangerous. Though, his posts don't leave a very good taste in my mouth, and his attempt to explain his "Lynching me is useless" claim...well, if that was your logic, that would be moronic. EVERYONE has something like that implied around them, the question is...or alternatively, anyone would be willing to say that, since its basically the same as saying "Don't Lynch me, I'm town!"
OK needs to to say something, you know, of actual credit. However, at the same time...
While my original joke on Andrew is a Joke Vote...I'm keeping it. Why? He hasn't said a damned thing since the joke phase! So at least to keep some pressure on him to start posting, its staying here.
For all that I don't agree with lynching Lurkers, especially on Day 1, I highly doubt my lone vote is enough to actually provoke a Lynch, but I would like him to speak up a bit.
Deltaflyer...yeah, agreeing with Laggy. I understand you're new to the game, but at least try to put forth a bit more effort. Even if your analysis is wrong (and frankly, more often than not, it will be! How else can it be explained why Scum often wins <.<?), at least showing effort and trying to form your own original ideas looks a lot better than short, irrelevant points with just voting.
Even if you feel you have to pull something out of nowhere, or just speak your mind, do it; showing at least some effort is a big step up.
Back to Rat...I stand by my 4 AM rant. The most likely scenario at the moment is Rat has some sort of power, but at the same time, can't vote. What that power is, who knows? Possible he doesn't know either!
If its scumploy...its a very risky strategy. Scum have only so many votes they can use to screw around with Town. By making a claim of "I can't vote!" means you more or less have to follow through the entire game, or else the instant you vote, red flags go off, and as such, scum lose one of their limited votes, giving Town better odds. For this reason, I'm thinking Rat's either Town with some sort of special, SIGNIFICANT role power, OR a 3rd Party with some weird Win condition like "Win if you are NK'd!"
So at the moment, not seeing any logical move for Rat to do that if he's scum.
Looking back at other things...Elfboy's vote on Strago seems to be similar to my vote on Andrew, albeit, its a case of "He hasn't posted at all" compared to mine "he hasn't posted since the joke phase." Says little one way or another to me, etc.
So end result is Tom's looking bad...but I get the feeling Lynching him is a bad move too. I propose letting him live the day, and if any Vigs are around, Nightkill him. Similarly, Docs, don't protect him!
So at this point, I'm left with basically "OK, Andrew, and Strago need to say stuff."
-----
...and Ninja'd by Cor!
Also...
REQUEST FOR VOTE COUNT PLEASE!
-
I do punctuate my sentences properly. Don't skit for the simple fact that im a school kid. I am not an idiot. Simple thing is: I have no real intel, beliefs or otherwise so I am going along with the game. He voted for me so I voted for him. It's as simple as that. If you do not like the fact that i am new, get over it. I won't be new for long.
-
Corwin:
<_<;;; I meant, "what's a muppet" in the context of mafia. Or more specifically in the context you used it in your earlier post.
Meeple:
I guess that's a fair argument, and there's a reason I asked about how jester works. (Hadn't considered bomb, that seems worth inquiring about too!) I'm less opposed to lynching him compared to you, though, because on average I'd rather operate under the assumption that the lynch (rather than a vig who may not exist) is town's best weapon and should be used against those who are being destructive to town's workings.
Still, not voting for Tom yet because it's way too early to get a large train on him. As you observed, several people haven't been involved in the day yet.
-
Now that the EvilTom wagon has progressed a little, I feel a bit more confident to voice my opinions about it, especially since Tom has given new information to ponder on.
A role that allows him to communicate with us beyond the grave, with the addendum that if scum were to NK him, the scum would empower him. I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, but I concur that a lynch on EvilTom is in my DO NOT WANT range at the moment. I hold no support for lynching EvilTom given the present defense. (Also Meeple's point of a bomb is plausible, but uuuh, yeah, I have no reason yet to conclude this is the case.)
We seem to keep falling back to Carthrat. It's pretty simple; Either we decide that him having no vote is enough of a reason to lynch him, or we decide to keep him due to the possibility of some sort of compensation for his inability to vote. As it stands, lynching someone because of a supposed role he has isn't exactly a good motive, unless said role is Godfather or some other scum-aligned role.
Seems like we're stuck in the same Day 1 Dilemma as inadvertably any Mafia game will be without a Night 0.
As it stands I have no case against anyone other than our Main 3 (Carthrat, OblivionKnight and EvilTom), and I'd like to hear more from OK. I'm not sure what I want to hear yet: Our offense on him is pretty fragile as is, and based solely on him carrying the joke phase a bit too far.
The others... I'm guessing they don't have the time we do in replying to this all. Would like to hear of them regardless and hear their thoughts on matters, although I understand it is a bit difficult to say things that haven't already been said.
-
Ask and ye shall receive:
AndrewRogue (1): Meeplelard
Ashdla (1): Deltaflyer2k8, OblivionKnight
Bardiche (0): Deltaflyer2k8, EvilTom
Carthrat (1): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (0): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (2): Shale, EvilTom
Elfboy (0): Ashdla
EvilTom (4): Bardiche, Corwin, Laggy, QuietRain, Deltaflyer2k8
Excal (1): Ciato
Laggy (1): AndrewRogue, EvilTom
Meeplelard (0): Elfboy
OblivionKnight (2): Laggy, Excal, Ashdla
QuietRain (0): OblivionKnight
Shale (0): OblivionKnight
Strago (1): OblivionKnight, Elfboy
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
The train of logic that Tom is a bomb doesn't really sit well with me because a Bomb would innately try to attract nightkills, not lynches, and he mentioned that he would be alive even if he died. So I am not terribly keen on this particular possibility since the chances of hitting scum are pretty slim, whereas just claiming a significant role and then getting NKed is much easier.
However, a Jester? He certainly SOUNDS like one right now. DF2K8 looks like he just did a good old-fashioned OMGUS vote which rings bells with me.
Meeple. Why are you dwelling so hard on Rat? The heart of the matter is that scum like their votes existing, and I'm not sure outside of a very weird gambit (i.e. I will not vote until the last day and HAMMER! MWAHAHA!) that a scum would willingly withhold their vote for no discernable reason. I think reading into the role too hard is useless and Rat telling us early was a very smart move on his part.
-
Oh, for frak's sake. Day 1 is so stupid.
On the subject of Carthrat, this has mostly already died down but stop the blustering useless role-speculation. As has been said, his reasons for claiming were good and if we get our knickers in a twist about the seventeen-billion potential LYLO combinations we may one day find ourselves in then scum will just smack us around while we aren't paying attention to important things.
On the subject of Tom, arghwhat. Oh what a frustrating and unnecessary WIFOM web we weave when we practice to... deceive? Tell the truth? Doesn't really matter, because all you've done is paint a bullseye on your chest with no real tangible benefit to the town.
On the subject of OK, yeah. He's my favorite for lynching right now. Granted, I tend to put more weight behind perceived syntactical slips than others, but that's just me. Can't help it. Not ready to put a full vote behind him, though.
Aside from those three matters, to which I unfortunately have little else to add, I'm having a hard time getting a real bead on anyone else. Uber-typical for Day 1. Hrrmph. Delta's OMGUS is indeed bad, as Ciato says. As far as Meeple's obsession with the minutiae of possibilities regarding Rat... well, I hate to say, "It's Meeple," but it very much is. And thus far it's been harmless enough. I think.
-
What's an OMGUS?
-
He voted for me so I voted for him.
That is OMGUS, aka "oh my god you suck" aka "oh my god you voted for me so I will vote for you".
-
This post was going to contain an explanation of OMGUS, but ninja'd by Laggy. Revenge for earlier? Maybe.
Nothing else to add since my previous post, except the requisite
##Unvote: Strago
-
Ashdla: Needs to talk more.
It's a wonder what sleep will do to a person. :P
Catching up at the moment, will post something more substantial once I have done so~
-
Oki dokie, so basically, this is what I'm gathering.
Rat- The initial hype he generated has passed over by now. If he really can't vote, I highly doubt he doesn't have some sort of power to compensate for it, or some sort of strategy in mind. Either way, I agree that saying so right off was a smart plan for him.
OK- For me, it wasn't just the slip up in the joke phase (to be honest, I didn't really catch it until it was pointed out), but more so, the voting seemingly at random, and failing to defend himself against the accusations made toward him. He seems to like accusing those who question his actions, rather than explaining himself, which puts me off a bit.
Evil Tom- To be honest, I really have no idea what he is trying to accomplish with painting the target on himself. Unless he's trying to distract attention away from someone else, or getting himself lynched triggers something super awesome for him. I'm not overly familiar with what roles can occur in Mafia, so it's a bit more difficult for me to pin people based on that. If lynching him does do nothing but lose us a town vote, then we'd be no worse off than a typical Day 1 lynch, right? There is that bomb idea that was brought up, again, I'm unfamiliar with how exactly that might work, so I'm not sure if it should be a huge concern or not.
Deltaflyer2k8- Seriously honey, talk more, and more importantly about relevant things, not your school life. Saying you have no opinion and you are just following others is... a bit sketchy if you ask me. I know you're new to the game, but I'm also playing this for the first time, so I really don't find that as an overly viable excuse in my book. In closing, opinions please!
As for my position in general right now, I'm wavering as to whether or not to switch my vote from OK to someone else. However, I'd like to hear some explanation from OK about his actions before I do so.
-
Deltaflyer, I need to agree with everyone else here. It's not how intelligent you are that's on trial, it's how much you're participating, and how you write your posts. They lack in structure, having no proper paragraphs, and structure is how one reads more than the actual letters in the word itself. Moreover, just going along with the flow and never venturing an opinion of your own is a good way to get attention that you would rather not have placed upon yourself.
Now, on to matters at hand. I am both disappointed in the lack of an OK post, as well as I am also interested in why there's still discussion on Rat. As has already been mentioned, his usage of FOS to replicate votes shows an admirable attempt to overcome his handicap. I'd ask him to issue an un-FoS if he feels he needs to "unvote" so that we can better create a voting pattern for him. But other than that, I am fine with leaving him be and letting his words dictate his alignment.
Moving on to Evil Tom, honestly man? The more I read, the more inclined I am to follow Corwin's advice and gank you. Your text is too flowery to convey meaning effectively, your botched reveal is doing little more than creating a spotlight which makes it hard to focus on anything other than what you're up to, and you gave us the message that if we mislynch you, then we simply have a confirmed townie in play that can still talk. That's a pretty good deal all told.
So, I still want to hear OK talk, but you're looking like a really tempting target to vote for.
-
I like to say big things when I have reasonable belief or when another player cannot sustain plausble deniablity. Therefore i have no paragraphs for i have nothing much to write apart from the fact that this is a game, not a literacy lesson so get over it and have fun. Im not enjoying myself much simply from the critism from you people, no-one cares from the other mafia i play and that is immensely enjoyable.
Also, when i commented on school, i was stating that i havent got long to do stuff because along with that i have other more important priorities than being critisied by people who have never seen my stories etc. You cant judge a book by its cover. So why are you judging me?
Also, I voted for ET because:
A) He voted for me so i changed my vote to ensure that i am safe from lynching because i dont want to go out on my first round of mafia here.
B) Because quite simply, anyone who does comment on my literacy should be shot unless they back it up with good quotes to show me that I am in the wrong.
Ok? There you go, that is why i voted for him. Goodbye.
-
Ho'kay. Generally speaking, there are obviously a few points that stand out to me here.
First and foremost, of course, is OK's peculiar slip of the tongue. While it isn't definite proof of anything, those sorts of slips often tend to be indicative of something in what a person was thinking. Of course, at the same time, we've seen it as an honest mistake before. I'd personally say, if nothing else, its enough to use as day one evidence, and it certainly is something I won't be soon forgetting.
Tom... well. Speaking from experience, if you have a powerful role, trying to play it out cleverly does not work. Yes, it can draw scum attacks. It also hugely biases town against you and relies on you being trusted in a game where you can't really trust anything until you have proof. Furthermore, it preps scum for dealing with your powers if they happen to have anything capable of doing it. Essentially, you've just spilled your hand before any bets were down. Worse yet, that sort of bluff actually plays out better against town. Scum has control over you in theory, town does not.
See the problem?
Delta... is an absolute wild card. I've got nothing on him as far as town/scum reads go. I will say, that, from what I can gather, he's not going to be happy playing Mafia with us and (no offense man) he's not going to be much use to us. The apparent hostility of his posts certainly isn't helping
Rat... not really much you can do with it right now. You'll go round and round trying to sort it out. What I will say is that it bothers me substantially that Tom continues to hype his own role and then fail to acknowledge that (unless I've missed a post where he explicitly says otherwise) Carth himself could have a worthwhile power role to compensate his lack of vote.
As it stands, though... I'm not comfortable with a Tom lynch on day one. Whether its debatable play or bluffing, this is like sticking it to a claimed Doc/Cop on day one. Although, on the other hand, of course, he has stated that town trying to lynch him is a waste of time, so perhaps putting that claim to the test isn't so bad.
##Unvote: Laggy
Obviously this vote no longer has a place.
I... blargh. Deltaflyer, could you do me a favor and explain how you play Mafia where you are from? Your posts are incredibly off-putting and of minimal use. As it is... I'm really inclined to lynch you because it seems like you're not going to develop particular leanings towards either alignment and that the general nature of your posts isn't going to be constructive. Thus, I need you to prove to me that you're going to be useful this game and that you really do have something to contribute. If not, its hard not to see you as scum or, at best, a useless townie.
##Vote: Delta
-
I'm ignoring all these accusations against me because they're foundless and have no point in the case against me. Simple enough. I agree with Delta on this general theory.
Otherwise, I'm NOT up for lynching Tom. He is doing stupid things at the moment and floundering, which is going to be a detriment to our later plan. I also know Tom is lying about his role and special ability, so don't vote him. Can't say much more.
-
##Unvote: Ashdla
##Vote: Laggy
Don't attack Evil Tom. You're doing something really stupid by changing your vote from me to him. Don't give in.
-
Sorry Oblivion, I have to do this.
He is doing stupid things at the moment and floundering, which is going to be a detriment to our later plan.
Uh, "our"? Mind expanding who you mean by "our"? Do you mean Town (who don't yet have a concrete plan), Scum (who may well have a concrete plan) or imply that you are Masoned with Tom?
I also know Tom is lying about his role and special ability, so don't vote him. Can't say much more.
Quoting this, but not sure what to say of it. Just... Urgh. That's what the quotation makes me think.
Urgh.
-
Ok, Andrew's finally speaking, so...
##Unvote: AndrewRogue
No purpose keeping a vote like this anymore.
Next off, regarding my Rat "obsession" and all that? That's just me being myself, focusing on small details more heavily than necessary, and knowing I'm not getting much out of it. Basically, one of those "I have something to say, I'm going to say it, even if its meaningless!" things. Just how I am, I wish I wasn't like that ;_;
As I said before, much as Eviltom's play bothers me...
Otherwise, I'm NOT up for lynching Tom. He is doing stupid things at the moment and floundering, which is going to be a detriment to our later plan. I also know Tom is lying about his role and special ability, so don't vote him. Can't say much more.
I agree with this line of thought...HOWEVER, the wording is really damned bad...and suddenly sticks out to me. Basically, I think Lynching Tom is a bad idea cause I think he's up to something with his little "Don't Lynch me cause its useless" thing. Either he's a scum trying to invoke fear and get eyes off him, OR he's a dangerous Town role that wants to avoid getting lynched to hurt the town, or...yeah, either way, I think lynching him is a bad at this very moment.
But back to OK...let me break down each section; I'm aware I just C+Ped it, but I feel I need to do this.
Otherwise, I'm NOT up for lynching Tom. He is doing stupid things at the moment and floundering, which is going to be a detriment to our later plan.
The bolded part is important, the Italics are what stood out to me. He uses "our" plan. Just...what is this plan? I'm really not sure why he'd word things like this. It seems...I dunno. I'd call it a slip at first, but based on the overall train of thought, why would he even THINK in terms of "our."?
I also know Tom is lying about his role and special ability, so don't vote him
You say this with such confidence. How do you know such a thing? If you're just trying to avoid getting Tom Lynched...why the hell would you say it like that? Do you know something about him that we don't? I know you could call me role fishing this early, but you worded it in such a way that BEGS to be called out on it.
Now, considering this and his unwillingness to move from the joke phase, and how his posts are not filled with much content, DESPITE being called out on them...and how he basically says "I'm ignoring all accusations cause they have no basis on me!"
Dude, its Day 1. There's not much to work with. the least you can do is speak up a bit. And with your earlier slip combined with your latest post saying very little but some really oddly worded lines...
...you know what? Screw it. I've said my part.
##Vote: OblivionKnight
Something's just not right with him at all.
-
I'm pretty sure that OK has some kind of weird joke role that is causing this, at this point. Seems like a safe enough bet.
-
You know, I just have to shake my head.
Delta's apathetic about being in the game to the point of being antagonistic. You have no more information than the rest of us (unless you're scum) and we're managing to speak up and provide content and comments just fine despite that. We don't have anything to talk about if no one discusses. The only ones who have enough info to sit back and watch the chaos are the scum. Unless you comment on people, we have nothing from you and that just reeks of scum lurking. So, talk about some other people, not just the person you have a vote on so we can get a better feel for you. You're someone new, so we'd all like to get to know how you think and how you play so we can judge how you're acting with something that approaches a little closer to logic than throwing darts in the dark which is all we have to go on at the moment. And I second the request for how you play Mafia elsewhere. I too play places other than here so I know it's vastly different. Knowing how a game is played somewhere else that you play can give us at least something to go on for how you think.
OK's playing the game like it's American Idol where the person with most votes wins. I agree with Ciato that if it's not required by his role then OK's gone round the bend and we all need to chip in for his nice white suit and the funny men to come take him away ha-ha he-he ho-ho. (sorry, was listening to Demento earlier today) I'm going to assume role-madness, but it's still very distracting from the game and makes me want to remove the distraction which...could be good or bad depending on the madness.
Tom's being...Tom which as usual is blowing up in everyone's face.
All in all this feels remarkably like...every other Day 1. Nothing good can come of it but the joy of knowing that eventually we'll get to Day 2 and can start putting these puzzle pieces together. Geez.
My vote stays. Of the three above who are all acting strangely, Tom still has my vote. OK comes in a close second, though.
-
...okay, I have utterly no idea how to respond to the OK debacle.
My first impression was that he had some sort of crazy role that forced him to say the exact opposite of everything he actually meant. Upon further rereading though, this doesn't appear to be the (obvious) case and I am at a loss as to how to interpret him.
Furthermore, I'm still not seeing the great danger in moving off the Tom train at this point. Like Rat, people are speculating far too wildly as to what he may or may not have; the bottom line is that he's already, in effect, stated that the worst lynching him will do is remove him of his ability to vote, and as I have stated before (as has Corwin and others), this is balanced out by having, in effect, a confirmed and nightkill-immune townie. This is all assuming he's telling the truth; if he's lying and scum, well, we'll have nabbed scum day 1, and if he's lying as a townie, theeeen that is not even worth considering in my eyes. It's certainly possible he could be third party or some other weird role, but this doesn't dampen the case on him; if anything, it increases it.
As far as day 1 cases go, this feels far more preferable than, say, going after Rat (explained many times by now, his stance is reasonable) or OK (complete wild card I have no idea how to see - can be argued on this though.) Delta's attitude seriously rubs me the wrong way as very anti-town and anti-productive and would probably be my second lynch choice at this point, but it still does not feel as strong as Tom's case.
-
I'm pretty sure that OK has some kind of weird joke role that is causing this, at this point. Seems like a safe enough bet.
Uh, you say "pretty sure" and "safe enough bet". I... I don't see it. Mind saying what makes you feel pretty sure about it and why it is a safe enough bet to excuse OK's behaviour by a supposed role he may or may not have?
So, okay, we have OK who, in jokevote phase, said something about "one of us scum", now talks of vague "our plan"... Need more info from OK. More explanations. For now...
I'd like to hear a little of Ashdla. Particularly...
Deltaflyer2k8- Seriously honey, talk more, and more importantly about relevant things, not your school life. Saying you have no opinion and you are just following others is... a bit sketchy if you ask me. I know you're new to the game, but I'm also playing this for the first time, so I really don't find that as an overly viable excuse in my book. In closing, opinions please!
You called Delta out for pretty much the same thing you've been doing, to me. Barring that post I quoted this bit from where you actually give input. But the rest... Yeah, big blank for me just what you are supposed to have said because they were all in jokevote phase, barring the train on who was it? Tom or OK.
I'd like your opinions on EvilTom and OblivionKnight.
-
Um, because the way he says things are ... not logical for anyone?
QR might be onto something. There is a role called politician that you have to garner the most votes without getting lynched. I'm not really sure, but as is the behavior is not registering to me as logical Mafia play.
-
Hm, the politician I know of "controls" another's vote. Mind clarifying what role you are thinking of, what it gains from getting the most votes etcetera?
And yeah, it's not logical Mafia play. I'm almost tempted to WIFOM and question whether or not that was the gamble: Whether we'd pounce on it or find it too suspicious to be really suspicious.
We need a votecount, too.
-
The voices tell me to do it.
Each day I hear them.
They tell me things, but the closer I am to death, the clearer they become.
VOICES.
VOICES.
Mommy...
-
*looks at the knight*
*eyes cid warily*
*sighs deeply*
Whatever you're smoking, it's prolly not legal, Cid.
------------------------------------
Anyway, I think it's safe to say that he's intentionally trying to get votes. Now, whether or not this is good for town is completely up in the air. I find myself...reluctant to run with this theory. For all we know, it's some third party where he wins if he gets the most votes by the end of the game or something. Personally, I find it distracting but unless there's a concensus to vote all the way to lynch, I'd rather not contribute to some ticking time bomb of unknown origin.
-
If you kill Tom, what he says will come to pass.
-
So vouching for Tom, while acting in a way that makes us want to lynch you. You cite "voices" in your defense, although it can be seen as a joke.
Since this are serious Mafia and we take everything serious, perhaps he really is required to do something. However, there was no Night 0, so I see no possibility of someone controlling OK unless it was supposed to be submitted alongside confirmation of the role PM.
No point in conjecture in that direction because it's pretty illogical as is and reaching for straws. I wish OK would act a bit more pro-town, at the moment I'm just thinking he's scum trying to confuse us alongside EvilTom.
-
I apologize for my earlier conduct. I finally started taking my pills. The half-life isn't very good, high, though, only about 4 hours. I might have to try the Clozaril later...let me rest and recover myself.
-
In that case, OK, Tom would be a confirmed townie if we lynched him. Seriously, this can be bad how? I mean, let's all be honest here folks. What exactly is our track record for managing to actually GET scum on Day 1? Horrible. I can count the number of times on a single hand that we've managed it and prolly have fingers to spare. If we're more likely to get a townie anyway, let's get one that can't die from it and can be confirmed as a townie! He may lose his ability to vote, but frankly there are ways around that for a confirmed townie to help out the town without that. Just to have a voice of a single person that we could trust would be nice.
If, like I usually suspect when it comes to Tom's Day 1 claims, he's lying while town, then frankly we're well rid of the whole situation and can then resume actually trying to get the scum. Don't lie when town.
If he's scum, then hey! FABulous and wonderful we got one!
Now, this assume that we lynch him, he survives and we get some confirmation that he's actually town,. Just surviving the lynch wouldn't really cement 'town' in my eyes. It would be nice if the day ending flavour text would confirm that in some way. If not, we would have, indeed, just wasted a kill because we'd still have Tom and no way to be sure he was really town.
-
I find that trying to weave through intentions of various posters and trying to decide if they are scum gambits based off of posting style being awkward is futile on Day 1.
I'm not exactly sure what the heck Tom was thinking, though. I need to go back and read the posts.
-
I'd like your opinions on EvilTom and OblivionKnight.
Oki then.
EvilTom- As I said previously, the seemingly random outburst from him about 'I cannot die' was sort of uncalled for that early in the game. Being unfamiliar with potential mafia roles, as I said, I'm not personally 100% sure what might prompt someone to feel safe doing that. Of course, it could always just have been a bad game move on his part. However, I don't think calling him out on his potential bluff is necessary just yet, though he is still high on my list of suspiciously acting players. That said, my vote still stays on OK, for the following reasons.
OK- From what I've seen, he has been acting odd since the beginning. Though the slip of 'us scum' at the beginning might have been discounted for being in the joke phase, the recent 'our plan' casts the same sort of doubt. However, the most recent post by him is the most curious of all yet, I think. He could be confirming that another player dictates his actions, if that is the case, the question then obviously becomes, who? Honestly, my immediate guess would be Rat, this could very easily be the power role to compensate for his lack of vote. At the same time, he spoke against EvilTom initially, where now OK is telling us not to vote for him. That could have easily just been a stunt to throw us off, or not. If it -is- the case, then removing OK from the game would eliminate that player's essentially 'two vote' power. If it's Rat (who I'm presuming is the only person with no vote power), then we take away his only real influence in the game.
Delta is now drawing some worry from me also. If he's scum, he's doing a bad job of hiding it. If he's town, his attitude is hurting more than anything.
Also, any other thoughts about who could be controlling OK, if that's the case?
-
I find that trying to weave through intentions of various posters and trying to decide if they are scum gambits based off of posting style being awkward is futile on Day 1.
I'm not exactly sure what the heck Tom was thinking, though. I need to go back and read the posts.
Ciato: while I agree with the spirit of that sentiment (which is why I moved away from Rat after he clarified his position), Tom's presented not so much a WIFOM-ey "maybe this, maybe that" situation but one, by his own words, come out in the outcomes that I have stated many times and QR has just reiterated once again. In this case, this is not a gambit at all but a test of his word, and the potential insight coming out of that is better than a heck of a lot of average day 1 cases.
-
I really do not support Tom's lynch. His points strike me as bait-y. Calling out that he wants scum to target him and not to lynch him because it won't accomplish anything...that strikes me as basically pulling a target on himself for some purpose. I honestly think he's trying to pull people to go through this logic to vote on him. He could have a special power, yes...but why the hell will scum target him tonight, or ever, if that's the case? If he's scum, they won't kill him - why would we kill our own? If he's town, they aren't going to kill him for fear of this power. If we do lynch him and lose this power, it hurts us. If we do lynch him and he's scum, ok, great job. He says he can't fully claim a power role, but I'd like more info on that - however, that would mean we should push him up further on the vote accumulation train. We're pretty shitty at pulling scum day 1, as has been said. Honestly, he doesn't strike me as giving off scum vibes - Cid said this would be a role heavy game, but not role madness. We can't expect a super strong role here - should we risk losing a townie just so he can make a post a day once dead, or something minorish? Unless he gets insight into scum motives...but if Carth's right about being unable to vote, that kicks us closer to DR. DOOM.
-
Maybe you should look at someone closer to home...oh yes.
-
Need...to...take...my...PILLS.......
PILLS!!!!!
-
I only have a couple more. Please, make them count. End my suffering.
-
If he's scum, they won't kill him - why would we kill our own?
Argh, I really can't tell if you're doing this intentionally or not. Whatever the case, I feel more strongly for an OK lynch than an EvilTom lynch at this point. I know, I know, you'd conduct yourself more properly but thrice? Thrice this is.. Ugh.
##VOTE: OblivionKnight
Consider it an incentive for you to start getting your act together. If you're town, behave as it! If you're scum, you'll be giving us a free ticket to scum on Day 1.
-
I need my meds, they are limited. You vote for me in anger, I vote for you! Don't touch my flowers!
##Unvote: Laggy
##Vote: Bardiche
-
Here again. Hungry. Tired. Overworked, as I just bitched about in chat. Catching up. On first glance, OK and Tom both seem to be looking bad on purpose, for hell-if-I-know-what reason, but if they are, I don't want to play into that. More when my brain works.
-
I really do not support Tom's lynch. His points strike me as bait-y. Calling out that he wants scum to target him and not to lynch him because it won't accomplish anything...that strikes me as basically pulling a target on himself for some purpose. I honestly think he's trying to pull people to go through this logic to vote on him.
Okay. Hold the train. You think Tom wants people to vote/lynch him. Then....
He could have a special power, yes...but why the hell will scum target him tonight, or ever, if that's the case? If he's scum, they won't kill him - why would we kill our own? If he's town, they aren't going to kill him for fear of this power.
You say he won't likely ever be targeted at night...
If we do lynch him and lose this power, it hurts us.
Even though you think he wants us to lynch him (and has stated clearly that lynching him is "useless" and would deprive him of voting power but nothing else?)
If we do lynch him and he's scum, ok, great job. He says he can't fully claim a power role, but I'd like more info on that - however, that would mean we should push him up further on the vote accumulation train. We're pretty shitty at pulling scum day 1, as has been said. Honestly, he doesn't strike me as giving off scum vibes - Cid said this would be a role heavy game, but not role madness. We can't expect a super strong role here - should we risk losing a townie just so he can make a post a day once dead, or something minorish?
Metagame madness analysis aside, I'm still lost in this whole "we might lose a townie!" out of this when Tom has stated quite clearly that we would not, in fact, lose him on a lynch. If Tom is a townie who is lying about this and wants to get lynched for whatever ridiculous reason with no clear benefit (again, with your fear that we're losing a townie on this lynch), well uh, as I've said before I can't even begin to consider that; that's just ridiculously bad play and shooting yourself in the foot.
Further ninja posts that have cropped out while writing this have convinced me OK is completely in a whack-o-role and I probably just wasted a bunch of time trying to logically analyze his argument. *facepalm*
-
Okay, is OblivionKnight just intentionally doing bad play to accrue votes? OMGUS'ing... Damnit. This game confuses me.
We need a vote count here, and a target for our day 1 lynch. We won't be able to get scum most likely, so we should try to remove the one we think is least likely to aid us in discerning who's scum.
We also need a votecount because by the Gods, I don't know who has how many votes on him/her right now and by whom.
I'm keeping my vote on OK for now, but only because I don't want to vote him again if we consent to an OK lynch and it somehow empores him.
-
My insurance won't pay for that many more refills, so let me take another couple. Maybe Da Vinci will write for a new script. I can't be of help when this happens. I need something to end this pain. A good, strong drug, delivered in high quantities...here, i'll take more of my drug the haldol is good 4 me
-
My insurance won't pay for that many more refills, so let me take another couple. Maybe Da Vinci will write for a new script. I can't be of help when this happens. I need something to end this pain. A good, strong drug, delivered in high quantities...here, i'll take more of my drug the haldol is good 4 me
...ok, now I also keep my vote for OK, if for no other reason than to remove the general chaos/confusion he is/has been causing.
-
Votecount:
AndrewRogue (0): Meeplelard
Ashdla (0): Deltaflyer2k8, OblivionKnight
Bardiche (1): Deltaflyer2k8, EvilTom, OblivionKnight
Carthrat (1): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (0): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (3): Shale, EvilTom, Andrew
Elfboy (0): Ashdla
EvilTom (4): Bardiche, Corwin, Laggy, QuietRain, Deltaflyer2k8
Excal (1): Ciato
Laggy (0): Oblivionknight, AndrewRogue, EvilTom
Meeplelard (0): Elfboy
OblivionKnight (4): Laggy, Excal, Ashdla, Meeple, Bardiche
QuietRain (0): OblivionKnight
Shale (0): OblivionKnight
Strago (0): OblivionKnight, Elfboy,
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
Quoted from the signups thread:
Now, I say role-heavy, but the focus is...strange roles. Quirky ones. Some are useless, some are just there for laughs, some don't do what they're supposed to do (unless of course they do). I'll say flat out that many of the common mafia roles will not be present; those that are present are likely to be altered in some way. Weird alternate win conditions will show up, possibly on more than one role--yep, bastard modding will be in place, but most of it's geared for comedic effect. The roles shouldn't dictate the flow of the game, but they should prompt some amusement, headscratching, and the occasional WTF, hopefully all of them at once.
I will deign to keep this heavily in mind, suggest everyone else do so as well, and once again emphasize that it is likely not a good meter of town/scum alignment. OK has just been flat out weird and this is largely why I still don't think a case on him will get anywhere, unless you think his posts are so distracting to town as to derail productive discussion.
This, however, does make me reconsider EvilTom. Egads.
##Unvote: EvilTom
-
To reiterate the main points from that (just in case it wasn't clear):
* Complete weirdness and such is there for flavor and should not be taken as inherently scummy or townish.
* Trying to ponder traditional Mafia roles (like bomb, jester, etc. as has been discussed) is likely a course in futility.
* Weird win conditions do indeed exist.
-
You listened to me
Because I spoke the right truth
Devil in White dress
Living in this place
I see no faith in his lies
Nor a malcontent
Where he is now, there
I see him standing so tall
He will save us all
-
I wasn't talking about Tom, Laggy. I meant Rat and OK. Tom just makes me headdesk and I am putting off reading his posts right now but I will. ;_;
-
Yeah, on Rat and OK I agree with you wholly there, hence why I haven't bothered pursuing cases on them. >_>
-
Okay, I go to training for about a day and return to a finely crafted trainwreck complete with WIFOMs and OMGUSs? Well, spank my ass and call me Matilda.
First, I'll ##UNVOTE: Carthrat for the time being, since, bizarre turn of events on whatever the hell he is now, there's no point for keeping joke votes up.
Second, uh. I quite frankly have no idea of what to make about the torrent of what the christ here. I thought Rat's sudden liberation was strange, not to mention distracting, but EvilTom playing like what would seem like a really, really desperate bomb or a really, really flamboyant bulletproof is just about as jarring. His pseudo-claim-but-not-really just brought people into fine Chardonnay territory, and it's derailed town nicely as is.
Then, there's OK going... uh... truly nuts with the OOC banter, although, behind the OOC insanity, his EvilTom defense isn't completely unfounded. Joyful lynchtrains at this point are going to make the scum pretty happy, as if the current madness wasn't a wonderful smokescreen to begin with. But that's about the extent of my willing suspension of disbelief towards EvilTom, as OK certainly doesn't make me comfortable either.
Then, there's deltaflyer, but he's just... um, he's just being pretty newbish and uncooperative. I wouldn't lynch him -as of now- unless as a last resort in case we really need a lynch. And, between the triad of Rat, OK and EvilTom causing havoc, I think we have more important stuff to sort out.
Also, to give Laggy's ninjaposting a word of consideration, I'll say that I'm not really thinking about this with rolefishing madness in mind. However, I think that, particularly at day 1, pursuing a practitioner of disruptive, smokescreenish behavior is as good as we can do for scumhunting. I'm not really trying to metagame into a clear role here, but the madness kinda busts my mind open and it feels this is derailish. But eh, I'm second-guessing myself.
tl;dr version:
##Shining Finger of Suspicion: EvilTom, OblivionKnight
Sorry for not being around earlier, but real life hurts. =(
-
Posting again to check in with the game, and... hell. Well not much has really changed since earlier today, except that OK has confirmed that he wasn't just taking the joke phase a step too far.
Lynching either of them would be cool with me; Tom's probably a better pick because if he IS telling the truth, reasons Corwin/Laggy have championed will make it not so bad an outcome. For all that I find OK more disruptive to the game.
As was observed in game post Laggy just quoted, roles are meant to make us scratch our heads, but shouldn't dictate the flow of the game. So I'm not going to get all hyper-second-guessy about who we lynch having dire consequences, and would discourage others from doing so.
-
Makes sense on the logical flow, NEB. I just said that mostly for purposes of self-clarification. Also because I'd like to not join a merryhappy lynchtrain out of awesomely nowhere and then facepalm as town gets its ass burned for it.
-
In the interest of streamlining our day to NOT be several days long, would it be possible to consolidate our list of suspects? We have healthy trains on Tom, OK and Deltaflyer along with some side stragglers. Does anyone have a serious opposition to narrowing that down to 1-2 serious pushes to lynch? I see a lot of good arguments for OK and Tom both. Does anyone want to push the Deltaflyer one hard? I have a harder time seeing that one, but I'd hear arguments about it. Personally, it's all role madness to me right now and I don't think we're going to get any more info out of people until the flips are made. So getting to that point seems optimal to me.
Anyone think we need to give it more time? Suggestions/comments?
-
I don't consider Deltaflyer an option for a Day 1 lynch. If he is scum, then acting like this will give him away soon enough. We can always opt for a Delta lynch later.
OblivionKnight: the entire wonky acting of him makes me want to lynch him. If only because it'd also, at the very damn least, make the game less confusing because he certainly isn't helping. Just spreading confusion among town. May be Jester from his behaviour.
EvilTom: could see why we'd want to lynch him, since supposedly it'd just render him voteless. Mrf. Could consent to an EvilTom lynch, but find OblivionKnight to be more alarming and aggravating. EvilTom saying that if Scum goes for him, he'd grow stronger... Makes me think there could be a Judas role in it. (if he gets targeted by scum he converts to scum). IDK. I'm more comfortable with an OK lynch, but as I said, I'm willing to support an EvilTom lynch if we decide on that instead.
The rest... No reason to lynch them. There is some minor stuff about Rat, but I rather wait for another day to see what comes out of Rat before deciding to lynch him based on his inability to vote.
-
I can agree with Bardiche in that aspect. That is, presently I find OK more of a hindrance to accomplishing anything positive in the game, however, if it is decided that EvilTom should go, I'm not opposed to supporting that.
Delta doesn't seem like a real threat to me at the moment, maybe in the future, but as Jo'ou Ranbu said, currently, there are more pressing matters.
-
OK is acting strangely... but this is most likely role-related. I don't think we should kill him because of that. I'm suspicious about where he is getting all this information, but I don't really want him to explain it, because that kind of rolefishing only helps scum at this point in the game.
I don't consider Deltaflyer an option for a Day 1 lynch. If he is scum, then acting like this will give him away soon enough. We can always opt for a Delta lynch later.
Never suffer scum to live. And no, acting like this, he won't give himself away, because he's effetively refusing to help town by not posting content.
I'll be sure to keep an eye on you.
Therefore, Deltaflyer! I've already got my vote on him, and sadly cannot vote again. I propose a Delta lynch.
It doesn't look like he's going to be of much help for the rest of the game, with his recent stance of OMGUS and 'I'M NOT POSTING CONTENT!'.
Ninja'd by Ash - Why is OK a hindrance? Why are you lynching based on roles-etc? Why aren't you lynching the player who has shown detrimental play? I don't see how OK is more pressing than Delta's OMGUS etc. Delta is the better target, because OK is contributing and Delta is not.
-
Catching up on everything, I have to agree with QR, this does feel like a good time to start thinking about narrowing things down. So let's look at the only three people with votes.
Delta: When he posts, he doesn't say anything and tends to be rude and anti-social, in a social game no less. Part of this is almost certainly being used to something different, but I refuse to credit all of it to that. Honestly, I'd be fine with defaulting to him due to this, since it's a case of someone's behaviour either being a good scum cover, or just generally not being helpful to town, which makes him expendable.
Tom: How is it that Tom always winds up in this situation? That said, given his flamboyancy and the fact that he drew all of this attention on himself and his role for no reason I can see, he definatly deserves the flak he's gained himself. More importantly, by his own admission, he's not that big a loss if we do lynch him, especially since I am now greatly doubting that we'll see his infinite cosmic powers come into play if we do leave him be.
OK: He was disruptive at first, but I think I'm beginning to get a handle on him. Definatly some post restrictions sitting on that sucker, but I don't feel quite as bad about him now as I did before. And, I think he's moved to the lowest of these three for my choice for lynch. Also, given that he's done it three times, I'm now confident in assuming that none of those scum references were slips, and instead assume they are part of the role. As well, I suspect the pills he's talking about are a limit on how often he can make serious/sane posts.
That said, I want to mull over the situation a bit before I actually change my vote given the number of votes on people seem to effect things, and I want to have a better feel for the equilibrium before I do that. But, just so that people can't say I'm hiding my intentions...
##FoS: Dread Thomas
-
Ninja'd by Ash - Why is OK a hindrance? Why are you lynching based on roles-etc? Why aren't you lynching the player who has shown detrimental play?
I'm not choosing OK based on his role, I'm choosing him because, role or not, the way he is behaving is disrupting the game, in that it is distracting, and generally confusing play. I believe that with this removed, things will at least be marginally easier to decipher.
-
To Excal:
OK: He was disruptive at first, but I think I'm beginning to get a handle on him. Definatly some post restrictions sitting on that sucker, but I don't feel quite as bad about him now as I did before. And, I think he's moved to the lowest of these three for my choice for lynch. Also, given that he's done it three times, I'm now confident in assuming that none of those scum references were slips, and instead assume they are part of the role. As well, I suspect the pills he's talking about are a limit on how often he can make serious/sane posts.
I would like to point out, again, the following lines in the signup thread:
I have not included post restrictions in the setup, and while there are a few triggered events lurking about, this is the exception rather than the rule. You shouldn't have to devote any real discussion time in-game to sorting them out, but it should be fun to see them in action. Let me reiterate: this is not role-madness. The game will be filled with roles but they should impact the game only in minor ways. This is not a role-puzzle, they are there for flavor.
I have no idea how OK's role is affecting his posts, but post restrictions-esque/threat of modkill... it should not be affecting him to that degree.
Tom, do you have any defense to the scenario that has been presented in the case of a lynch on you? You haven't argued directly against its points, just said that Delta seems to be a better target than OK.
-
Re: Cyril
I'm glad to know that this game won't be revolving around the guy who can't vote, the crazy that gets better at hearing voices the more you vote for him, or the unkillable wonder.
Sigh...
Y'know what, screw it. Let's push that big red shiny button and see how unkillable Tom really is.
##Unvote: OK, ##Vote: Dread Thomas
-
It's not a good case? I tried to give town information about my role, as Rat had done, because it would come out eventually (and was fun to do so). There's nothing especially scummy or anti-town about that.
I've contributed to discussion, as I continue to do so. And my vote has been useful in getting information from players other than those under lynch trains, such as when I voted for you, Laggy.
Scum could (and probably are) hiding on these trains and not presenting new and controversial views. Lurking is how scum win!
Delta has not contributed, at all, and refused to do so when I asked him to, instead he jumped on my train and OMGUSed me.
Do I need to make the case for him better than that? The call is clear, it's best to get rid of him over someone who is contributing.
PS. I hadn't noticed the thing about posting restrictions. Odd. I still think lynching OK is a bad idea though, because he seems to have some amazing power of insight, which may or may not be a role power.
Ninja'd by Excal: would you like to explain why you're voting for me, who is contributing as shown, over Delta, who refuses to do so?
-
Hmm...OK seems...role related at this point. His latest posts are just...too weird for him to be really doing it honestly. Eh, guess its enough to do this:
##Unvote: Oblivionknight
If something IS going on with him, or he's faking it all, I feel it'd be better to be more secure of this thought later in the game. However, its Day 1; its impossible to be sure of anything.
And...personally? I want this day to end soon. Its really hard ot do anything, its been noted Day 1 Lynches = Random, almost never get scum, etc. Due to this, despite my earlier misgivings about lynching Tom...he seems like the best candidate off hand. No reason to prolong Day 1, rather, get Day 2 here quicker where we have actual info to work off of. As such...
##Vote: EvilTom
I'm not confident about this at all, and still think its a bit dangerous...but at the same time, I'm lacking any better targets. OK...I'd rather get some info before we jump to conclusions about him. Thomas' actions have been similarly lacking in help, and instead, has given us those cryptic warnings (if you can call them that), and such. Don't feel there's any better target at the moment as such.
-
Bah, I'll explain for him.
It's because while he's basically a non-fixture of the game, your play is actively spiteful, misleading, continues to state that 'it's good to give information about my role' when it is clearly not. Your posts also read with typical INDIGNANCE, as well as pulling out unbased paranoid shit like 'scum are hiding on these trains and not presenting new views', well no shit, your early claim pretty much forced us all to focus on it and is going to dominate the game while you're still around.
Your cases in general are also suspect, as you seem to base your lynch criteria on 'lynching this person is likely to do the least damage to town', as opposed to 'lynching this person is the most likely to nab scum', which is our actual goal here. Any mislynch is bad for town, and just trying to minimize the damage is a weak way of playing; a mindset that will lead to defeat. Let's all keep in mind that not lynching to find scum in day one will leave us with a more difficult day 2 and not fall into this trap of laziness.
With OK behaving like a frigging idiot as well, of course, there is no way I can make sense or trust anything of what he's saying without seeing a flip. Suffice to say that by him claiming lynching you is a bad idea, he's tied himself to your flip, whatever it might be.
Whatever your plan was, if it wasn't based on getting lynched, it was bad. If getting lynched is your goal, well, gj, easiest thing to do in the game, grats.
Ultimately, ##FoSAgain: OK because by stating "killing Dread Thomas is a bad idea" (paraphrased), he's tied himself to DT. I can't really conceive of where his intel is from (which has lead me to think it's most likely made up.) Laggy's point about the post restrictions (or rather, the lack of them) holds merit as well.
To nobody's surprise, I am going to dismiss DT's desire to not-lynch OK due to the obvious bias involved.
-
argh, connection ate post. Anyway to sum it up I don't see anything particularly all-relevating about Tom's case and still feel the same way, so my vote goes back, it does. I am not convinced role madness should screw town over THAT badly after rereading Cid's guidelines on the game in the worst possible case.
##Vote: EvilTom
-
Votecount:
AndrewRogue (0): Meeplelard
Ashdla (0): Deltaflyer2k8, OblivionKnight
Bardiche (1): Deltaflyer2k8, EvilTom, OblivionKnight
Carthrat (0): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (0): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (3): Shale, EvilTom, Andrew
Elfboy (0): Ashdla
EvilTom (6): Corwin, QuietRain, Deltaflyer2k8, Excal, Meeple, Laggy, Bardiche, Laggy
Excal (1): Ciato
Laggy (0): Oblivionknight, AndrewRogue, EvilTom
Meeplelard (0): Elfboy
OblivionKnight (2): Ashdla, Bardiche, Excal, Laggy, Meeple
QuietRain (0): OblivionKnight
Shale (0): OblivionKnight
Strago (0): OblivionKnight, Elfboy,
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
Okay, so. Still tired, but head's more together now.
##Unvote
Of the three people currently painting targets on themselves, I like Tom's lynch the most, followed by OK and Delta somewhere below that.
1) Tom. He's actively created confusion with the roleclaim, for which there was no good townie reason, even compared to, say, his Touhou Mafia antics. His claimed power is all kinds of weird, and the rationale for claiming it - especially the anti-nightkill portion - incomprehensible to me. He's also going on the offensive against a pretty darned weak target, but that's not really useful information; when you're the leading vote-getter, it's good strategy to go after the runner-up regardless of what side you're on.
Also:
Can I tell you any more?
Simple answer: No.
Long answer: No, and I can't tell you why I can't tell you.
Does not inspire trust in a game where we have been explicitly told there are no post restrictions.
2) OK. Likewise thrashing about, but the desired effect seems to be not so much to confuse as to draw attention directly to himself. Tons of jokevotes, incredible and varied amounts of weird and sometimes disruptive posting with no clear purpose. "Don't lynch Tom and I'm not going to say why" may be the most suspicious thing he could possibly have said, which, like much of his posting, makes me wonder if anyone could be that suspicious without it being deliberate. Like I said before, I'm feeling an ulterior motive here, and I don't like playing to it.
3) Delta. Is doing the same sort of things we've mislynched Smodge and Tom for god-only-knows how many times in the past. Definition of insanity, same thing, expecting different result, etc. Someone to keep an eye on, but not to kill.
One last thing, a bit of paranoia talking: Rat, what happens if you try to vote? It's not counted, you're modkilled, giant space lemurs descend from the heavens and ravage the land?
Sleep now. Will look over the cases again in the morning and vote. My judgment on Tom/OK is rooted enough in gut reaction to OK that I want to look it over again when I'm not exhausted.
-
You want my contribution. Well scanning the pages quite smiply, there is nothing that i can think that has already been said so I am just going with the flow, I wasn't active for the last two pages simply because, i was asleep.
In the light of recent events, the Joke Vote phase is over, correct? So why are we still worrying about shooting in the dark and hitting innocents? I'm not saying that we want to kill innocents but maybe, if we have no real evidence then why are we throwing votes around randomly?
Ok, so a did an OMGUS. So did OK but no-one seemed to notice even when he stated it.
I think, however that OK is a jester or other special role that wins when lynched? If that is the case then we are in a little bit of bother, arent we?
(Also, This is how our mafia is over there, we say short, funny oneliners all the time. It works even though it shouldn't but it does!)
I say that we vote for either me or ET. I'd prefer it if you lynched him but if you start a train against me, you start a train against an innocent.
-
Okay. Tom, the main reason people are voting for you is that you are acting really bizarre and you are being extremely arrogant for no reason. I don't see how this is especially hard to see. As much as Delta is not contributing, your behavior is simply poisonous to town. Rat's roleclaim was fine because he chose to give the information he wanted to give and didn't really imply anything, which is discreet and makes sense. Your flaunting of your role and mystery is highly irritating and I feel that voting for you is a natural reaction. Your randomly inflammatory remarks do not serve us well at all.
With that said, despite my discomfort with your overarching tone of everything you have said, I do agree that Delta's just... uncooperativeness is highly obnoxious.
I, once again, do not like Strago's delving into tongue slips on Day 1 and his contribution is tentative at best, although it is Day 1.
In general Meeple is laying very low and this worries me a little bit and I think Tom has enough pressure until he returns, so...
##UNVOTE: Excal
##VOTE: Meeple
-
I just co-operated and gave you my view...
-
I say that we vote for either me or ET. I'd prefer it if you lynched him but if you start a train against me, you start a train against an innocent.
My brain hurts. "Guys, vote for me or the other guy. But vote for him, not me, because I'm innocent." Yeah, that's a pretty funny one-liner, actually. Also OK has plenty of suspicion on him, with one of points against him being the way he's voting (haphazardly and all over the place.) Also we are not throwing votes around randomly because we DO have some evidence, but even if we didn't, not voting at all will lead us to PARALYZING INDECISION. That's not a good place to be. Also, just going "What I wanted to say has already been said" is weak. Really weak. Say it again if you must.
Ciato is sort of right on Meeple. He's playing like he always does, by his own admission, which means lots of rampant speculation on things that aren't really deserving of heavy analysis- not because they're not important, but because it doesn't take a frigging essay to note certain things. An awful lot of talk with very little meaningful stuff in it, in other words.
That said I don't see him as lynchworthy today because of the other extremely lynchworthy things happening.
<->
Shale, I was told I can't contribute to the votecount and that my votes do nothing. I don't think the world will explode or anything if I try to vote, but nor do I suspect anything interesting will occur. For the sake of science, ##Vote: OK, but yeah, zero expectations here.
-
Votecount:
AndrewRogue (0): Meeplelard
Ashdla (0): Deltaflyer2k8, OblivionKnight
Bardiche (1): Deltaflyer2k8, EvilTom, OblivionKnight
Carthrat (0): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (0): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (2): EvilTom, Andrew, Shale
Elfboy (0): Ashdla
EvilTom (6): Corwin, QuietRain, Deltaflyer2k8, Excal, Meeple, Laggy, Bardiche, Laggy
Excal (0): Ciato
Laggy (0): Oblivionknight, AndrewRogue, EvilTom
Meeplelard (1): Ciato, Elfboy
OblivionKnight (2): Ashdla, Bardiche, Excal, Laggy, Meeple
QuietRain (0): OblivionKnight
Shale (0): OblivionKnight
Strago (0): OblivionKnight, Elfboy,
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
We have a negative, sir.
-
And there you go. Say thank you to the mod for his timely update, everyone.
-
##Unvote: OK
##Vote: Evil Tom
Seems the town has made their decision, and I'm not opposed to a lynch for Evil Tom. Likely a more detailed post in the morning. Night for now, everyone.
-
can i just ask, who is this Dread thomas you all talk about??
-
Dread Thomas = Evil Tom.
-
Oh. Ok thanks.
-
Delta:
I say that we vote for either me or ET.
Oh for the love of--
You people say mean and hurtful things! I'll be doing my passive-aggressive act to avoid actually contributing. I'm innocent, but I suppose you could go ahead and kill me anyway.
That pretty much sums up your play.
I was this close to voting you. But I won't do that. If you really don't want to play, bow out. I'm not going to waste our lynch on someone playing like that.
On Tom and OK: I agree with Rat that OK's pretty much tied his fate to Tom. I also think they're having a bit too much fun with their roles/characters, and the rest of us suffer as a result.
I happen to think Tom is lying, somehow, about something. Maybe about everything. Every time before I thought he was lying in mafia I turned out to be right, so I'll trust my instincts (you guys don't have to, etc).
I don't think we should lynch OK. Tom is... weird and looks like he misstepped (whether as lying town or scum is a mystery, sadly, though I favor the latter option). OK... whatever he's doing, it's hard for me to see it as anything but intentional. He has to be aware of the consequences in light of what's happening with Tom. Therefore, I don't see his actions as 'slips' the same way I do with Tom, and would prefer not to lynch someone whose alignment we don't know and who asks to be lynched by openly referring to himself as scum repeatedly, in various forms.
I also find it weird how he both says Tom lies and that what Tom says will come to pass in two different posts, but I'm not sure what that suggests.
On Rat: I'll second that request for you to "un"-FoS to maintain a proper voting record to the best of your ability. Or just go ahead and use the voting format as you just did in that post you made. As your votes aren't counted but you're allowed to do this, that would give us a clear idea of whom you'd like to see hang.
On Ciato: Your contribution is lighter than I expected, I realize as I see another brief post. Day 1, etc, hope to see more from you to get a read on you.
On Shale: His contributions are reasonable, if sparse. (one more appeared as I was typing all this, so I hope it's a sign for things to come)
JR: Actually vote on someone? Using FoS on our two top lynch candidates is... not informative in the slightest.
QR: What actually makes you think there's role madness afoot? There has been literally no proof of it as yet. It reads to me as a convenient excuse to use later if your choice of a target ends up being town. Mind explaining why you said that?
Bardiche: "We can always opt for a Delta lynch later." -- that... rarely works in mafia. And even if it did, choosing someone with a day 1 case over information based on flips and further inference is foolish to the extreme, if not self-defeating. Why are you suggesting this?
-
Well not using my vote certainly doesn't do me any dang good, does it? Blech.
People who were uber-speculative about Carth's "hidden power role" because they didn't think a voteless townie was believable: Ashdla, Bardiche, OK, Laggy. Role-fishing always bad this early, that's a given. Moreover, it's freaking Carthrat. If he was working on some crazy gambit that involved him hiding another power I think it's safe to say that we all respect him enough to assume that he'd be better off keeping it to himself for now. Ja? I know that's a bit of old news, but on re-reading the topic those folk stood out to me.
OK's behavior is utterly bizarre. I didn't even realize that this game apparently didn't have post restrictions until it was pointed out, and to me it just makes half of OK's content completely inexplicable. I really, really want to know what the deuce is going on there. Also also, I almost feel as if not enough has been made of his claims that he knows things about Tom's role. My refusal to lynch OK today is pretty contingent on him actually being helpful tomorrow.
That being said I also despise Day 1 and have no real desire to drag this out much farther, especially when a Tom lynch strikes me as just fine for all the reasons that have been discussed. Not to mention that I find his attitude of "I'm having fun with my reckless pointless role-claim, losers, what are you doing?" to be extremely irritating and incendiary. I see no reason for anything he's done thus far, pretty much.
##VOTE: EvilTom
-
I gave you guys my contribution and now its being tossed away. Go on then, vote for me I dont even care any more. Go on then! Hurry up and kill me, you always say that I am one of the most likely scum. Hurry up so I prove you wrong in death you idiots.
-
Bardiche: "We can always opt for a Delta lynch later." -- that... rarely works in mafia. And even if it did, choosing someone with a day 1 case over information based on flips and further inference is foolish to the extreme, if not self-defeating. Why are you suggesting this?
I'm not getting a scum reading from Delta based on his current actions. It seems, though, as he proves with his latest post above mine that I made somewhat of an err in inviting him. The way we play Mafia here is significantly heavier from what he is used to. I apologize whole-heartedly.
##UNVOTE: OblivionKnight
##VOTE: EvilTom
As I said, I am fine with a lynch of either of the two. Since our decision seems to have fallen on EvilTom, I'll put my support where I promised it would be. I concur with most of the thoughts against EvilTom, and if what he says will come to pass, we will at least have a guaranteed town voice among us.
In response to Strago about my "role-fishing": Yes, I admit I speculated about the possibility Rat has more powers than just that, since it seems like a really mean role to give someone, as well that El Cid promised any regular Mafia role will be modificated if it appears. I see no reason to be ashamed of lending a few words to it, especially when it was in the stages we were still discussing who we wanted to lynch: At that point the two "revealed roles" were pertinent enough.
-
For the benefit of the mods,
That is hammer stop talking.
-
Daggon man don' be goin with tha night and th stop talkin man whachu think mod gonna do man you donno if it's hammer or not man
Dread Thomas, aka Evil Tom, aka Mindboggler, aka Leah Wasserman, aka Town Aligned Zombie, was lynched day 1.
It is now night, stop talking and send Cid your night actions!
Votecount:
AndrewRogue (0): Meeplelard
Ashdla (0): Deltaflyer2k8, OblivionKnight
Bardiche (1): Deltaflyer2k8, EvilTom, OblivionKnight
Carthrat (0): Jo'ou Ranbu
Ciato (0): QuietRain
Deltaflyer2k8 (2): EvilTom, Andrew, Shale
Elfboy (0): Ashdla
EvilTom (9): Corwin, QuietRain, Deltaflyer2k8, Excal, Meeple, Laggy, Ashdla, Strago, Bardiche, Bardiche, Laggy
Excal (0): Ciato
Laggy (0): Oblivionknight, AndrewRogue, EvilTom
Meeplelard (1): Ciato, Elfboy
OblivionKnight (0): Bardiche, Excal, Laggy, Meeple, Ashdla
QuietRain (0): OblivionKnight
Shale (0): OblivionKnight
Strago (0): OblivionKnight, Elfboy,
With seventeen alive, it takes nine to lynch.
-
The day began and ended with wild claims: "If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!"
This announcement was greeted with some skepticism: "I dunno, I can imagine quite a bit."
After this exchange, there was nothing for it but to put the claim to the test. So they hung Mindboggler from the neck until dead, and spent some time watching the corpse to see if anything happened. Then someone prodded it. Then someone painted it yellow because, well, why not? Nothing happened. There was some disgruntled mumbling and eventually the crowd dispersed and headed for an uneasy night's rest.
A few minutes later, after everyone had retreated to their quarters for the night, a ghostly, transparent image blipped into existence over Mindboggler's corpse, and spoke thusly:
Like zombie Zalbag
I slip from the grave's embrace
To speak once a day!
No doubt Mindboggler would have more to say when her fellows arose. ...Though not to all of them, as it turned out. In the morning, the residents of Belle Reve found their number further reduced by two.
Deltaflyer2k8--The Thinker, AKA Cliff Carmichael (Town Messenger)--was killed overnight!
OblivionKnight--Deadshot, AKA Floyd Lawton (Self-aligned Jester)--was killed overnight!
---
It is now day two. With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
(In case anyone wonders, Delta was not a modkill and he did not quit the game).
-
Gah. Sorry I didn't speak up like I planned to. Got called into work early, and by the time I had a free minute the hammer had fallen. I would've voted for Tom anyway, so at least it didn't change much.
Anyway, that's...well. All three of the Day 1 targets are gone, so it's time to look at the people who were attacking those three yesterday. Fun, fun.
-
Well. I guess we should all be thankful that Tom was able to get himself lynched before OK. Uh I'll go through stuff later, RPing right now.
But I have to get this out there right now: I hate this game.
-
Well then, I guess that took care of all the Day 1 potential targets in one fell swoop.
-
Well, it turns out I had good cause to suspect OK of jesterdom. We dodged a bullet there? (I'm still unclear as to whether jesters winning mean the rest of us win less or not.) And Tom is a zombie. Well I guess he was pretty much telling the truth then. Now we can count on his insight from beyond the grave. Joy. I can hope he has some cop-like ability or somesuch, but I kinda doubt it.
Not sure what the hell to make of yesterday, since the cases on both OK and Tom seemed pretty damned reasonable. Scum could easily have done just about anything, and I dunno how to wade through the WIFOM to figure anything out.
The fact that two nearest candidates to lynching besides Tom himself died is curious, though. Most likely reason I can think of offhand is that one death is the work of a vig. No idea why scum would kill either of them, but I'm not going to think about it too hard either. See WIFOM disclaimer above.
-
My thoughts on each!
Ok, Delta...I'm not sure about. Guessing a Vig got him. Why? Cause he was being totally unhelpful to Town, and looked suspicious, and could probably be irritating, so probably went down by that or something. Of course, there could be some other method of death...just don't think its scum.
Why? Cause I bet Scum suspected OK was a Jester too. His actions make sense; he was trying to get himself lynched. He failed, Scum knew he was probably going to keep this up, so took him down before he could get lynched. Makes sense enough to me.
Granted, I think a Jester Win might be independent of everyone else. As in, getting Lynched = He wins, but game still goes on. He just needs to succeed at that, and not matter for anything else. So yeah, in that regard, seems kind of silly.
Tom...yeah, telling the truth in the end. Just...argh, why did he do that? Wasted a lynch on him cause of his whole odd style of playing. Well, at least he can still help contribute to the conversation some, and hopefully explain himself from beyond the grave (though, it'd be recommended he make his one post as good as possible, for obvious reasons.)
Anyway, gonna need to go over and analyze things. No clue where to start...well, ok, starting with those who interacted with any of the 3 role flips would be a start, but...yeah, this is going to take some time.
-
Heh. My head hurts now... I'm not quite sure why the scum would kill either....
Also reaaaally glad we didn't lynch OK. Not sure what that would have caused but I don't think it'd have been good.
-
Corwin: in answer to your question, the way OK, Carth and Tom were all acting yesterday was just really off to me. OK especially. And the way everyone kept saying 'nope can't say more' just screams that they have roles that are wacky. And roles-wacky=role-madness to me with this batch of peeps. We tend to take a little bit of chaos, sow it with fertilizer and then will it really hard to grow into something even worse than what it started out as (at least so it seems to me). And seeing Tom & OK's flips haven't really changed my mind in that regard.
Tom's death was...well, with hindsight, it was the BEST thing we could have done between him and OK. And now we've got a phrase a day from him. I'll be looking for that later on when things get going again.
Delta's death: I'm not really sure much can be gotten out of that. Whether it was a scum hit, a vig hit or a third party kill, it basically boils down to taking out someone who was a distraction at best and a downright impediment to town at worst.
OK's flip, hmm. Waiting...waiting...nope, not much surprise going on here about that one considering how he was acting yesterday. No win for you mister distraction. I'm still not sure what to make of someone targeting OK. Vig/SK hedging bets to see if the one who dodged the bullet was the scum instead? Scum trying to make us start back at square one by taking out the other front runner? Either set phearing OK's Mad Mafia Skillz(tm)? WIFOM could eat my evening on this one. Not sure what to make of it, but I'll let it percolate in the back of the brain and see what comes up.
-
There's honestly all kinds of weird possibilities. Maybe there's a bus-driver or someone with an ability that reflects NKs to someone else. I mean, this is a pretty silly game so far.
-
Huh, odd set of people to take out, but I'm not especially inclined to ponder too hard on who took out whom, nor why they did so. With luck, we'll eventually find out who the vig was, and hear who they shot and why. But for now, all I can do is look at those people, and actually be glad that we lost the folks who were being the biggest detractors from the game (though, I can now greatly understand why OK was doing what he was.)
Now, we have a clean slate, and some knowledge from which to start a proper hunt. So, time to look through everything, and see what can be learned.
-
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to kill.
Mod slip up or is this genuine? I sincerely hope not.
As far as new suspects go, I'm just as flabbergasted as the rest of you lot.
-
You need a majority to lynch. 7 out of 14 is not a majority. 8 out of 14 is. I see no problem.
Sleep now, 10 hours of work tomorrow. Grrr.
-
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to kill.
Mod slip up or is this genuine? I sincerely hope not.
That, sir, is a very good question. I'm quite curious myself. Dark Holy Elf, presuming Rat still has no vote, this does not compute.
As for the overnight kills, I can't say I'm terribly disappointed in the outcome. Though we didn't get scum, we got a third party, and I think the other two being gotten rid of the way they were will be beneficial to the game in general. I'm not sure myself as to who got rid of whom and why, though.
As for the present game, I can't say I have any major leads at this point.
I'm heading to bed now, and have work in the morning, so you wont see me posting for a while, but I'll read over everything when I get home and give my thoughts at that point.
-
Ash, it does compute. Sure, it could be a mod mistake, but I don't think it is. Which means that Rat does have voting weight when it comes to determining how many people need to vote to lynch, but no actual vote himself. It'll be something to keep an eye on as the game progresses, but nothing that needs to be focused on at present.
-
Rat having no vote has no bearing on the amount of people still in the game.
Anyway, people are going 'must take look at interactions, more later'. I'll be actually sure to follow up on that and check whether the promised 'more' comes at some later time.
Myself, I think I'd like to examine those who didn't vote for whatever reason. http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24589#msg24589 for easy reference.
9. Elfboy
12. Shale
13. Jo'ou Ranbu
Okay. So we had three people who had not placed a vote at all, after all our deliberations?
Elfboy. Yeah, I'm thinking I would like to hear why you had no votes on the table when the day ended despite being reasonably active.
Shale. Here ( http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24655#msg24655 ) he cites RL as the reason, and then follows up with saying he would have voted for whom we now know to be a town player without hesitation. This is something I'd like to hear him explain.
At the same time, Shale is trying to direct attention towards the people who DID vote for either of the three targets of day 1. Presumably, it means Tom's voters, as Delta and OK had two votes between the two of them; the same Tom, whose innocence Shale now knows and says he would have gone for, but it was apparently suspicious to pursue while his claims were still very much in doubt.
JR. Lurking and not voting, too. Nice!
-
You need a majority to lynch. 7 out of 14 is not a majority. 8 out of 14 is. I see no problem.
Oh, right. Of course, my mistake.
So I just skimmed through the entire thread and... I'm going to be flat-out honest here, I've nothing new to add to the table. EvilTom/OblivionKnight's cases have been dominant the entire way, and all one had to do is really just add on to that and ignore everything else.
If I look at delta's voterecord, nothing really comes to bear.
As far as ideas for the day...
I find it a bit odd Ashdla wanted Elfboy to defend himself against a joke vote. Further, there's this little bit...
Too true! Usually only those wanting attention make such bold statements. Why oh why does the rat want us to look at him, I wonder?
I admit I am reaching at straws here, but looking back at it, Ashdla seemed too hard to try and get people to look at Carthrat... Coupled with jumping the OK train right after that post with no explanation... Bah. I'll be looking at you, Ashdla.
Then there's Excal saying:
It feels so odd when I'm one of the few who isn't letting a role influence his posts.
I'm... Not sure what makes him feel secure in making this statement. I mean, sure, Carthrat, EvilTom and OblivionKnight somewhat acted on a role but no one else did. And in Rat's case, he couldn't do much else.
Now, I often believe the first kill listed is scumkilled, and the second kill listed is ITP/Vig killed, so of course this gem strikes up to me as well:
Delta: I am a proponent of lynching people who don't bother to use proper capitalization, not to mention punctuation. Not actually having much to show for yourself either in volume or content will make your playing experience a short one, if I have anything to do about this, so do shape up.
You'll forgive me for reaching at Day 1 straws here. Note that I can't say that either of the three I highlighted are scum based on the above three quotations, but I still believe they deserve some extra attention.
Ninja'd by Corwin. Brings up an excellent point on Shale. Had overlooked it. Good thinking, Corwin.
A request to EvilTom, by the way: Please do not post during debates unless you want to point out some things we are clearly overlooking and/or are about to lynch what you feel is a bad choice. Please do not post needlessly so we do not waste your single day voice. Please forgive us sinful children of Ivalice.
-
Yes it does compute, we go for true majority here in the DL, which means over 50% of the town's votes are required for a lynch. Now, I don't have a vote, but I apparently contribute to this anyway. So yeah.
I was tempted to copy/paste my day one rant here again for irony's sake. But no, onto an actual post.
<->
Anyway I think Bardiche is presently the most suspicious person around, mainly because he doesn't seem to think it's that bad lynching me in order to 'narrow the suspects down'. At least, that's what he said stuff to the effect of yesterday...
Carthrat: Huh, can't vote at all. I concur with Meeple on this point, that it could be something like that... Mm, too little information as yet. I see no reason to lynch him for it, although I do consider it an option when we're going to "narrow" down the amount of players and cannot decide on an eligible target. For now, I appreciate Rat's analytical ability enough not to want to support a train on him yet.
This is actually never a good idea. Lynching someone because it seems like the least worst option is not a good mindset or basis for an argument. Sure, he doesn't condone lynching me then, but this logic is inherently flawed. Laggy also scores points for expressing slight willingness to do this just based on 'day one sucks'.
So. FoS: Bardiche for this, and generally pushing discussion about me around throughout the day with what looked like a view to lynching me for no good reason. He still apparently has minor stuff about me to talk about, too. I'm very curious as to what that might be.
<->
In general, the fact that we had such lynchable people running around yesterday only means that nobody is going to REALLY seem suspicious just for following up on those cases.
Honorary mentions go to Meeple and Ashdla for rampant role speculation.
<->
AND REMEMBER, EVERYONE, YOU ARE NOT CAP'N K. YOU ARE NOT A ZOMBIE COP. YOU ARE THE SAME, ILLITERATE, USELESS SOCIAL DROPKICK AS EVERYONE ELSE.[/i]
-
On the subject of day one lynches to "clear out riff raff": there are precious few circumstances that I can think that this is a good idea. Simply put, while day one does suck, you should at least have some indication that a lynch target is in part scummy. The only time that uselessness should ever be a factor is when they are LITERALLY useless and, even then, it should only be a factor when they are one of many targets. I.E. play ability should only be factored in as a last resort to help decide between multiple targets.</playstyle>
Looking at the vote records, the first five people that I would look at are: Bardiche, Excal, Laggy, Meeple and Ashdla. Why? Because all of these people went for the two likely lynch trains. While, obviously, this isn't a sure thing, it is pretty likely that scum will try to sneak on on the obvious lynch trains. Of them... Bardiche looks unquestionably worst to me.
Stolling down the list, we have the support of lynching Carth 'cause, hey. He can't vote. The other big thing that jumps out at me is that... well. Why didn't you give Tom a final chance to roleclaim? While this isn't always useful, I have to admit a certain curiosity as to why Tom was not given a final chance. Given his earlier comments, I'm not sure what he would have provided or even if he would have just said he couldn't, but it feels... off to have not give him a final go and instead jump straight into the hammer vote. I realize his earlier statements about not being able to say anything, but hearing last words might still have done something.
Generally speaking, I really don't like the sort of precedent this sets. In fact, that bothers me enough that I do want your logic behind that one in your own words.
##Vote: Bardiche
The other person I recommend taking a look back on is Shale who unvotes Delta... while he's still one of his top three suspects. It feels really odd to me to have three viable candidates and not put votes on any of them.
Beyond that, I would like to hear from NEB and Snow as to why they had no votes at the end of the day.
-
Apologies for late post, was caught up in stuff and been a busy day in general. Also dead tired, but I felt I should contribute before passing out for the night.
Immediate first thought before anything: Bardiche, it is customary to at least give a fair amount of warning (declare intent to hammer) before actually dropping the hammer. Please keep this in mind in the future, because it sure looks like you were just dropping the vote without realizing it would end the day.
Flips are somewhat unsurprising, if disappointing. If I had to hazard a guess, I think we had a vig that gunned Delta and scum gunned OK knowing he wasn't one of their kind and likely had an alternate win condition, but I'll not dwell too much on that. As said before, at least Tom is now a confirmed townie with assured insight.
Collective thoughts on everyone right now:
AndrewRogue - Needs to post more.
Ciato - Ditto. Actually your post count really isn't that bad, but some more own thought and speculation would be nice. Mainly what you've been saying is caution and don't-do-this, which is fine but let's-do (or think about)-this is ALSO important.
Strago - I'm a little fed up of the "oh noes, people are rolefishing and speculating too much, that must obviously be scummy!" when 1) that was already explained thoroughly at the start, and 2) every other post I wrote afterwards contained something along the lines of "Stop speculating on Rat's role, his explanation was reasonable and further talk is derailing". Furthermore his few posts have really come off as parroting a bunch of really obvious statements with no real original content of his own, and he laid down a vote on Tom. While the cases were so clear and justified in Day 1 that this is somewhat understandable, it bothers me, more so in that he hasn't really been active.
Carthrat - While I can understand his unease on me, in my defense let me say that I had you clear off the potential lynch list rather early on after OK and Tom (and later, Delta) insanity came up; before that, literally the only other thing was LAL, which as you said yourself was dumb to pursue that early. Other than that... yeah, it was day 1. Speaking out my thoughts and laying out all potential cases is not necessarily a bad thing to do; furthermore, I was vocal afterwards about NOT having people waste time speculating/commenting on your role and lynch case, since it was so WIFOMey. As for Rat himself, he is still of course mysterious mystery.
QuietRain - Has been active, given good reasoning behind her votes, basically pro-active townie behavior. Can't really see much to criticize at the moment.
Bardiche - Came on the verge of offering content a lot of time but seemed to back off way too much under the pretense of not wanting to look scummy. Well okay dude, we all don't want to look scummy but we all also need to be not afraid to speak our minds. I think the whole ROLEFISHING OMG hit you too hard too, and frankly that annoys me to see it hold that much.
Elfboy - Similar to QR, except much more reluctant on the votes, using the justification that he didn't want to hop on trains that much. Eh, I think as town you really need to not get stuck on that train of thought too long, but so did I for a bit when I got derailed by the incessant role speculation on Tom. Neutral read right now. Ninjas/reads my mind too much, obviously a bad sign!
Meeple - Is Meeple and has been Meeple and will always be Meeple. Too much rampant speculation though, and Meepleness does not excuse that. Seriously, as I had posted previously in Day 1, running in circles thinking about possible role powers and whatnot is not going to get us anywhere with the guidelines Cid posted. However, he has been active and voted consistently. Also kinda neutral overall.
Shale - Has a RL shield to bar being able to read him too much in Day 1. Please be more active in post content when possible, lest you become an obvious representative of lurkerdom.
Jo'ou Ranbu - Posts way too little, and bothers me in that I don't think he really reads that heavily or carefully before he makes his comments, which ... don't have much substance outside of "yeah this is :psyduck: dumb", insert vague suspicion, that's... it.
Corwin - Started off hard and aggressive but presented a reasonable case that I fully agreed with. Again, Tom's case was so friggin' "what" that I have a hard time seeing OTHERWISE, although we should all do well to avoid tunnel vision. The fact that I agreed strongly with his logic on day 1 bias me somwhat in that regard, but thinking too hard about it, like the lynch in general, is WIFOM and will probably get nowhere.
Ashdla - Also needs to post more strong content in general and push more rather than following whatever seems to be the popular case at the moment. Is much more active than the likes of Snow/Strago though so she does not look quite so bad in this regard. Still.
Excal - Uh, honestly, it kinda makes me blink for a moment that you flew under the radar. I distinctly remember you posting and fairly often but not a whole lot about what you had to say aside from your flabbergastment at OK and Tom. BUt said flabbergastment is, once again, well understood! Such is the arghness of it all.
NINJA EDIT: As I post this Andrew posts and with relevant thoughts! Thanks, that makes me feel better 'bout you.
-
Oh, and in light of who I think is the most suspicious right now:
##Vote: Strago
That nagging feeling that he's parroting a lot and making vague general accusations of groups of people concerns me the most, on top of the lack of activity.
-
Current votecount:
Bardiche (1): AndrewRogue
Strago (1): Laggy
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
-
Stolling down the list, we have the support of lynching Carth 'cause, hey. He can't vote.
Lynching Carthrat would get us a netloss of 0 votes, and 1 voice who may or may not be scum. Time and again have I stressed that this is something we can resort to if no other eligible candidates apply. Had this been my intent then surely I'd have pushed for a Carthrat vote due to an absense of, presently, a plethora of really eligible candidates. Let's face it; We're stuck and reaching at straws.
Even so, I haven't yet mentioned again to lynch him; I understand that it is an unforgivable crime to suggest lynching the one that will net us a vote loss of 0 as a Day 1 lynch, but to me, it seemed like a viable enough option if we could not decide who else to vote. Best case scenario, starting a small train on Rat had the potential to see who would actually agree to it, who would disagree, and what arguments either side would use, without needing to actually lynch Rat.
The other big thing that jumps out at me is that... well. Why didn't you give Tom a final chance to roleclaim? While this isn't always useful, I have to admit a certain curiosity as to why Tom was not given a final chance. Given his earlier comments, I'm not sure what he would have provided or even if he would have just said he couldn't, but it feels... off to have not give him a final go and instead jump straight into the hammer vote. I realize his earlier statements about not being able to say anything, but hearing last words might still have done something.
Would you believe me if I say, "oops, I made a stupid mistake and miscounted the amount of votes Tom had, and hadn't realized my vote was the hammer"? Because uh, that's generally it. It's embarassing to admit, but I could spin a bunch of arguments here why I hammered him, but the simple truth is that I fail basic maths and miscounted the amount of votes tallied against him.
-
In response to Corwin/Laggy's concerns about my non-voting:
I'll admit I've historically been a bit reluctant to vote as long as I think there is still discussion to be had. Just kinda how I play; if someone wants to convince me I am horribly wrong for doing this, I'll listen and try to change my ways. Until then I'll do what's natural to me. I can still put down a vote to pressure someone, but Tom quickly got that from others anyway, so there was no need for me to jump on the train and push him closer to hammer when I didn't feel it was time for that yet.
Regardless, hopefully I was clear enough about who I was going to vote for if the day had gone on a bit longer (Tom went from 4 votes to lynched pretty quickly, so I didn't really get a chance to get involved with the lateday).
Analysis and such will come tonight, I hope. As mentioned I will be away a lot today.
-
Blah, not voting isn't a horrifying crime. People should still be searching within your content for slipups instead of HEY YOU VOTED FOR X!! SCUM! Considering how easy it is for uh scum to vote for themselves. At the end of the day I don't feel that voting on something you feel uncomfortable with is advisable, and don't let anyone pressure you into doing otherwise. ^_^
As to why I haven't posted much... well, I am lazy. It's true. I've kind of decided to lay off posting hueg liek XBox posts because well my eye tend to glaze over them big time, but instead of posting I have been playing MM7. I HATE YOU MEEPLE or something.
I think Laggy has a point about Tom too. Frankly, his behavior.... ergh. I really hope that had something to do with his role and not just "Tom needs to be hit in the face with a tire iron". If it is the latter I volunteer.
With that said, it is soooo very easy to let someone who is overzealous and ridiculous dig their grave, which is another reason why votes are relatively eh to me in this situation. I believe that he could have been lynched without a single scum vote going to him due to the behavior.
Anyway, I am still highly displeased with Meeple's content to not shutting up ratio, and it's not just because he is making me play MM7 (grr!). Pretty much everything he's said is just... well, not very helpful! He's also not posting much in general outside of that, which is very obviously not a good thing.
Andrew... ah, good ol' Andrew. His aggressiveness never fails to smart me as smug and scummy, but this is just baseless conjuncture for now. Will see how this develops, of course, though.
Shale... the case that I had on Shale was pretty much summed up by Corwin. "Hey, let's go look at people who voted for these three!" while having no votes on anyone at the end of the day. The statement in general feels like a bit of a baiting, which I definitely don't approve of. Now, as I just said, I don't think not voting alone is a big issue, but the mild... not hypocrisy per se, but not voting and then casting an eye on those who do... well, that's pretty odd at best and scummy at worst.
Snow needs to post more, of course. Not really much to say here except a lack of presence needs to be fixed.
*sigh* at Bard's logic on lynching Rat. Yes, a non-voter dies, but the scum also get an extra kill by this logic. Now come up with a case for Rat possibly being scum instead of RUSSIAN ROULETTE FOR NO REASON other than Rat is useless!! and I might actually follow your train of thought a bit better. As is, no.
Elfboy... well, personally I understand why he didn't vote. It makes sense to let Tom roleclaim fully before just epically destroying him, and he stated his intentions earlier in Day 1, and I don't feel that those intentions were misguided or particularly scummy. He's actually putting stuff out there though, so lack of voting when... well, it was pretty much appropriate isn't ringing bells.
Okay it's time for me to finish my work bai bai~
-
Oh, that was supposed to end with
##VOTE: Shale
-
Shale. Here ( http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24655#msg24655 ) he cites RL as the reason, and then follows up with saying he would have voted for whom we now know to be a town player without hesitation. This is something I'd like to hear him explain.
I thought Tom was suspicious when I went to bed, and when I woke up and started writing a post he still looked the scummiest. What, am I supposed to lie about it now that I have the benefit of hindsight?
At the same time, Shale is trying to direct attention towards the people who DID vote for either of the three targets of day 1. Presumably, it means Tom's voters, as Delta and OK had two votes between the two of them; the same Tom, whose innocence Shale now knows and says he would have gone for, but it was apparently suspicious to pursue while his claims were still very much in doubt.
Huh? All three of yesterday's leading vote-getters are gone, and all flipped non-scum. Therefore: 1) it's pretty damn likely that scum would be trying to help lynch them, since that's kinda what scum does; and 2) if the people who looked suspicious yesterday weren't scum, then it's time to look at the people who avoided suspicion. That doesn't seem controversial to me.
-
He still apparently has minor stuff about me to talk about, too. I'm very curious as to what that might be.
Was re-reading everything, figured I should shed words on this.
##VOTE: Carthrat
Explanation forthcoming after the vote count. And on that notice,
Requesting vote count.
-
Current votecount:
Bardiche (1): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (2): Anonymous, Bardiche
Shale (1): Ciato
Strago (1): Laggy
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
-
##UNVOTE: Carthrat, because it was just to show proof of what I am about to say.
Sooner or later I would've voted, and everyone would've gone, "ohmigawd an anonymous vote!!" and some of you would write essays conjecturing what it could be and what have you. That's... That's really cool, and all, but this ability I have, I want to use for good. 'kay?
So you ask, "What is your ability, Bardiche you sexy beast?" Well, quite simply. Anytime I participate in a succesful lynch train, I accrue one extra vote, which will show as Anonymous on votecounts. At present, since I was part of the EvilTom lynchtrain, I have two votes. It is why I was so active on day 1, intent on accrueing at least that one extra vote power. Because... well, I think any role should at least be somewhat used, right?
I won't lie; At first I just wanted to keep this ability a secret and accrue additional votes until my one vote could lynch someone! ... Then I realized that's a pretty stupid plan because it doesn't help Town at all.
Specifics:
- I gain one extra vote each time I am part of a succesful lynch train. If I unvoted that person before he got lynched, I will not get an extra vote.
- I cannot divide my votes, nor can I choose not to use them. If I vote, my vote will count for 1 + each succesful train that I am part of.
- I... think I could potentially trigger an instant-lynch at a later date. I have no confirmation on this, but nothing said I cannot.
There you have it. The reason I have decided to show my role is because of a variety of reasons:
1) I *could* have tried and pretend my nose bled. "Huh, anonymous votes? That's odd!" But were it to be found out it was me, that'd be a certain way to death. There's no reason I can find to hide this, unless:
2) To show my goodwill towards town. This ability of mine, were I to somehow sneak under the cloak of suspicion long enough that no one connects the ability to me (voting for the same people others do, hammer voting, avoiding being the last to vote before a votecount) could, as I highlighted earlier, be a potential hammervote from the get-go. I will not bear ill will to those that suggest I further stay my hand and avoid accrueing more votes.
-------
What does this have to do with that there's "something minor about Carthrat"? The minor thing would be that I have additional voting power, making it believable to me that there can be Townies without voting power. IE: I feel pretty confident Carthrat is, in all likelihood, a (likely town) person that just doesn't have voting power, balanced out by my strengthened voting power.
What's that? I still advocated Carthrat's lynch? Good gracious, dear man, I last shed any significant words (beyond "minor things") on it on page 4 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24418#msg24418), clearly saying that lynching Rat based on his supposed role is stupid, with a joke addendum "unless he is a scum role". Moreover, if you read back to the first pages, you'll see I've been clearly saying that it is not my intent to lynch Rat based solely on the role he may or may not have. For all that there may be reason to lynch me, I feel that that is certainly not one.
Would that I could dispense my votes among others, certainly I would assign them to targets of Carthrat, and later EvilTom's likings. That is, however, not within my power.
-
Also, I'd like to take a moment and focus suspicion on Snow. Looking back at Day 1, he not only has the benefit of being one of the three people who didn't vote, but in one post he lays down a finger of suspicion on both OK and Tom. This is at the point in the day when they were both viable lynch targets and the OK train hadn't jumped over to Tom. The especially telling thing is that the third person he considers in his post is Deltaflyer, but dismisses him and then when it comes time to consider posting he names Rat as the third leg in the tripod, despite the fact that Rat was his joke vote which he dropped going into that post, and that he does not make any mention of Rat before that in the post.
I'm going to check and see if there's any more content by Snow before I make any more concrete demands, but for now that's where my interest lies.
Edit: Bard, your last sentence is a bit mangled. Would you be aiming at Rat, or at targets Rat wants gone?
-
Re-underlining my earlier statement, which is a pre-emptive to people that might suggest I use my additional votes to vote in lieu of Carthrat and/or EvilTom. I'm not a double voter, who can elect to place one vote in Target A and the second vote in Target B. All my votes are on the same person, whether I will it or not.
-
Giving voices to the voiceless I see. Good to know.
Regardless, reading over things again, that was Snow's only post after page 2, and while he does bicker a bit with Rat early on, it's pretty clear he's not in serious mode as he does so, and it's during the transition to serious Mafia when he disappears. So, let's do this.
##Vote: Joe Rambo
Why the suspicion on Rat? Also, why no vote? And, given how little you've shown up/posted, why haven't you at least given a cursory I'm busy post?
-
Giving voices to the voiceless I see. Good to know.
Yeah, I need to work on clarity here. I can't do that.
-
Alrighty, time to post now that I'm home from work.
Just to be as clear and constructive as I can, I think I'll address Bardiche's questions to my behaviour, and then outline how I feel about each player thus far.
The reason I asked Elf to defend against a jokevote was really quite simple, I was -joking-. >.>;
Really, there's not much more to be said there, it is what it is. I do apologize if that was carrying the joke phase a bit far, I'll know better for the next game I'm in.
Secondly, the Rat thing, I was honestly suspicious of Rat, initially. I think most of us -were-, or at least a bit concerned as to what his claim might mean for the game. Since that post I have reconsidered, (actually not very long after that post) and I don't think that Rat's lack of vote warrants suspicion, as much as I know most of us are curious as to what/how it may or may not be compensated.
Lastly, I didn't exactly jump on the lynch train, that is to say, I didn't vote for OK simply because everyone else was voting for him. I did think he was suspicious, but mostly disruptive, for reasons I have since outlined in my posts.
I think that clears those things up. Moving on!
Andrew Rogue: His vote for Delta, from what I can gather from his post, was to provoke him into posting more, not necessarily a bad thing, but it does seem a bit... unproductive. However, he didn't speak from that point on, until after Tom's lynch happened, which sort of seems odd, even if you were busy with RL things. What is more curious to me, is that he voted for Delta, who he said wasn't really a threat, and then in a later post, said that he didn't approve of targeting someone unless you thought they were scummy. Sort of curious.
Ciato: She initially kept pulling people away from targeting Rat. Aside from that, most of her posts have been rather short and haven't really had much to say in them. Doesn't seem a particularly scummy target at this point, though.
Strago: Has been laying kind of low in my opinion, in that he's only posted twice, neither of which had a vote in them. Not that lack of voting is a ridiculously terrible thing to do, but it's still noteworthy, if nothing else.
Carthrat: Yes, I admit it, his no vote claim initially made me suspicious. Since then, however, I have seen the wisdom of his decision to bring it forward to early, as well as we have all seen that he isn't lying, since he voted and nothing happened. I suppose I'm neutral on him at the moment.
QuietRain: From what I have seen, she's been a fairly frequent poster so far, and her posts have all had something to say in them, as opposed to being short or filled with fluff. I can't say I have anything terribly terrible to bring to light in this case.
Bardiche: Claimed that he knew Rat could make a lynching vote earlier in the game, and then didn't really defend himself one way or another when others asked where he got this information, since Rat hadn't mentioned that himself. Whether it was an honest mistake or not, seems a bit odd to me. Moreover, I'll be honest, I don't like how he keeps gunning for me for not explaining things, even after I explain what he asked me to explain.
Elfboy: The lack of voting mildly concerns me, since I can understand the reasons he gave, not wanting Tom to be without a chance to defend himself, ect. Not really much else to say on him at this point.
Meeple: Eh... seemed adamant on blaming OK's behaviour on role madness, after laggy had quoted the rules, where they stated roles would not have a large impact on the gameplay. Other than that, I'm honestly finding Meeple hard to read.
Laggy: I haven't seen anything terribly scummy in his behaviour thus far. People seemed to jump on him rather quick for rolefishing on Rat, I'm still new to Mafia, so I'm not sure if that should be a huge no-no or not.
Shale: Called Rat out initially on proving his lack of voting power. Even though it turned out to be true, I can't say that was a bad suggestion on his part. Outside of that... has posted barely at all, most of which have been in the jokevote phase, and ant meaningful to the game.
Jo'ou Ranbu: Not voting, and potentially casting FoS at the two most likely targets to cover that up? It's a possibility. Honestly, he's posted three times so far, only one of which had any content in it.
Corwin: ...wow, I thought he had posted a lot more than he did. Huh. Maybe someone else missed this too? Other than that though, nothing terribly strikes me about him at this point.
Excal: I thought his posts were pretty logical, and agreed with most of what he has said thus far. Hasn't really seemed odd to me. Though I agree with Laggy he hasn't really brought anything new to the table, he's supported his arguments well.
Not prepared to cast a vote yet myself. Now I go eat. e_e
-
I've been looking at Andrew's posts after what Ashdla said, and well...I dunno.
He's had 2 long posts. The first of which is just "these are the three potential lynch candidates!" and then goes to voting against Delta to prod him into speaking...and then says nothing. Next post, he basically just argues about Bard's stance, then goes on about "These are the people who look like on the Tom Train!" its true I am one of those people, but...
Well, why single out specific 5? Anyone on the Tom Train can be suspicious, I feel. Bard's hammer might be out of place, but at the same time, I'm not willing to call that an immediate scum tell, but rather, a bad play. personally don't think scum would let him pull a stunt like that, ESPECIALLY since he apparently has that extra vote power (Thus an extra vote in scum's favor), so I'm inclined to say its more bad play than anything else. Bard, in the future, if you're about to hammer, please announce your intent first to give time for role claims, last minute analyses, etc.
I dunno; Andrew's style of Post a sizable post (I know, I'm not one to talk), disappear, then reappear, accuse others, and then disappear again always strikes me as off.
Next off...Ciato's obssessed with my posting style it seems. Um, ok, you know how I am, you know I tend to do this EVERY GAME I'M IN, and you're holding it against me...now? Even though you know very well I was doing other things (you used MM7 as an excuse, in which case, I can say I was playing MMBN3 and MMXCM instead. There's nothing wrong with placing other games above Mafia, etc.)
No, I'm not saying this excuses my actions. What I'm saying is you know very well you have to have more of a basis than "He's posting large posts with little content!" Laggy noted that, but at the same time, he basically stated it says nothing one way or another.
Basically, her whole attack on me right now feels like its based entirely off a play style move.
She voted for me on Day 1 based off that entirely, more or less, which...feels weird.
Getting a neutral read from here right now, but I'm just saying that calling me out on the "Long posts, little content!" ...well, happens every damn game from SOMEONE and its been proven to be a really flawed argument.
I'll need to look over Shale's posts, to see if I actually find something off about him. However, the point fingers at people, talk about lynching, and then not casting a vote...yeah, that doesn't look too good.
Regarding the discounting OK's actions due to some role factor? I was pretty confident OK was doing that for some reason.
I wasn't sure if it was:
A. Someone else's actions. Someone could have a manipulative ability that forces people to say specific things (using the mod as a middle man to hide their prescence) and thus, yeah. Though, maybe this falls under Roles are not effecting post restrictions.
B. OK was doing that because of his role, be it directly or indirectly. And the only reason to get THAT much attention to yourself is if you get some sort of benefit from being lynched.
Well, hey look! OK flips Jester! That's about as good a role as you can get to be lynched with; kind of hard to argue against "You win!" So he comes in with useless posts, obvious scum slips, and just being generally ridiculous...frankly, I knew there was something afoot here. I just couldn't tell if OK's actions were being controlled by someone else, or OK was trying to get attention to himself for the sake his own role being lynch worthy.
For this reason, I was reluctant about going after him later. The latter, which it clearly was the case, we'd be doing him a favor and not helping us at all. The former, we'd be lynching a town cause of someone elses actions.
That and Tom's really weird play felt off.
I don't think we should lynch Rat at all. While yes, he can't vote...his still good at analyzing, and can get us into the right direction. He's also good at pressing others. His inability to vote hurts us, but its also not a reason to lynch him. He's already proven he can't vote anyway.
-
Okay, I'm finally back from training. Now, for people eyeing me for lack of posting content, let me clarify my position:
This week, I started a day-long training week at an English school, and I have to be there early in the morning and I also have to tutor at the early night just as I get back. This highly limitates my Mafia schedule until Friday, which I already had discussed with Cid. This also happened to somate with poor timing, since, yesterday, when I finally got to the computer, the hammer had already sounded, and I thought Monday was a bit early to cast a definite vote in any direction, and the 1st night period only ended after I had to head to bed. It wasn't my intention to end up not voting, but I thought the day would have gone for longer considering the confusion back on Monday.
Now, this is an easy copout, I know, but sometimes, these unfortunate coincidences happen. The lack of content in my posts is explainable partly from the fact that all of them happened in Day 1. The -only- read I had was "omg this is dumb", like Laggy said, and it really wasn't a very thorough decision, but it's not hard to understand -why- I made that. And, to Excal: I -did- note that I was busy in one of my earlier posts (actually, my first post with any content? I threw the disclaimer at the beginning of it, but sorry if it wasn't clear).
Okay, defenses done. Now, I can simply say "my head hurts" like anyone else, since killing both OK and delta this evening brought a fine WIFOM upon us, but we still need to get people into discussing and posting. And then, there's the fact that we have Bard's role reveal, which, quite frankly, feels a bit hurried to me, since he's just being pressured by a few people, there's not even a train going yet. On the other hand, this could well mean he is just a desperate townie. He proved his power is true, at least, but I'd still like to see a better defense. Also, I've no idea of what to make of the Rat and the town/scum majority vote, which makes me suspect he may have something under his sleeve, but too early to put my finger on it. While it mathematically makes perfect sense, it still throws me off a bit.
But, as for now, I think I'll just add a pressure "post more" vote:
##VOTE: Strago
Since he has been almost as absent as I have.
-
Jo'ou, the reason I revealed it is because I cannot hide it, and I might as well throw it out there immediately rather than wait until it is time to vote and my condition becomes known.
I don't at all feel endangered yet with no votes on me and no case construed against me that goes beyond "little suspicious" and "Carthrat lynch".
-
Bard, you do realize that you may have possibly put yourself and town into a rather delicate situation, right? Now that you've laid it out in the open, scum may (and, if they're cunning enough, probably will!) try to bait you into lynchtrains and score more townie kills and endanger the town with the increasing risk of a LYLO.
Then, there's the fact that, while you can't hide the existence of Anonyvotes, there's no reason to go "oh I cannot hide that" and deliberately blow your cover for the sake of blowing it (which is what you did). That was an act that shows desperation of some sort, and I cannot really fathom why would you do that so easily outside of ingenuity or deliberate smokescreening. I dunno, it just feels something just didn't went through properly in the logic train here.
-
Jo'ou discerns that the great danger of Bardiche throwing this out into the open is that scum may CONVINCE HIM TO MISLYNCH OH MY GOD THE WORLD IS ENDING
Bardiche has already offered to stay his hand- a rather questionable course of action, I must admit (I would probably not do the same!), but I hardly see how this makes our situation any more 'delicate', as you put it, and with that admission out there I find your angle bizzare.
He totally couldn't hide it for long, and has saved us all some time and effort by revealing it early, something I think was necessary given that now we know the terms of how his vote increases. Some roles just aren't worth the bother of keeping secret, and vote-related ones are chief amongst them.
-
I guess you have a point. I dunno, I guess I'm just second-guessing myself and overthinking how scum can exploit things. Regardless, you will excuse me for being uncomfortable with role-claiming without an immediate, life-threatening reason, and there's nothing that says he couldn't be non-aligned with town even then. I dunno, it's just -the way- in which he revealed, which felt flamboyant and calling. And I'm not complaining that he couldn't hide it for long, that much is a bit obvious. Just... why roleclaim so gratuitously? That's what bothers me.
-
Well. I can't really fault him much for being gratuitous alone. What bothers me about Bardiche in general are these reservations he has on doing things that are based off 'I don't want to look scummy.' Only when you say that, it makes you look just as bad as doing the action itself would (if not worse in my own eyes, at least, because I hate reluctance and all that.)
Jo'ou bothers me somewhat more, though, because his line of attack is originally based on how scum can exploit things, and not a far more potentially deadly concern, which is 'what if Bardiche is scum?' EVEN THOUGH he is finding the man suspicious based on role, it doesn't seem as though he's considered the most obvious and dangerous of ramifications; as a result, his attitude doesn't seem to be coming from a townie perspective.
That's enough to make me, um, point at Jo'ou instead of Bard. ##UnFoS Bardiche, ##FoS Jo'ou. Goddamit, Cid.
-
I need to shout out loud "HEY BARDY LOOKS SCUMMY" to make my perspective shown? If I find someone suspicious enough to raise my eyebrows, it's because I find the behavior detractive to town. And, to me, both threats are equal in danger - i.e. they get us fucking killed and lose town the game. I don't think I need to scream those corollaries all the time just to point out a behavior isn't quite right - which, at least, I kinda succeeded at regarding the 'diche. I think I drove the fact I don't trust him very much fine, and you got it. But I'm not going to point fingers this adamantly about the possibility of scumminess, since -everybody is suspect of being scum as is right now- anyway.
-
Well, everybody among the living anyway.
-
Bard's action strikes me as reasonable, frankly. Yes, Scum will try to use this to their advantage, but frankly, they were going to do that anyway. Seriously, if someone tries to persuade Bard into a train, that's painting a red target to me. All things considered, it doesn't really change our stance, except as Rat pointed out, it did save us time and effort of finding out where that anonyvote came from.
Considering the way this game is going in some cases, I can't fault him for doing that so quickly too. Hold off on voting to keep this a secret could work...except there seems to be some popular hate against reluctance to vote lately. Given Bard's position, if he held off on voting for this sake, people would eventually call him out for not voting, and he's be forced to explain why anyway...
UNLESS he could hide the anonyvote in a long chain of other votes where there wasn't any Vote Counts. But that's hoping things work out a certain way, and really not worth it.
Considering all this, I think Bard's action was reasonable enough.
-----
Anyway, looking back at a few posts...
Ciato calls me out for dwelling on the Rat scenario, when I...had one paragraph talking about it, and why it'd be a bad move to lie about something like that (and truth be told, its already been confirmed he can't vote, as evident when he voted to see what would happen, and it didn't get recorded.) And all she does is basically say what I said anyway, in less words (again, flaw on my part as a 'human', I am trying to fix this, honest! ;_; )
Following that...here's her next two posts!
I'm pretty sure that OK has some kind of weird joke role that is causing this, at this point. Seems like a safe enough bet.
Um, because the way he says things are ... not logical for anyone?
QR might be onto something. There is a role called politician that you have to garner the most votes without getting lynched. I'm not really sure, but as is the behavior is not registering to me as logical Mafia play.
So she says OK's acting weird cause of some role likely. Ok, fair (and it was true too!) That's fine and all, but her next post...
I find that trying to weave through intentions of various posters and trying to decide if they are scum gambits based off of posting style being awkward is futile on Day 1.
I'm not exactly sure what the heck Tom was thinking, though. I need to go back and read the posts.
Feels a bit hypocritical, no? She was speculating before in the last two posts about why OK was acting that way, and then goes and says...its useless? This feels weird.
She's also been...purely responsive, I feel like. She didn't make a single case on anyone, or really analyze much, just says "Well, this point could be this way!" and such. The one thing she's said so far is the whole "Meeple, why are you obsessed with Rat?" (despite my post being primarily related to the Tom incident.)
Her next post is, not surprising, another one liner. IN response to a post about Laggy involving game rules...when Laggy didn't even talk to about a single person specifically, but meant it as a heads up to everyone.
Heck, that post in general, not sure why she's responding at all. Paranoaia or something? I dunno; Laggy was only responding to OK and El-Cid posts recently, and I don't seem Ciato talking about Rat anywhere beyond more or less reiterating what I said earlier, acting like its not what I said (that's the impression I got.) Seems like she's not paying attention to her own posts?
And then finally, she posts something of content!
She explains to Tom why his actions are bad. Then talks about Delta and Strago being weird...
Then goes after me for...laying very low? Ok, wow, so I didn't post within a few pages, yet, there are people like Corwin who didn't even post in a longer time. Of all people, she goes after me, and she called me out earlier for a Rat thing which was overemphasized what i was doing to boot. Furthermore, she only says "Tom has enough pressure!" when she kind of admitted he was the best lynch person in that post, and votes me. Um, I don't see the logic here; Tom being pressured clearly wasn't changing anything, you went after me, someone who clearly wasn't getting lynched that day...
Its true, I didn't post again until Today...but then again, after Ciato's last post, the hammer appeared not long after. For the record, it looks like 8 hours, but keep in mind the time frame; it was during a time when I was likely asleep and/or at work (Truck shifts at 6:30 AM are a bitch.) So in actual time for me, that was little.
Rat does talk about my playstyle, but admits that I'm not a good target. And he says "Sort of right" and admits that I'm playing like I always do, and it feels more like he's simply warning me to not post an essay. Again, I'm sorry; I try, but it always ends up wordy ;_;
I dunno; Ciato's been laying low if anything. She has said...practically nothing, posting mostly 1 to 2 line posts, even if its day 1, you can still contribute more than that (my posts are overkill, admittedly, but people were still able to form paragraphs.) She finally posts something and goes after me for being myself. Even now, she's doing it on Day 1! Combined with what feels like hypocracy I pointed out earlier...I feel she's off.
Call it an OMGUS, but I wasn't actually looking at her posts til it occured to me she wasn't saying much at all, DESPITE the obvious presence indicated in her small, somewhat meaningless posts.
What about her posts today? Comes in, says "oh, OK died on an NK, that's good!", then talks about more role madness in her next post.
She finally posts something of content today! But that's not excusing what I feel was odd in Day 1. IN her post, she again, argues against my playstyle. As I have stated earlier, THIS IS A BAD IDEA. You can warn me for it and say "please stop it!" or something, and say how its not helpful, but holding it against me as a scumploy? Um, yeah, people have tried it in the past and it failed, outside of FE Mafia where I was scum, and I ultimately got down there not cause of me acting that way, but cause of something else (you of all people should know that!)
She did vote on shale eventually, mind. But her post, she feels like she's...almost pointing fingers? Says "Meeple is being unhelpful for being Meeple!" and used similar logic to vote against me yesterday. Has a snide remark about Andrew being himself (hiding, popping up, big post where he's aggressive, huddling back in the corner. I know for a fact that she notices this since in FE Mafia, she herself stated this is how he plays.) She does admit its baseless conjecture...but why bring it up then?
She also talks about Elfboy being weird for not voting right after he explained why he didn't (and also noted how Tom picked up votes quickly out of nowhere, so he didn't really have much of a chance to do anything.)
Also, he voting for Shale she says "summed up by Cor" and then restates what he said. I think people are looking a bit too much into a minor point by Shale. Gee, lets think about it...
3 people flip, 2 towns and a Jester. What are you going to do? Look at people who were ignoring the case altogether and went after people who weren't flipped, and try to attack someone blindly? No, that's...just giving scum what they want. Flips are the best info we have at the moment, going based off people who interacted with them is the best we'll get.
Also, he didn't say "voted", he said "attacking." Attacking doesn't necessarily mean votes; it could mean putting pressure on them to get them into a situation TO seem suspicious and garner votes. Call it mincing words, but equating one thing to another doesn't always work.
As such, think people are looking a bit too deep into some wording. Especially since one of Cor's earlier statements, that being how he is known for going after people with bad grammar, etc. (makes me wonder why I'm still alive! <.<), and he was the one who mentioned it initially, feels like its some nitpicking here.
So...yeah, that's what I'm going off for now. She says I'm laying low, when she was doing the exact same thing. If this is her general playstyle...well, there you go; she was doing the exact same thing to me at one point. But that doesn't excuse her being unhelpful in Day 1 for almost the entirety, claiming I was going on about Rat when it wasn't remotely close to the lionshare of my post, some of what feels like hypocrisy...
Anyway, if its not obvious...
##Vote: Ciato
-----
ninja'd by the rat, damn you voteless bastard!
-
Okay, I'm going to bed now and probably will only be back after at least 17 hours. Just giving a heads up in case my timing blows again this game.
-
To be frank, its pretty hard to ascertain an actual post pattern on someone from pure day one activities, where I may or may not actually be, say, busy or preoccupied and thus unable to post more than a decent, chunky post and move on. Take it as you shall.
On the subject of Delta: I did not say he was not a threat. What I said was that he was a complete wild card and I couldn't get a read one way or the other. Big difference. The fact is that Delta's play was something that was obviously either from a very, very, very casual school of mafia play or very newbie play. This reads painfully either way. Either he's town and doesn't know what he's doing, or he's scum and doesn't know what he's doing. His growing hostility definitely was not a positive thing, and his actual responses to me were incredibly unsatisfying. As it stood, he could pretty clearly swing either way... much like the rabid and crazed posting of one OblivionKinght or the odd and early gambit of one EvilTom. Given the options, I'd say he was both a viable and even "safe" lynch.
Really, I would have preferred he go down day one than Tom or OK. He certainly was not behaving in a manner that could be called pro-town. So, really. By the end of the day, he did, in fact, fit both the criteria of being scummy and have the additional weight of being a figure who seemed, at best, to be deadweight to town. Even if I had posted again, I would likely have advocated for a lynching of Delta over both OK and Tom.
To Meeple: I point out those five because I want to make sure its obvious to everyone that they were on both lynch trains. Its not a huge thing, but it is important to keep track of where votes land. Five people specifically built up on two non-scum aligned figures. So, in all liklihood, there is at the least one scum in that group. This gives us a pretty strong central point of investigation to start with.
Anyhow, the revelation of Bardiche's extra vote is plesant, but I do ask that we keep in mind that this means the hammer can come even sooner. I also, obviously, recommend that we watch how large Bardiche's vote weight gets.
Furthermore, I'm gonna put out this basic reminder, since I really hate this particular style of argument: just because scum can communicate does not mean that scum is immune to dumb/questionable moves. I've been on enough scum teams to know that communication can be hard and, even in a group, several smart people can add up to be total dumbasses. :p
I'm generally going to agree here with the Rat about the Snow. Informing us ahead of time is a good move for both scum and town, since it means there won't be a sudden panic lynch when its revealed he has serious vote weight. Hiding it... really wouldn't have been constructive, and getting exposed when he had a number of votes would have been a good way to go straight to the gallows. So... yeah, pretty neutral move overall.
Now I consume dinner.
-
Dangit, I hate having to play catchup. This'll be mostly another response type format, and then my own thoughts at the end.
Re: NEB, on vote record: That's fair enough, and Tom's fast and unexpected hammer certainly does lend weight in that regard, but at the same time the vote record is a very important tool for town to analyze, and recent discussion has shown just how much scrutiny and fire you may come under for not supporting your stances with a vote. This is especially true the further the game goes in, as analysis of such things after flips becomes more informative.
I disagree wholly with Ciato that not voting, especially by the end of the day, is not something to remark on. The simple fact that you have to unvote and vote to switch targets leaves a nice trail that is more easily studied, since scum have to switch strategies depending on the circumstances and current cases, too. So just because scum can vote for each other is not a defense in this regard.
Bardiche - as for your anonyvote power... first off, no, as a matter of fact, not every role has to be exercised and its power used, especially double-edged ones like anonyvoting. However, I do think that you revealing it, much like Rat revealed his voting restriction, was inevitable and you dodged a potential clusterfuck bullet that may have happened later had you not, so that's alright. The condition is... troubling, though, to say the least; even assuming you are town (and allowing me a moment to borrow from the metagame page and thinking that with the amount of power that role could have, it'd be ridiculous in scum's hand, but that's not assured), having essentially a one-man lynch team carries grave consequences. Incrementing in weight on every successful lynch is kinda o_O, we saw that with Ramza in FFT Mafia and how ID got mauled for it. Anyhow. I more or less agree with Rat's sentiments in that I don't see the hammer on Tom as particularly dooming you in my eyes, but don't make that mistake again, be especially careful considering your anonyvotes. Also stop blathering that nonsense of being afraid of "coming off as scummish". It's counterproductive and just makes you look worse.
Shale does feel rather backgroundish and this is a strike against him, but the specific arguments some people have made against him seem blown out of proportion (why the heck is him saying that he would have voted for Tom anyway somehow scummy? The entirety of Day 1 supports this). That said, the lack of activity and posts, as well as the lack of votes, does bother me. If he doesn't improve in this regard he will be suspect, much as I feel Strago is right now.
Snow, your attack on Bard because he was being too overdramatic... uhhh.. yeah might as well go blame Meeple for being too Meeple. In short, I don't think that's a good case to go after someone. Your reasons for not being around are understandable, but as has been said many times, can't let those kind of shields protect you from being lurkerish and low on content forever; it's too easy to use as scum. Not getting good vibes from all of this.
Meeple, your attack on Ciato, on the other hand, does kinda reek strongly of OMGUS. In particular, where you attack her for speculating on why OK was acting the way he was, she wasn't saying that such speculation was pointless - she was saying that you can't really read alignment from that. Which you can't, he ended up being third party! Her being primarily responsive is true and I noted as such earlier, but then again it's not really a surprise either.
As of right now, things on my mind:
- I am still waiting for Strago to show up and say something substantial.
- Where the heck is Corwin?
- I'm guessing Tom will post sometime later after discussion has run its course, to provide some observations and insight when all's said and done.
-
Bardiche:
First of all, I will say that I think you did the right thing by revealing your role. Vote-related roles are one I feel town should know about; holding your hand would just have created a panic that could lead to a quick-lynch of you, I'd imagine. And assuming you're town, we don't want that.
Speaking of panics, though... I'd encourage you not to try to run up your vote weight. Mostly because, well, that's what a scum multivoter would do! The minute you can lynch solo is the minute we LOSE THE GAME if you are scum. I know I for one would be uneasy about letting you get that powerful, and I can't imagine I'm the only one. Not trying to stir up shit against you, but... yeah.
I'm reminded of FFT mafia. ID, who had multivoting as town, observed it wasn't a very strong ability. If you actually make solo lynches, town hates you. Lynching by consensus is a town weapon. There's something to be said for having more votes be in town's pocket, but that's reassuring to the multivoter and the multivoter alone, since nobody else can know he is scum. In other words, it's not something to be built up at all costs. Quite the opposite if anything.
This was mostly ninjaed by Laggy AGAIN. Get out of my head!
-
I can only see it as karmic justice.
-
Yar, Laggy's points against me are fair enough. Actually, I'm a bit surprised that more people haven't called me out on my lurking, but I suppose I won't ask for any more flak. I know I haven't been playing particularly productively thus far; I blame both Arcanum, a general Day 1 inability to figure out what the hell was going on, and a lack of investment the source of which I can't quite place. That said, I've now finished Arcanum, Day 2 has arrived, and hopefully those first two will contribute to the amelioration of my third little problem. So now what? Well, I've been re-reading in the hope that anything will jump out at me.
(Vaguely amusing thing I just noticed. On Page 3, Meeple submitted both Tom and Carth as potential Jesters while giving OK's weird behavior a pass. Granted, OK's behavior hadn't been especially bizarre at that point. But still... perhaps Meeple and OK are some sort of unholy Jester alliance! Nefarious.)
Snow's vote against me seems a little... I dunno, pre-emptively OMGUS-y, since when he made it we seemed to be almost identical in the general perspective of the rest of the players, and yet he had two votes on him as opposed to my one. Bit of a deflective tactic, potentially. Then again I can't actually find fault with his wanting me to talk more, so. And likewise he hasn't done much of anything that I haven't, so. Fair enough to his vote.
I don't see anything wrong with Bard's roleclaim. Him putting it out in the open keeps us from speculating endlessly about where the extra votes are coming from, which just wastes our energy.
Ashdla, on page 2, rapidly switched a vote -- during the jokevote stage, mind -- from Elfboy to OK. This interests me because this sort of random jokevote switching often gets people called out -- as it did with OK, Day 1 -- and the only person who seems to have noticed Ash doing this was Corwin. Could easily be nothing. Then again, I don't particularly like being misrepresented, which Ash has recently done:
Strago: Has been laying kind of low in my opinion, in that he's only posted twice, neither of which had a vote in them. Not that lack of voting is a ridiculously terrible thing to do, but it's still noteworthy, if nothing else.
Largely absent, sure, I cop to that. But I voted for Tom near the end of Day 1. Obviously this doesn't make me a dang ol' saint or anything, but nevertheless I wanted to set the record straight.
Regarding Meeple's recent offensive against Ciato... hmm. I actually see what he means, a fair bit. The one thing I don't particularly like about his reasoning is the "I always play like this etc." since it's really just a dead-end; counterproductive or vaguely scummy play is going to look bad and be bad no matter how many times you've done it as a townie. That being said, I feel like he's hit on something regarding Ciato's responses to Andrew. Her rather unpleasant responses toward him have been happening for a few games, as I recall, and I don't consider them particularly helpful as they seem to have little to do with the actual game any more.
That's it for me at the moment. I do apologize for my lack of presence thus far. I... may actually be gone for some large portions of this weekend as well -- I'll be going to New York to look at a couple neighborhoods and have a meeting with my theater company -- but I'll try to have my computer with me and at least check in whenever possible. Anyway, tomorrow I'll be around plenty.
-
Laggy, right. I was more emphasizing that I was uncomfortable with it being regarded as universally something that has to be... I dunno, noted in some sort of scum book is all. NEB being active and helpful (and explaining why he didn't vote even in Day 1!) says to me that he is paying attention to the game, and he cares, but he felt that the situation wasn't right for voting (which it wasn't!).
Meeple. I said you were being unhelpful because you have not contributed any sort of the content to the game. Stop hiding behind this excuse that I AM MEEPLE!! because, yes, you can ramble on forever about roles if you want but you need to actually add something else. Which you didn't! And uh I voted like five-ten minutes after I posted? You say EVENTUALLY like it was some sort of massive delay when it wasn't. (I actually got summoned away as I was finishing up the post since I was posting on the job and all... <_<)
I simply listed the people I thought were being least helpful to town, and I believed you were one of those people. I still believe you are one of those people! I would be willing to bet that you are scum because pattern style is similar to FE Mafia but I will not partake in the OMGUS for the present, will analyze situation later.
I'd like to see some more QR action around in general as well as Strago (and while Ii write, there is Strago. Yay! ^_^)
Andy, dear, that's why I said it was baseless conjuncture. Your general posting style in most games ... sets off my alarms and I feel that noting it but admitting its lack of credibility is fair. <_< Just mostly a mental note really.
Strago, honestly, there are only three times I can recall that Andrew and I have really gotten into it in Mafia, and he was scum all three times. I wasn't trying to start anything with him this time at all! If noting someone's behavior as ringing bells is picking a fight then well *shrug*.
Laggy is love. Why don't you play Mafia more? ;_;
-
Fair enough, Ciato. You're a reasonable enough sort (generally >_>) for that kind of thing not to get in the way of your better judgment, I suspect. Just thought I'd note it, as it set off my own bells a bit.
-
That said, rough thoughts on everyone so far. If people think I am harder to read because I lacked a vote last round, might as well make up for it with this!
Andrew: Barely around day 1, didn't contribute much worth noting. Has come out much stronger today. Not quite sure what to make of the change, but for now I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and blame it on him being actually around.
Ashdla: Was one of the first people on OK, but backed up her reasons solidly. Jumped to Tom, but I'm not faulting her there, either. Has posted substance today. Reasonably townie read here, I think.
Bardiche: Was certainly active, yet I have almost no real read on him. His day 1 contributions consisted of some obsessing over Rat at first, then trying to reason with OK. Also trying to make sure his friend's experience with the game didn't suck, which tells nothing naturally. His hammer (I'd better do this to increase my vote weight!) does not sit well with me. As mentioned I am glad he admits his power. Still, not comfortable here. Not enough for a FoS, though.
Carthrat: Has done his best to be active, and generally coming across as a pretty good townie to me. He's been heavilly involved in discussion. If he is scum he is even a relatively undangerous one, as he can't bring about LYLO any sooner. Metagaming -> I still think he has a role -> he needs to stick around, and I definitely do not think highly of him as a lynch candidate.
Ciato: The only thing that really stands out about her was her dogged worry about Meeple yesterday. I can understand why, mind (more later!). She posts a decent defence of herself today, but I'd still like it if she laid back less. EDIT: Latest posts continue to help. She's definitely getting more involved today. And I'm not going to fault anyone for being less excited about Day 1. (blech)
Corwin: Hardly ever posts. When he does he is pretty accusatory. His logic against Tom was of course very sound, not that this proves anything one way or another. He's playing an aggressive style as town and is kinda lurkerish otherwise. He's taken a shot at me and I'm not nearly the person he's come after hardest! But he can back up his arguments, so that's something.
Excal: Got involved and talked with all the lynch candidates. Has attacked Snow today, but with solid arguments. This is mostly my thoughts on reviewing his posts; for some reason he made little impression on me during the day.
Jo'ou Ranbu: Wasn't around much, though has some excuse. He's obviously tried to be a bit more involved today. How I ultimately judge him will depend a LOT on how he behaves today. I'm not willing to get on the train for him yet, though. He's not the worst offender.
Laggy: Indeed, needs to play mafia more. Thinks along way too similar lines to me. And since I know I have townie thoughts, that means he has townie thoughts too! 100% cleared as town to me! Seriously, he's been hella involved, has been helpful, and has explained himself well whether agreeing with me or not.
Meeple: Has been one of the lurkiest folks around, and unlike the others, does not have an excuse. Ciato starts laying into him, and he comes out all defensive and OMGUSy.
I dunno; Ciato's been laying low if anything. She has said...practically nothing, posting mostly 1 to 2 line posts, even if its day 1, you can still contribute more than that (my posts are overkill, admittedly, but people were still able to form paragraphs.) She finally posts something and goes after me for being myself. Even now, she's doing it on Day 1! Combined with what feels like hypocracy I pointed out earlier...I feel she's off.
He's obsessed with post length rather unhealthily; the section I quoted it is not the only time he mentions it. He completely disregards that even those one line posts she actually uses to get involved, and has gotten moreso on Day 2, and not just out of pure defence. He calls it hypocrisy but I can't see it at all. In general he comes off as pretty inflammatory. Lurk -> that style of behaviour is not especially cool. Lurking with the worst reason for doing so is even worse. He hasn't really let us see his opinions on people much, though he has flung some more random suspicion around. He attacks Andrew, which I can kinda understand, for all that he admits he's attacking him for similar reasons that he himself is under fire. And then there is Shale.
I'll need to look over Shale's posts, to see if I actually find something off about him. However, the point fingers at people, talk about lynching, and then not casting a vote...yeah, that doesn't look too good.
That's it? Back it up more.
I admit I'm probably biased against Meeple because I -know- how much he was around yesterday, but yeah. To make as few posts as he does is not normal for him, and to be as aggressive as he is in those posts is similarly eyebrow-raising.
Bleh, ranted on him more than I wanted. Maybe I am Meeple myself!
QuietRain: Posts have not been especially common, but reasonably insightful, and she's put herself out there. Went after EvilTom for reasons that certainly feel townie. Helped focus town yesterday to boot. Only negative is not much contribution so far Day 2, but that's excusable enough thus far.
Shale: In the background, but he's taken strong enough stances when called upon. Calling on the Rat test was good, as does picking out the specific complaint he did with Tom. Defended himself adequately today. That said, the background attracted suspicion for a reason.
Strago: Well hell, there's a reason I voted for him. Posts the least, period, more or less, in terms of total number. On the other hand, I remember each and every one of his posts, so he's putting content into them. I actually don't find myself agreeing with many of his opinions day 2 (defence of Meeple obviously not something I am down with, especially since he doesn't say WHY - could you elaborate, Strago?) but I'm glad he's put them on the table.
Whew. That took way too long. I remember why I basically didn't ever do this in FFT.
##Vote: Meeple
With that much of a look at everyone, it'd be wrong not to toss a vote in the direction of the most suspicious. Too early to say what I hope will come of this vote, largely because I am not sure what sort of explanation I expect from Meeple. Certainly this vote is not cast in stone, even if he does look the worst so far to me.
-
Pre-Comments Note - I haven't been on much today because, while I did get out of work early, I've been spending much time with the better half who cracked a wisdom tooth recently and is in mucho pain. I will prolly be somewhat scarce over the weekend in keeping with that. I will endeavor to maintain high post quality, even if I am going to be spending a lot of time with Gate instead of online and thus expect my quantity to suffer accordingly.
---------------------------------------------
I am going to put my thoughts out on the issue of Bardiche's role reveal. Of everything that's currently being talked about, I think it is the issue stayed in the forefront of my thoughts when I read through the posts I had missed. After waking up tomorrow morning and doing my start-of-the-day Mafia check, I'll be posting more about people in specific. Wanted to get some thoughts down now though before I go to sleep and potentially lose them in dreamland.
Bardiche's reveal: I actually think this is a good idea. Much like Carth, I think anytime you have a vote-based power it's always something to seriously consider just handing over up front. It's not like an investigative role that you have to worry about yourself under the scum's radar. This is not always a wise move, mind you, but the current game situation makes it make sense to me to reveal when he did.
And I agree with the Elf about watching how high that voting weight gets. Additional votes are great, but nothing that marks him as a confirmed townie. In fact, I can easily see it being a winning senario for a third party: You win when you have accumulated enough votes to make a lynch by yourself. Or a scum ability tempered by something else perhaps. It could be a town role, though, so I am not writing him off as non-town just yet. I think his reveal makes me feel a bit better about him, but not necessarily feel all warm and fuzzy.
---------------------------
Also, in reading over the above, it seems to be a tad hard to follow. If it is, just ask me clarifying questions and I'll try to answer them tomorrow morning when I wake up. My unisom is kicking in and the pillow and my better half beckon.
-
Okay, first off I'll come down on the side that has no problem with Bardiche's roleclaim (i.e. "not Snow"). That's not a power you can hide for long anyway, and this means we're not distracted trying to work out what's causing the anonyvotes. At worst it's a null read to me (getting out in front of an obviously necessary claim), and at best it's a lot more helpful to town than letting us get confused when the doublevotes start coming in. That said, speaking as the one who led the charge against ID way back in that FFT game, I also don't think he should be deliberately trying to increase his vote weight for its own sake. At best, that's a double-edged sword, since even if you end up absolutely double-plus confirmed town somehow, you can't be sure you're using your votes against scum.
Since Andrew brought it up: My original vote on Delta was a jokevote. I unvoted because I wanted to make sure any vote I placed was based on actually wanting the person gone more than any other, not "well, he's on my list, and I've got a jokevote on him already, so I'll just leave it."
So, people.
Rat: Rubbed me the wrong way with how he played his roleclaim. Posts a partial claim and then jumps on the first person to ask for more information, because he'd decided (but didn't say!) that he didn't want to give up any more specifics. Has done better since then, and verified the no-voting claim - which goes a long way toward explaining why he might be a bit testy about this setup.
Bardiche has made some decent contributions, but anybody who says we should lynch "safe targets" instead of going for scummy people gets my hackles up. Lynching town hurts town, and you do what you can to avoid it. Especially when there's no deadline. This should be self-evident.
Meeple: There's a reason Ciato's on you about your posting style. We know it's how you are normally, but writing lengthy rants about relatively simple topics is also a good way to couch high-word-count lurking. "I'm always like this" isn't a great defense there.
I'm hardly one to talk, but Ashdla needs to post more. She hasn't been that bad as far as post count goes, but most of her posts have been really, really brief and single-target (today's megapost obviously to the contrary, but I tend to take megaposts with a grain of salt; observations about people are good, active discussion with them is better). I'm not as inclined as NEB to look past her switch from OK to Tom - I can't fult people for thinking Tom was supicious, but the ease with which she switched, just because she was resigned to a Tom lynch was...diconcerting, I guess is the best word? Especially after she jumped on the nascent OK bandwagon with nary a word.
Corwin: Where in the heck are you? Again I'm not one to talk, but still. Good contributions when you talk, but post more.
Snow: Is very definitely coming off as wishy-washy today, and the one real stand he's taken seems deliberately obtuse. You can't think of any reason Bardiche would roleclaim preemptively, when it's become rote behavior for town to sniff out the source of any anonymous votes? Hiding your own vote record from town is never going to work, and trying to do so can easily smokescreen actual discussion. How is "hey, I've got two votes today, so when you see an anonyvote you know it's me" smokescreening anything?
Other people: nothing jumps out at me at this point.
-
Alrighty then, I suppose I should post a pre-sleep post.
Mainly, wanting to discuss Bardichie, (what else is new!) and his roleclaim.
When he first posted, I do admit, I was a bit concerned as to why he would do this, and I still disagree that it would have been a difficult thing to hide for long. Easy enough to stick his vote in with a bunch of others, so there could still be speculation as to who exactly was the cause of the anony-vote. At the same time, however, having heard others' arguments on the subject, I've seen that should he have tried to keep it secret, it would have blown up in his face eventually, and (providing he is town) would have been bad for town as a whole.
That said it still doesn't really sit well with me for a person to be able to hold the power to lynch whomever they please, especially later in the game (which is when that would take effect due to lower vote numbers, ect).
He has said that he will refrain from using this power, which seems alright, but doesn't that also mean he can't help town lynch anyone until much later game? Unless there's something I missed in his post about it... which isn't unlikely, to not use this power would mean not to vote on anyone who got lynched. A side effect of this, would be him either not voting, or voting randomly or at lesser targets for the sake of it, both leaving no voting trail to look back on, which could end up badly, should he not be town. In either event, I'll be keeping a close watch on how many votes he actually accumulates, so I don't wake up one morning and see he can now lynch whomever he pleases.
Oh yea! Also a thanks to Strago for setting the record straight about his voting for Tom toward the very end of Day 1, I apologize for missing that, admittedly I was sort of skimming at the time.
Those are the only things jumping out at me right at the moment, I'll probably have more once I get up tomorrow and catch up on everyone else's posts.
-
Okay, then! At a read through the pages that accumulated, Bardiche claims an 'extra voting' power that is supposed to even out Rat's proven inability to vote, as we've seen with helpful votecounts both times. That doesn't mean they're town, of course, though I would certain hope scum wouldn't have doublevoters in this game. And then, JR takes issue with Bardiche.
This post was originally going to reflect my thoughts on the people I wanted to watch ( as stated in this post here: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24687#msg24687 ), as well as note anything I thought worth of mentioning that hadn't been picked up by others. HOWEVER. I saw JR's posts and decided this would be about him. Why? Because I'm voting for him.
##Vote: JR
JR on Bardiche. I don't see a problem with his reveal, especially given that he has said only what would have become apparent soon enough, if he is being truthful, and would have ended up casting him under suspicion. We have not seen a full role claim from him, so JR's concerns there feel unwarranted.
But I do have many problems with the following:
JR's trying to cast suspicion on Bardiche's logic, while the only issue at hand here is apparent playstyle differences between the two of them. Rat happened to mention the other thing I felt was suspect about JR's drive here: oh noes LYLO scum tricks etcetc. It feels like a way to drive paranoia up, culminating in eliminating Bardiche 'for our own good' or so that he 'wouldn't be taken advantage of by scum'. He's also voting Strago for lurking, essentially, with a throwaway oneliner excuse, while keeping occupied full-time on Bardiche. That reads to me as an attempt to keep his hands clean there, while fanning the flames and hoping someone else would pick up the crusade for him. And that's... yeah, it looks pretty bad.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24792#msg24792
Rat: Jo'ou bothers me somewhat more, though, because his line of attack is originally based on how scum can exploit things, and not a far more potentially deadly concern, which is 'what if Bardiche is scum?'
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24793#msg24793
JR in response: I need to shout out loud "HEY BARDY LOOKS SCUMMY" to make my perspective shown? If I find someone suspicious enough to raise my eyebrows, it's because I find the behavior detractive to town.
JR in response, redux: And, to me, both threats are equal in danger - i.e. they get us fucking killed and lose town the game.
First, he admits that he's casting Bardiche in a bad light in hopes of people taking notice without taking the proper responsibility for it. Second, he rewrites our goal from FINDING SCUM above all else to finding scum AND killing random people who might detract from town's win in some way, a nebulous definition we are not privy to. And hey, I wonder if arguing against it and against JR would label me as a dangerous person to town?
So that's the reason for my vote.
Incidentally, I think that Bardiche should just use a FoS (and unvote/only keep one as intention to vote) and end up hammering our choices if he happens to believe in the lynch train gathered. A bit more effort on his part (and on ours not to hammer before he had the chance, if he so wishes), but the rewards should be clear enough.
* Yesterday was filled with work (during which I posted, but sadly, the people I asked things of weren't all around to answer), then gaming which ate my concentration and followed by a company event. Posting drunk after all that seemed like a swell idea, but I ultimately decided to hold on that till I woke up. Just an explanation, not really trying to excuse a lack of participation here.
-
Current votecount:
Bardiche (1): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (0): Anonymous, Bardiche
Ciato (1): Meeple
Jo'ou Ranbu (2): Excal, Corwin
Meeple (1): Elfboy
Shale (1): Ciato
Strago (2): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
-
Looking back to the beginning of day 2 and onwards, some thirty plus hours prior to this: Shale (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24655#msg24655), Meeple (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24662#msg24662), Excal (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24678#msg24678) and Ashdla (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24681#msg24681) pretty much promise to analyze day 1 stuff/voting records. DHE follows up later with a promise of his own (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24714#msg24714).
Of those, it is interesting to see who actually delivered, and who thought they got away with the promise of future content voiding the need for said content to come.
Excal posts about JR with a clear reference to day 1 postage, culminating with a prodding vote to have JR talk more and explain himself.
Ashdla also posts about the other players; as an aside, while the information presented is helpful, I tend to be more suspicious of large analysis posts that don't actually draw any conclusions -- if you yourself don't think anyone as suspicious enough to warrant even a prodding vote, or a vote to encourage explanations for things you find strange, just how helpful can the information truly be? It makes me doubt its usefulness.
Meeple's comments don't actually do what he promised, as he seems to be focusing on day 2 discussions instead. On top of this undelivered promise, his actual content is not too informative. Looking back at things after the flips to justify his stance is easy (and it would have been even easier for him to manufacture this evidence of 'being right from the start' if he is scum and knew the players being discussed weren't).
There's also: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24756#msg24756
"Next off...Ciato's obssessed with my posting style it seems. Um, ok, you know how I am, you know I tend to do this EVERY GAME I'M IN, and you're holding it against me...now?" followed up with
"No, I'm not saying this excuses my actions."
Well. Yes you are. That's exactly what you're doing, and I boggle at the defense of 'I make large posts with little content all the time and it's the way I play, you can't call me out on this scummy playing method that conceals my true thoughts and obfuscates them.'
"What I'm saying is you know very well you have to have more of a basis than "He's posting large posts with little content!" Laggy noted that, but at the same time, he basically stated it says nothing one way or another."
Ciato has to have more than that? At the beginning of the game, no less? Really?
I also don't believe using another player's thoughts on playstyle is a viable defense. I'm saying I agree with Ciato on this, so what does it mean? Are we in a democracy, where we now outvote Laggy's opinion?
All in all, not a very favorable view of Meeple, here. His later vote on her here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24795#msg24795) reeks of a delayed OMGUS; or a preemptive one, if he feels her points against him will result in a vote eventually. In that post, Meeple also defends Shale by claiming I misrepresented Shale's comments, where he meant 'attackers' and not 'voters'. Fair enough. However, my argument was based on Shale's apparent hypocrisy of seeking out people... let's say 'attacking' Tom & Co. while himself saying he found Tom the most suspicious and would've supported the lynch. It baffles how Shale is saying he's going to go after people who thought along the same lines he did (because it's such an obvious sign of scumminess), and Meeple buys this wholesale. A note to Laggy: it is this superposition that troubles, not Shale saying he'll look over 'attackers' or Shale saying Tom looked the scummiest. I just don't see how a townie could go 'This guy seemed very scummy to me, but all of you who were vocal about it are scrutinized for suspicion of being scum'. What. So that raises doubts about Shale's towniness, as far as I'm concerned.
As a side-note, I don't attack you on the grammar front due to your ability to write "I'm" without fail.
DHE. Better late than never with that promised analysis, I suppose. Interesting, in that it contrasts with Ashdla's own large summary post by following it up with a vote. Mmm. I find the Meeple case viable, as I've covered myself above, but DHE's evidence feels a bit on the thin side. That it seems more of a prodding vote than an attempt to train Meeple does help.
"And since I know I have townie thoughts," -- yeah, that fragment in your post made me pause, the same way your lack of day 1 voting had, excuse/reason or not.
Shale. I'm of two minds on this. What I feel is suspicious about him has been amply documented. That we don't really get him to deliver on his promise is another strike against him. On the other hand, he does post thoughts on people. I actually prefer when people single out only a few of the players, clearly those that elicit the most controversy/thoughts from them, over megaposts covering everything (yes, I used to do those myself in some past games, but I've changed my mind on their usefulness since). And back again, I find it troubling he doesn't use his vote to prod people; if you have concerns, you tend to go after those that concern you and get them to respond to your satisfaction. That is achieved with a vote, which could later be withdrawn if you are satisfied with their answers, or kept there if you aren't. I don't like how you keep to the background by not doing this along with your analysis.
Summary for the tl;dr crowd: Meeple and Shale don't deliver, in what seems to be an attempt to have the cake and eat it, too. A cursory reading would show them participating and promising insightful analysis of what had occurred previously... and that simply does not happen. However, I have no doubt they would look better to a casual observer than myself, when I made no such promises during my absence. They also rub me the wrong way for reasons I detailed, mostly in this post. Ashdla needs to show more aggression and actually narrow the field down some. Opinion on my own vote remains unchanged: I still view JR as the scummiest around for his questionable tactics and suspect logic.
-
"And since I know I have townie thoughts," -- yeah, that fragment in your post made me pause, the same way your lack of day 1 voting had, excuse/reason or not.
Oh for the love of...
That was humour. Sorry, I forgot this are serious mafia.
Besides that, probably will not be around much today. Should be around a fair deal on the weekend, though.
-
I'll just say first and foremost that I am a bit confused by the people that think I should've pretended my nose bled and just hide my anonymous votes in a mass of votes. Uh, yeah, okay, so how is it better if I willingly let people engage in speculations of "Anonymous" votes, and what would I do if people'd find out?
"Hey guys, the reason I withheld all this information and made you needlessly speculate on end about the anonymous votes is because uuuuh... Hi."
Yeah, no, I can't agree with you people. Withholding this information would hurt Town. I apologize for my desire to accrue votes from Day 1, though now it does prove that I am speaking truth at least about my multivoting ability.
-----
Moving on, I can consent to using ##FoS to appoint people I am suspicious of. If my vote isn't necessary to weight down a hammer, I'm also willing to abstain from that vote if it makes you uneasy to think I could accrue enough votes to hammer by myself.
-----
To give a short response to Ashdla, who seems to take problem with this power I have as well: Yeah, it doesn't sit well with me either that there are roles that can kill at day (dayVig), or kill at night (nightVig), stop a lynch (governor) or otherwise affect the entire process. But that's the game!
-----
The personal attacks from Jo'ou don't sit well with me, nor does his apparent belief that he knows why I did what I did:
it just feels something just didn't went through properly in the logic train here.
deliberately blow your cover for the sake of blowing it (which is what you did)
I'm... Not sure why you're telling me I should've kept this a secret. Would much appreciate your belief of why it would've been beneficial to town had I not immediately thrown everything out precisely to avoid smokescreening everything with conjecture about my role and having others probably try to fish what my role exactly does. (which'd make them easy targets. really, if I wanted to draw bullseyes on others here, I would've taken a wholly different approach)
Moving on, I'm more suspicious of Meeple at the moment. The entire assault on Ciato seems uncalled for. It also doesn't sit well with me how you defend Shale. I mean, sure, I defended Deltaflyer, but I think I was much less zealous on it to the point of attempting to null suspicions on him by saying things he should've done himself. So yeah, at the moment, I'm going to
##FoS: Meeple
Because unless he somehow has reason to stand at Shale's side, I think it's a course of action that is very... blargh.
-
Regarding my post style aspect, Shale...
Its more that EVERY SINGLE GAME someone uses it as a case against me. Its like how Alex feels about whenever he does something slightly different, someone screams "This is not the Alex I know, SCUM!" when as I've seen in the past, its not the Alex we know cause Alex plays differently each game, alignment be damned.
The point I'm making is...warn me about it if you want. Fair. But don't try making a case out of it. That was what Ciato was doing on Day 1, or so I felt; voting on me based solely on that.
Elfboy, the reason I didn't post much while being active?
Well, if you remember, I was playing other games and such while conversing in chat. I learned that its best to not play Mafia AND play something else at the same time.
That, and given how I post, I figured it'd be easier on everyone's brains if I didn't post as often as I do. I found that if I get too serious about Mafia, it just makes me too stressed and such. I'm trying for a more laid back approach for my own sake for nonMafia reasons, if that makes sense.
Regarding the Ciato post size thing?
Its cause her posts say next to nothing in addition to being small. There was actual discussion going on, she barely said anything in it to contribute. Mostly a "I agree!" or "I disagree" thing and doesn't really do much to support it.
Something I learned the hard way in Clue Mafia, where I got too into it, and well...yeah, you saw what happened.
Next off, Cor's post on me...
First off, I did follow up on what I said. I did go back and analyze. Not immediately, but you know very well it takes time. I wanted to get something down at the time, hence the focusing on Day 2 discussion at first. Don't try to mince things. What, just cause i didn't do it immediately is bad? Please, that's a pretty shallow argument.
Also, you're misunderstanding what I'm saying about my "This is how I am" thing.
It doesn't excuse me in the sense that I should keep doing it; its bad, I agree, I hate myself for it, etc. But calling me out as a good enough reason to vote = no. I explained earlier; people do this every god damn game, and it proves completely flawed and goes nowhere. Yes, its bad, no, you're not going to get anything out of it.
Ciato has to have more than that? At the beginning of the game, no less? Really?
Considering there were cases on *3* people and it was nearing the end of Day 1, I don't consider that largely the "beginning of the game." So yes, she does. She basically said Tom had enough pressure...when its clear we were past a point where pressure wasn't going to do a damned thing. There were two other targets she could have gone after.
In fact, she acknowledges that both Strago and Delta are even good targets (admittedly, Strago wasn't the other main one, OK was) and then based entirely on "He's been laying low", she goes after me. She admits Delta's being uncooperative and highly obnoxious and says she doesn't like Strago...then just goes I'm laying low and places a vote. It comes out of nowhere.
So yes, you need more of a reason on Day 1 when there's actual discussion present. It'd be one thing if it was to get the ball rolling, but why put a vote on someone who had no move against him, and there were 3 pretty obvious targets going down at that point (which ironically, all 3 did by the end of the night?) I'd give a reason, but its WIFOM (if you really must know, I'd say "put vote on someone else, avoid a train, look better that way when person she didn't vote for flips town"; as I said, this reason is a total WIFOM. I'm merely mentioning it cause if I didn't, I'd be called out for having something to hide, see Smodge in Random Mafia.)
Cor, you don't know me as well as Ciato and Laggy do. Ciato saying something like that against me seems off cause I KNOW she knows I act like that. This is what boggled me; I think she even defended my posting style like this once. So now she uses it as an attack against me? Its...just weird and strikes me as something is up.
Next off, wanna make something clear...
I wasn't so much as defending Shale, but rather, I was defending the current claim against him. People were saying he was bad for going after people attacking, and translating attacking = votes. There's a difference; you can vote on someone and not attack them, and vice versa. Shale's line did NOT seem hypocritical as a result. Its true, he doesn't vote on the people who he said he was...but for starters, there were 3 people, so its not like "I am confident to vote on *x* person specifically" and then doesn't vote, its 3 people. Makes things a bit harder. Next off, RL concerns didn't let him get a chance to, is his claim.
Anyway...will go and look at SHale's posts more closely RIGHT NOW.
-
Ok, analysis on Shale posts!
Until the post I quote below, Shale says...little, joke phase, etc. He does give insight on his role...or at least, the name of his role, though, does it in a manner that you'd have to be familiar with the character to actually know it. Sounds like it was tongue and cheek given the "we're all villains!" claim thing. Nothing informative here, unless someone has explicitly figured out WHO Shale is, though, that says little about his actual role and/or alignment/
Count me in as looking askance at OK. Rapid-fire jokevote switching plus the "us scum" slip of the tongue....neither looks great, both together make this either a giant gift or an equally-giant distraction. ##FoS for now, maybe I should vote here but I don't like jumping onto Day 1 dogpiles, this is not new.
Says he thinks something is up with OK, but refrains from voting due to the point I just bolded. Seems pretty fair. Also, keep in mind that bolded part for later.
He then doesn't post for nearly another 24 hours, where he says...
Here again. Hungry. Tired. Overworked, as I just bitched about in chat. Catching up. On first glance, OK and Tom both seem to be looking bad on purpose, for hell-if-I-know-what reason, but if they are, I don't want to play into that. More when my brain works.
Which sounds like "RL sucks, these characters look bad, but don't wanna go after them cause I'm tired." Nothing odd about that frankly. Guessing he posts this just so he indicate he's still alive. After what happened in SSBB Mafia, I really can't blame him either!
Next post, he goes over all the lynch targets. He says the following:
Of the three people currently painting targets on themselves, I like Tom's lynch the most, followed by OK and Delta somewhere below that.
Is this the line where people say he's ready to go after anyone? Cause...uhh...that's not what he's saying. He follows up by summarizing the cases against him and why he sees Tom > OK > Delta.
He ends the post stating this:
Sleep now. Will look over the cases again in the morning and vote. My judgment on Tom/OK is rooted enough in gut reaction to OK that I want to look it over again when I'm not exhausted.
Says he's going to vote in the morning, and if I'm reading this right, he's not sure who to go after between Tom and OK. Indecisiveness, sure.
By the time he posts again...Hammer was fallen. He says he would have gone after Tom so the result wouldn't have changed much.
That followed by...
Anyway, that's...well. All three of the Day 1 targets are gone, so it's time to look at the people who were attacking those three yesterday. Fun, fun.
The famous line that people are calling him hypocritical on. Ok, so...how is this hypocritical?
FIRST OFF, if you look back at the summary of 3 lynch targets post...he basically states Delta was not a good option at the time. He qualifies this with "We've mislynched TOm and Smodge too many times for this reason alone in the past." He does state this doesn't totally disqualify Delta's action as being scummy by saying to keep an eye on him, but is more or less admitting Delta is not a good lynch target. So if anything, he did NOT attack Delta.
So what about OK and Tom?
OK he doesn't actually attack either, if you look at the post. Observe!
2) OK. Likewise thrashing about, but the desired effect seems to be not so much to confuse as to draw attention directly to himself. Tons of jokevotes, incredible and varied amounts of weird and sometimes disruptive posting with no clear purpose. "Don't lynch Tom and I'm not going to say why" may be the most suspicious thing he could possibly have said, which, like much of his posting, makes me wonder if anyone could be that suspicious without it being deliberate. Like I said before, I'm feeling an ulterior motive here, and I don't like playing to it.
Bolded Parts are Shale's speculation. He's being objective regarding what OK was actually doing; I don't see this as an attack at all, its summarizing what happened. The bolded parts are subjective, where Shale's putting his own input. He generally says that OK was doing everything purposely to draw attention. Now, Shale was pretty much 100% correct since OK flipped Jester. This...says little about Shale's alignment, of course; Jester being 3rd Party and all, not even Scum would know about it, for starters, among other obvious reasons (the ever famous WIFOM situation of Scum Defends a nonScum to look better!)
Lastly, there's the Tom part. Here, he...mostly just summarizes what Tom was doing, input involves around "I can't fathom why he would do that" though, pretty much indicates he finds Tom most suspicious due to Tom's whole "I can't say anything about what I know!"
Now, why he didn't vote Tom there...I dunno. Tom was getting close to Hammer; -3 at point. Putting him at -2 would be dangerous. GRANTED, going off close to hammers on Towns are hard to read, but still worth noting.
That and he actually stated earlier he doesn't like jumping on Trains. Granted, he gave a reason here, so it could be considered not Training, but that point still deserves some mentioning.
However...
At the same time, Shale is trying to direct attention towards the people who DID vote for either of the three targets of day 1. Presumably, it means Tom's voters, as Delta and OK had two votes between the two of them; the same Tom, whose innocence Shale now knows and says he would have gone for, but it was apparently suspicious to pursue while his claims were still very much in doubt.
From Cor! This sticks out to me. First off, OK and Delta had more than two votes, garnered outside of the Joke Phase, throughout the day. That's a key thing to note here; someone jumping from one of them to Tom is worth noting. Notice how everyone on OK eventually went to Tom anyway? Yeah; I'm also assuming when that point that everyone raised Red Flags for, Shale didn't look at the vote count at the time.
Shale responds to it directly, defending himself. I dunno; that statement felt pretty logical to me. feels like you're jumping on him for hypocrisy and false implications. He said something, you took it to mean something else, and then twisted it to prove what you mean. This...I dunno, going back and reading Shale's posts, this definitely feels like a case of "look hard enough, you'll find anything." I know someone's going to say "That's the point of mafia!"
And again, as Alex likes to emphasize many times in the past, SCUM LIKE TO STAY ON SMALL FICKLE FACTS for arguments. They thrive on watching Town argue about a minor slip that doesn't say a lot. Shale's actions don't really seem suspicious, and it feels like someone on him is scum.
Also worth noting that Cor's starting the whole "These people didn't have votes!" thing. We've debunked that not voting, especially on Day 1, in and of itself isn't really a big deal.
However, Shale did state he was actually going to vote, and even gave an explanation as to why; Cor acknowledges this, but still holds it against him some. That's...kind of awkward...
Afterwords same time, Ciato more or less Me-too's Cor, and votes on Shale for that reason alone.
Next off, Laggy's point on Shale...
Shale does feel rather backgroundish and this is a strike against him, but the specific arguments some people have made against him seem blown out of proportion(why the heck is him saying that he would have voted for Tom anyway somehow scummy? The entirety of Day 1 supports this). That said, the lack of activity and posts, as well as the lack of votes, does bother me. If he doesn't improve in this regard he will be suspect, much as I feel Strago is right now.
Bolded part is important. Laggy states Shale might be suspicious for OTHER reasons, but the other main reason which Cor attacked him for doesn't really fly.
The rest on the Shale issue seems to have moved on from here but...well...
The attacks on him for what he did? Being backgroundish does hurt some, admittedly, but the whole "Doesn't vote, go after those who voted on who he said was intending on voting for" was definitely blown out of proportion.
Though, Cor's still attacking him for...not using Votes to prod people? And for not delivering? Um, I don't see him making promises and then not delivering. He has been defending himself, looking over posts, what have you.
Basically, I feel someone who was on Shale's case is scum. Whether...Shale himself is scum or not, dunno. I have my eyes looking at Cor at the moment, for all that my vote stays on Ciato (Cor brought up the point initially, Ciato me-toos it, more or less.)
-
Saying you don't agree does not constitute debunking.
I have utter disbelief for what I'm seeing in your posts. People shouldn't judge others for acting scummy, if they did it before. Or if it's something 'minor'. Or if you think what they said meant a different thing than myself or others you disagree with.
Huh? What's up with that, Meeple?
It really annoys that you take certain things as utmost proof of your case. You bold out a part of Laggy's post, for example, and instantly I am proven wrong. How? How is Laggy's opinion overriding my own with such ease that my entire case suddenly doesn't fly and crumble?
Your strong defense of Shale reads bizarre to me. You seem to dedicate more effort to it than to actual offense or even your own defense.
You are also taking issues with my belief that people should use their votes, to pressure if they have to, instead of sitting on them?
And finally, I've done exactly what I said I would. Some people haven't, which I took note of. You dismiss it out of hand and attack me; whatever. Everything is laid out clearly in my previous posts, which I'd suggest to reread to understand my intentions. For someone who attacked me for misreading and misrepresenting Shale, you're certainly guilty of it yourself.
-
Good grief, I don't like having my lines be used as such a point of contention in an argument I'm not actually actively in. Meeple, if you missed it, Corwin clarified as to what he actually meant in a reply to me in his post:
A note to Laggy: it is this superposition that troubles, not Shale saying he'll look over 'attackers' or Shale saying Tom looked the scummiest. I just don't see how a townie could go 'This guy seemed very scummy to me, but all of you who were vocal about it are scrutinized for suspicion of being scum'. What. So that raises doubts about Shale's towniness, as far as I'm concerned.
The fact that Shale went ahead and did he say he would have voted Tom anyway had RL issues not prevented him from making it back in time kind of solidifies this. Now, I still my original opinion to what Corwin LOOKED like he was saying (You would have voted for a confirmed townie!! Scum!!) but he's clarified that this isn't the case, so yeah.
Corwin, on the megapost vs few suspicions thing - yeah, I agree with that stance as the day winds down, but I find that collective analysis of everyone makes sure we aren't forgetting certain people exist, especially in a game this size. While I'm sure plenty of people who are citing their absences due to RL reasons are valid, it is still greatly troubling in that it simply eliminates chances to, well, root out scum from that crowd. >_> Since Day 1's flips weren't terribly good in relevating things, the whole "well, everyone seems suspicious by default" comes into play at first; then we narrow down the field from there.
*deflates while reading through walls of Meeple posts*
Both Snow and Meeple look pretty bad to me right now about being the uber-overly defensive/reactive. Snow's reaction to Bardiche I already noted in my past observations; it just seems off-the-wall and flawed terribly in logic. Meeple seems not to be so much defending Shale as he is trying to accuse Corwin of being hyperaggressive (from his offense ON Shale), which... well, I can see it from above, but Corwin's been defending his arguments and explaining when necessary, while Meeple comes off a lot more flailing. Still, I feel some of it comes off from taking the attacks on his style too personally. Argh. Even so, though, I can't help but shake the feeling that Meeple is coming off more like a giant townie spat than anything else.
HOWEVER, that is not to say that Bardiche still concerns me. I am admittedly somewhat giving him the benefit of the doubt because I still find it hard to think scum would have such a powerful anonyvoter on their side when this game isn't supposed to be about role madness, but his attitude still merits worry. Particularly this:
To give a short response to Ashdla, who seems to take problem with this power I have as well: Yeah, it doesn't sit well with me either that there are roles that can kill at day (dayVig), or kill at night (nightVig), stop a lynch (governor) or otherwise affect the entire process. But that's the game!
One of the most important things to realize about all of those roles is that they all have the choice not to exercise their power, and often times this is the wise thing to do. It's a double-edged role, as NEB and I both stated as of previous, and your attitude that "well, other people can go independent and do things themselves, so deal!" is rubbing me in the wrong way even as you say in the same post you'll be discretionary about your power. Uh, okay. Getting a little defensive there, bro; plus no one but Snow is accusing you of using your role revealment as a smokescreen, and he's gotten plenty of flak for it.
Strago, Shale, Andrew, Snow et al all saying they'll be somewhat absent for the next few days bothers me as stated above, but there's not a whole lot to be done about it at this point. Given that the last one on that list is also well-deservedly garnering criticism in my eyes and others' on top of that, plus I'm still feeling uneasy about Meeple's case,
##Unvote: Strago
##Vote: Joe Rambo
-
*that is not to say that Bardiche still doesn't concern me, kurse the lack of ability to edit.
-
Alright, just a heads up so I don't get attacked for lurking, I'm going to be gone for a large chunk of today and almost all of tomorrow. Sunday looks good though, so let's try not to gum most of that up with nightphase, please.
Now, moving on to some actual thoughts to leave you people with before I go, I'm watching this Meep/Corwin fight with curiosity, and it inspired me to read over Ciato's posts. And while she does seem a bit more mellow than usual, I think this is partly also because the people who got the attention on Day 1 were begging for it, instead of the usual almost defaulting that happens. Aside from that, her posts read very much in her usual style, and while I do need to do a specific meeplesearch, I'm inclined to listen to her. Her initial vote reads less as a "I think Meeple is scum, let's train him" but more of a "I still have things I want to talk about and I want to put the focus on that." A viable option considering how close Tom was to death by that point. Her larger post after that goes into deeper reasonings, and generally feels sound.
Which reminds me of someone else who may be worthy of watching. Andrew started off today by pointing out the five people who voted for both OK and Tom. I pointed out a sixth person who FoSed them both without actually voting. Now, pointing out things like that is a good thing. I think it also suggests that the person who points it out should take some time to look into it, especially if no one else is. After all, if you don't look at the whys of the votes and the switches, then all you're doing is ramping up paranoia. Especially in a case where there's five people, at least one of them is bound to be town. And yet, when Andrew posts again, there's no mention of them at all aside from him wrangling with Meep over why he felt they should be mentioned. Which feels like he wants to look like he's helping with the scum hunt without actually helping.
Finally, as for Shale, looking at his day 2 posts. I'll admit that Meep has pointed out that Shale has mentioned who he would vote for ahead of time, and stayed consistant about that when he posted on Day 2. However, his Day 2 posts feel a little off. Well, lets clarify. His third post feels fine, but his first two don't quite feel like they connect. There is a difference between the concept of those who attacked the three targets yesterday, and those who avoided attention. Attacking someone garners attention, just sliding over onto a well formed train when it's lynching time, tends to attract less attention.
Also, I'd be worried about any argument that says Scum would be eagre to be on a mislynch. They do need it to happen, but they also want to not be associated with it. And there's just four people who didn't have their names attached to the big three. Three of those four are, oddly enough, coming under flak today for one reason or another.
Anyways, as much as I'd love to continue piecing through this puzzle, I'm going to be late for work if I don't head off, so this'll be the end of my post. Best of hunting to all of you, and hope these humble thoughts assist.
PS: Corwin, could you be so kind as to get a picture title or a sig containing a unique word? I find tags like that assist a great deal when trying to hunt down just one person's posts.
-
Mostly to Laggy: Yeah, it does rather suck that this weekend will be a bit of a dead zone for a lot of players' activity. But, you know... 4th of July weekend and all. This sort of thing's fairly likely to happen. I think the best thing we can do, honestly, is to try and not let players' absence this weekend influence our judgment too greatly in either direction. I suppose I might be inclined to think otherwise if I myself was going to be more present, but at the moment I feel like a fairly neutral stance will be the most productive.
Hmm. Maybe even call for a bit of a pause on the game? That might be too hasty, I suppose we aren't losing that many people's voices.
Off to a (hopefully quite brief) job interview, after which I'll be back with more comments.
-
Oi, alrighty, now that I've caught up...
Bardichie using FoS consistently seems like an alright option to me, prevents most of the problems I had detailed in my earlier post. I do agree with Laggy however that he got a bit jumpy on people discussing his claim 'all the people who think I could have used it as a smokescreen' when in fact, only one person thinks he should have kept this power hidden.
As to Corwin giving me flack for posting about everyone earlier on... At that point, I didn't have anyone in my mind who stood out to me more than the others especially, so I didn't feel the need to throw a vote out there for the hell of it. I posted all my thoughts at the time on each person, I promised a post with content, and I believe that qualifies as content. Though yes, votes are helpful, I didn't then (and still don't) know who I should sure cast my vote for, as yet.
Now I've got to head off to work, I'll think more about those under suspicion then, likely casting my vote when I get home tonight.
-
Picture/appropriate picture tag get. Hope that helps and all that.
Ashdla: Let me put it a different way. Do you have people whom you find more suspicious than others? Do you have people whom have acted strange and you would like to see explain themselves over it? Those are just two broad examples for when I believe one should use their vote even though no prime suspect is in appearance. It is somewhat disconcerting that the guy who claims he has no voting power (and that votecount pretty much confirmed that) has been more vocal with whom he would like to vote for using the FoS format than players who don't have such issues.
Quite simply, if you don't do it, who would? And if you, assured of your alignment, don't promote your cases, are you taking on faith the words of someone whose allegiance you are not certain of? Scum have trouble making cases on people, because they know without the shadow of a doubt that they're lying through their teeth. It's not by accident that too-passive play straying into lurker territory content-wise and abstinence from voting to create a voting record are considered scum tells. It is my belief that by acting this way, someone would be either scum or is allowing scum to lay low the same way by providing them with a buffer.
-
Do you have people whom you find more suspicious than others? Do you have people whom have acted strange and you would like to see explain themselves over it?
To the first, not at yet, as I just explained in my post.
To the second, yes, as I explained in my post about Bardichie.
Sorry for this being such a short explanation, but I've gotta head off to work now.
-
When he first posted, I do admit, I was a bit concerned as to why he would do this, and I still disagree that it would have been a difficult thing to hide for long. Easy enough to stick his vote in with a bunch of others, so there could still be speculation as to who exactly was the cause of the anony-vote. At the same time, however, having heard others' arguments on the subject, I've seen that should he have tried to keep it secret, it would have blown up in his face eventually, and (providing he is town) would have been bad for town as a whole.
Ashdla, to touch on why I, and most of the people who think it was prolly a good idea for him to claim when he did, if he did that (sticking his vote in the middle of a bunch so it would be hard to tell whose vote it was) we would have lost precious time arguing about whose vote it was/why they voted/why they tried to hide it (is he scum? third party? why hide if TOWN!?) etc. Having him say up front that it was him shaved off lost time trying to logic out the culprit. I think it has been explained a few times in mafia games before (and has played out in many) which is why I thought I'd mention it since this is your first game.
---------------------------
As promised, thoughts on people:
Bardiche: I do agree with Cor's suggestion about Bardiche using FOS so his vote weight doesn't gain too much momentum and we're potentially stuck in a situation where he can just take people out indesciminately. He seems willing to do so as well which goes a very long way to bringing my hackles down even further. Right now for Bardiche I'm leaning townie/3rd party>scum.
The whole Meeple post thing. I'm not seeing anything really off there. It IS how Meeple always posts and when you take that into consideration and read the post for what it's worth, there's content there. I find for myself that I always just discount the whole post-size thing from him. No sense in always saying the same thing. Meple posts as Meeple posts. What I DO take into consideration is the content of those posts. And I do see content there. Right now, I'm thinking with his defensiveness, it reads a bit more defensive townie than it does in scum trying to distract out of a bad situation.
I type that and then continue to read. In Meeple's last post I can see a bit more of what looks worrisome. I can sort of see where people can say his defense of Shale looks odd. I admit it does to me too, but less so for his defense of someone not proven to be town than for his ascertion that someone on Shale's case MUST be scum. Frankly, anyone on ANYONE'S case has a good chance of being scum. Let's be honest if no one is really wearing the Red Tiara of Scumhood for all to see, they're obviously not doing too bad of a job of blending in. It could be anyone. But that makes me stop and think. I think that it's likely to be true that since scum is raising no real red flags that it might be best to look at those people who are putting forth the smallest amount of oomph for town. If scum really is doing a good job of blending in, I'm going to bet at least one of them is doing so by laying low. And Meeple trying to focus attention to people on someone else's tail without any good indication that said person is any more town than anyone else...yeah.
Ciato: Since she's got a vote on her, I went back and read through her posts. I'm not seeing anything really that far off. The only thing that did draw my attention was the fact that she did not vote for any of the 3 people who were front runners yesterday although she did mention all of them as being odd. She places a joke vote on Shale and then a pressure vote on Meeple to post more. I don't know that I'm getting much off her.
Strago ticks the edge of my radar just for low posting. He has been good about providing content when he's here though so I'm not pegging him hard at the moment, but I'd like to see more when time allows.
Everyone else, I'm not really feeling one way or another.
So, Bardiche is still worrisome to me. I can't shake the feeling it's a third party ability. I'd rather take out a scum, though, if I can find one. Third parties are always good to eliminate, but right now I can see it as a town ability too and the risk of losing more town on the off chance I'm reading a role right is foolish. Trying to discern alignment based on roles will prove disasterous as often as not. And Meeple's defense of Shale and general defensiveness has my hackles rising. I'll look forward to more posts tonight when I log back on so I can discern a bit more.
---------------
Now it's the 4th so I will be around very little today. I will make at least 1 more post today and prolly 2-3 tomorrow. Yay long weekends where I don't get to rest and enjoy because I have too much to do. *sigh* And personally anyone not tied to their comp today and tommorrow isn't going to read lurker to me for obvious holiday reasons. (ninja'd by Strago who says the same thing :) )
-
Laggy: Er... I never said I wasn't going to be around. I'm around. I just have other things to do during the day, so I'm trying to space out my posts into chunkier bits. Be around, but not devote the whole of my time, you know.
As it stands right now, the two worst looking people to me are Snow and Meeple.
Snow... his movement on Bardiche makes me incredibly uncomfortable. There are actually many, many good reasons to claim before a dire, life threatening situation. Its just a matter of what the role is, how useful it is in town's control and whether it is worth pointing it out to scum. In Bardiche's case... I'd say this is a pretty big case where he should share. Scaling votes would get out of hand pretty quick and I can't see anyway it wouldn't end in a panic/reactionary lynch.
Meeple... there are two things to be considered here. The obvious is, yes, that in the end, it gets hard to pressure him for a style of writing he uses everywhere. Of course, this is complex when said style is somewhat inherently scummy. The difference here, methinks, is that it is even more pronounced this game. Last game, he actually did have quite a bit of content hidden within his long and winding posts. Here though, the general content of his posting feels... slimmer? His post about Shale is pretty good, but otherwise, it seems less thorough than normal. His reaction against Ciato is also somewhat uncharacteristic, and that bothers me. This sort of response from him really does feel off.
Outside of them... Ashdla looks particularly noteworhty to me as well. The posts she has are rather... vague. Not a lot of actual analysis, just vague finger pointing and general... ambivilance towards everyone. At some level, I can understand this. After all, I'm having problems picking out targets as well. But, ultimately, the fact is that you need to decide. So, hop to!
##Unvote: Bardiche
##Vote: Snow
Despite him not being one of my five original candidates, Snow... definitively feels the worst to me at this point. The whole thing with Bardiche just stikes me as wrong.
Meeple, I still have a question for you though! Why did you react to Ciato in that manner? Inquiring minds need insight to settle internal disputes!
-
Okay, so I'll be honest and say I'm feeling really urgggggh now with walls of text, and that I don't really feel like writing one myself at the moment. Bear with me a little if I am a bit more concise and shorter than normally, and if my view isn't as broad as it should be.
To whoever said I was erroneous in thinking that more people thought I should've delayed my claim: Yeah, okay, I admit I should've read everyone's posts more rather than skimming and thinking more were uneasy with my claim and found it scummy/thought I should hide it. My mistake.
I still find that Meeple has been performing unsatisfactorily: Latest gem of a post was mostly in Shale's defense, even after I called him out on defending Shale. It's almost as if Meeple is convinced Shale is on his side (being either Town or Scum), but at the moment I cannot say for certain that I am buying that myself. It seems horribly opaque for Scum move, but then again no one's ever said Scum won't sometimes make mistakes and slip up.
Keeping my FoS on Meeple for the above reason. Additionally, her case that people that are suspicious of Shale are suspicious people... Yeah, I'm not sure what to make of it, but it doesn't sit right with me. Can't quite place my finger on it, but something about Meeple feels very off.
-
I actually don't find myself agreeing with many of his opinions day 2 (defence of Meeple obviously not something I am down with, especially since he doesn't say WHY - could you elaborate, Strago?) but I'm glad he's put them on the table.
I only found myself particularly defensive of Meeple because it was Ciato attacking him at the time, and I had some issues with her. They both, however, were doing some things that rubbed me the wrong way, as I believe I mentioned, both having to do more with general play style than any specific action they'd taken, but I suppose that's an aside.
Except for the fact that now Meeple's made the odd choice of going out on a limb to defend Shale, which I don't fully grok. And... here I'm ninja'd by QR, who... hmm.
I can sort of see where people can say his defense of Shale looks odd. I admit it does to me too, but less so for his defense of someone not proven to be town than for his ascertion that someone on Shale's case MUST be scum. Frankly, anyone on ANYONE'S case has a good chance of being scum. Let's be honest if no one is really wearing the Red Tiara of Scumhood for all to see, they're obviously not doing too bad of a job of blending in. It could be anyone. But that makes me stop and think. I think that it's likely to be true that since scum is raising no real red flags that it might be best to look at those people who are putting forth the smallest amount of oomph for town. If scum really is doing a good job of blending in, I'm going to bet at least one of them is doing so by laying low. And Meeple trying to focus attention to people on someone else's tail without any good indication that said person is any more town than anyone else...yeah.
QR, do you mean by this that Meeple actually strikes you as townish, due to the fact that going out on his Shale limb doesn't seem all lurky-scummy? For some reason I'm having a hard time reading your exact conclusion here. That being said, if I've understood you correctly your read on the situation strikes me as having some WIFOM problems. As in, Meeple's putting himself into the spotlight could be genuinely counter to a lurking-type scum strategy, but why couldn't scum use that tac for exactly those reasons? We could go back and forth like that for a while. Ultimately, the weirdest thing about Meeple's behavior is so vehemently defending someone whose alignment he would have no way of knowing, as a townie.
On to bigger and better things. Well, other things, at least.
What I somehow managed to miss about Snow in his post where he first voted against me was the way in which he characterized his suspicions of Bardiche. Specifically:
And then, there's the fact that we have Bard's role reveal, which, quite frankly, feels a bit hurried to me, since he's just being pressured by a few people, there's not even a train going yet. On the other hand, this could well mean he is just a desperate townie. He proved his power is true, at least, but I'd still like to see a better defense.
Now, my immediate response to Bard's roleclaim was, "Oh, that was considerate," since I've seen games get bogged down in the "Anonymous Vote Hunt" mini-game before. FFT comes to mind, in which Snow also participated. Snow seems to have attempted to turn this roleclaim into... Bard scrambling to look like a townie? It just seems like overreaching and suspicion-mongering, especially when he capped off that post with what was a pretty "safe" vote against me. I also find a lot of sense in what Rat said during that Bard/Snow exchange:
Jo'ou bothers me somewhat more, though, because his line of attack is originally based on how scum can exploit things, and not a far more potentially deadly concern, which is 'what if Bardiche is scum?' EVEN THOUGH he is finding the man suspicious based on role, it doesn't seem as though he's considered the most obvious and dangerous of ramifications; as a result, his attitude doesn't seem to be coming from a townie perspective.
The reasoning's somewhat esoteric, but it rings true to me.
One of Corwin's comments bothers me:
However, my argument was based on Shale's apparent hypocrisy of seeking out people... let's say 'attacking' Tom & Co. while himself saying he found Tom the most suspicious and would've supported the lynch. It baffles how Shale is saying he's going to go after people who thought along the same lines he did (because it's such an obvious sign of scumminess), and Meeple buys this wholesale.
You've never been a townie and accidentally ended up on a mislynch train? I feel like investigating mis-lynchers is pretty typical in this sort of situation, and to go on the offensive against Shale for wanting to do that despite his own involvement in the train seems bizarre, to me. If anything, wouldn't it mean sticking his own neck out to investigate others he thought might be scum? Then again, Shale never did pursue that angle very much, so I wouldn't read this as a particular hearty defense of him either. Mrrff.
Finally there's Ashdla, whom I just find vague and noncommital in a threatening way as described perfectly by Andrew who just ninja'd me. Stupid ninja Andrew. AIAS LYNCH HIM. But seriously, the fact that Ash's post late last night before he (she? I realized I don't actually know) was just a re-tread of Bard's roleclaim with no real new content doesn't sit that well with me, nor does the long rundown on every player with no real conclusion drawn anywhere. And since then Ash hasn't added much either.
Yeah, I'm going to toss my vote Ash's way, for now. Snow's already got enough votes sitting on him (halfway to lynch, if I can count) that I don't feel like I need to rush his train at the moment, despite my suspicions of his scummitude. My doubts about Meeple and Shale aren't quite as strong as my doubts about the others, either. This is partially a gut thing, but we're also getting into either a slight rut or Snow-lynch-tunnel-vision, neither of which seem like the best things for us.
##VOTE: Ashdla
Ninja'd by Bardiche: Meeple's a dude. ^_^
-
Current votecount:
Ashdla (1): Strago
Bardiche (0): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (0): Anonymous, Bardiche
Ciato (1): Meeple
Jo'ou Ranbu (4): Excal, Corwin, Laggy, AndrewRogue
Meeple (1): Elfboy
Shale (1): Ciato
Strago (1): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
-
Popping in for just a minute as Gate's feeling a bit better.
QR, do you mean by this that Meeple actually strikes you as townish, due to the fact that going out on his Shale limb doesn't seem all lurky-scummy? For some reason I'm having a hard time reading your exact conclusion here. That being said, if I've understood you correctly your read on the situation strikes me as having some WIFOM problems. As in, Meeple's putting himself into the spotlight could be genuinely counter to a lurking-type scum strategy, but why couldn't scum use that tac for exactly those reasons? We could go back and forth like that for a while. Ultimately, the weirdest thing about Meeple's behavior is so vehemently defending someone whose alignment he would have no way of knowing, as a townie.
Does Meeple strike me as townish? Not really. Let me try to explain a bit better. I think the way he gets defensive of his posting style looks townish to me. But on the opposite claw, his support of Shale and trying to make poeple look at those who looked at Shale suspiciously as possible scum, THAT seems off. Between the two I'm having a hard time getting a read. If I absolutely had to lean a direction or other, I'd prolly lean towards scum as defensiveness is far outweighted by defense of others in my book. But I think we've got enough room to go it a bit slow as everyone here in the States has the holiday to content with.
And I can totally understand Bardiche's calling Meeple a gal. Avatars will get me all the time. :)
-
Mod announcement: Ciato is dropping out of the game due to real life concerns. Taishyr will be taking over her role. Any votes by or for Ciato will be negated. An updated vote count will be edited into this post momentarily.
---
Current votecount:
Ashdla (1): Strago
Bardiche (0): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (0): Anonymous, Bardiche
Taishyr/Ciato (0): Meeple
Jo'ou Ranbu (4): Excal, Corwin, Laggy, AndrewRogue
Meeple (1): Elfboy
Shale (0): Taishyr/Ciato
Strago (1): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
-
... Well dang, so now we have someone completely new to work with and see if Ciato held scum or town role.
Welcome aboard, Taishyr. We'll probably want to hear your opinion on the current recent cases.
Going through Ciato's posts now.
-
Well.
Currently reading through stuff again, since I was mainly just skimming beforehand. You people get far too wordy too fast and for what at a glance seems to be fairly odd stuff, but hey, pot kettle soot-colored.
Gonna take me a while, asking for patience.
-
To Cor:
You are obsessed with this concept of Agreeing and outweighing one another, and being proven wrong, etc.. Well, not obsessed, but you keep falling back to it. I said something about Ciato, you claim to agree, thus outweighs the situation. You later bring up how I did something like that with Laggy to disprove you. That's not my intent at all; my point is that you going after something that was pretty much minor at best, and then I was showing I wasn't alone in seeing things that way.
My Shale defense? Simple. People are jumping on him a bit harder than I think he deserves. He is one of the people at hand, so I figured I'd get my own personal thoughts out there. If I didn't do that, I'd be called out EVENTUALLY for not talking about Shale. Actually, I said something about Shale earlier (negative even!), Elfboy called me out on it saying "That's it? Come up with actual support!" or something along those lines. Fair, my line said practically nothing other than "I need to look at Shale, what others have said, he looks bad." But when I looked back and went over his posts, and saw the flak he was getting...I dunno, struck me someone was trying to label him something. Admittedly, I'm not 100% certain he's not scum, but I don't think the cases on him are particularly convincing at all.
Also, Cor, you still haven't answered my question. You claimed I haven't made good on what I claimed I would. Care to, you know, point out specific examples? Simple taking a post, and saying "Meeple didn't do what he claimed later!" doesn't help. I looked at the specific post and saw something that I did actually follow up on. Maybe not in the way you wanted, but I did.
Also...where did I call you out on saying you didn't do what you claimed you would? You basically answered the converse of what I was saying. I said I did something you claimed I didn't, and you go and act like I claimed that you didn't say something you said you would.
To Laggy:
Cor's clarification does not, in fact, satisfy me is the thing. It feels like he worded something some way, then needs to back himself up. Go back and see what he said. They don't really match.
I don't even agree with his logic. Again, what's Shale suppose to do? Ignore those who voted against a townie...let alone three...just cause he was intending on doing the same? His logic just doesn't sit well with me. He's saying "How can a town say he looked scummy then, and now say others look scummy for saying he looked scummy?"
Well, my thought? Simple; scum will make bigger of a situation on another town in order to get others to look at it. Now, I don't think going back and looking over Tom's points in and of themselves will make him seem less scummy; the fact is, his antics (if you can call them that) were pretty bizarre, and did nothing to help us, especially with that stunt of "I can't explain why!" On Day 1, everyone but Scum is blind; on Day 2, when there are flips, perceptions can change. Tom will still probably look scummy in a vacuum; I'm not denying that.
But...those still related to his lynching (me included, sad to say), and possibly those related to dealings with the other now confirmed towns does merit looking at.
Cor's saying that he can't see it as at all townie to go back and look at those dealing with Tom as a starting point...I'm not sure I follow this logic. Its just bizarre.
To Andrew:
I reacted cause I felt it was odd that Ciato would attack my posting style. There are some people I'd expect this from...but she's one of the people who knows exactly how I act, game's be damned. Even back in FE Mafia where we were both scum, I explicitly told her I have problems keeping my posts concise. When I have something to say, I say it, and then I get this urge that I'm not being clear enough and then have to go into detail. Its just how I operate; I really wish I could so something about this, but paranoaia that something will be read the wrong way + mild cases of OCD make it so I just have to get things this way. I've explained that in the past; even in nonMafia games. Any argument I'm in, I'm like that. Attacking my style just irks me, especially when the person at hand knows about it.
...though, I will admit I was probably angry in hindsight, and my case on Ciato isn't as firm as it use to be. Eh...guess I don't really have much of a case anymore, but I figured I might as well toss SOMETHING else on the table, even if it did garner me suspicion. I wanted to avoid the same trap I fell into once back in Clue Mafia where people were attacking me for not bringing anything new to the table, Me-tooing, etc. where i was town...and it led to several tunnel visioning, forced me onto the defensive the entire game, people ignoring actual important part of my posts, what have you. IT was at a point where everything I said was used against me. I wanted to avoid that...seems like I might be back into the situation, though, at least this time, I'll admit I did something more grabbing of attentions. Do I like this position I'm in? Of course not, but well fuck, I gotta deal with it anyway, so I'm doing my best to get out of it.
Regardless...
##Unvote: Ciato
In any event...
Some more clarification regarding some things I'm done, not geared towards anyone specifically...
My Defense on Shale? Again, people were calling him out on something. Naturally, I didn't just want to jump on the train by word of mouth of others; very easy for scum to embellish something, cloud vision of the person and they read things the wrong way. So I went back and thoroughly looked at Shale's posts. I wanted an in depth analysis of him, and all I came up with...was a weak case at best. Does this clear Shale? No.
However, I suppose saying "someone on Shale is probably scum" is a bad idea. *HOWEVER*, I do believe that someone related to the Shale attacks (if you can call it that), himself included, is probably scum. It was an easy thing to take, be it cause:
A. Shale himself is scum, and people got him properly
B. Cor said something the wrong way, someone saw it as an opportunity to put a stronger case on Shale, and went with it.
C. Cor himself is scum, trying to put blame on others.
Why am I bringing up Cor? Cause I feel like he's a good deal responsible for the Shale situation. Now, if you notice in B, it COULD be a simple case of a Townie trying to find something odd, attacking someone, and then some other 3rd party (in the sense that its not Cor or Shale, I mean) taking advantage of it.
Of course, there's no way of telling what's going on unless we get more role flips, so speculating like this is just going around in circles, and I know, being unhelpful. Still, I think someone is scum related to the Shale aspects.
Again, I don't mean to say "Shale's not scum, don't go after him!" What I mean to say is the arguments on him feel...lackluster. He hasn't done anything to make me think of him as something one way or another.
I will ask for clarification from one person though...
Excal!!! I'm having problems understanding what you mean about Shale's first two posts not linking up on Day 2.
If I'm reading it right, are you saying its typically better to look at those who didn't attack the three Day 1 deaths, but rather, go after the people who were clearly training?
Just trying to see if I understand your statement before I make any sort of assessment on the point.
(Additionally, Excal, lots of people here only refer to others via nicknames/shorthand. You could just Ctlr+F their full name and find out posts that way! Its what I do after all, seems to work fine. Doesn't work for everyone, naturally, since some people like Shale and Ciato lack such shorthands.)
*phew* Ok, think I'm done defending my actions...
Anyway, thoughts on others?
Bard...I'm having problems seeing him as scum. The Anonyvote feels a bit too...powerful as a role for Scum. On the other hand, I believe El-Cid stated roles in this game would NOT be used logically in all cases, so perhaps giving Scum an extra vote falls under this. So given the weirdness of the game in general, I'm inclined to say that Bard's role power being known doesn't do us any good as far as telling us his actual role, but I do think that his telling us about it was the right thing to do regardless.
Bard using FoS' the same way as Rat, if for different reasons, seems like a just compromise on that note. He's definitely someone I can't fault for wanting to hold back on his votes, given the double vote weight.
For Snow...he said he wasn't going to be much available this week, no? I think his point on Bard was more him over thinking the situation rather than anything else. Stuff like this happens; you think about something a bit TOO hard, come up with something that's worse than it really is, and you fear it (if that makes sense.)
Going over the cases on him, however...
So far, I...have to say they do seem sound.
Snow's concern of overthinking the situation I'm ready to pass. However, in his post, he doesn't consider that Bard himself COULD be scum, which is far more dangerous than his situation. Rat is quick to point this out. Snow responds by basically taking offense to Rat's call out. Seems a bit weird, frankly. He also seems to have his priorities not set straight either; Cor points this out in that he's, possibly unwillingly, implying that not only go after scum, but be concerned with anything scum to take to their advantage!
Though, Snow does point one thing out that I didn't see the others noting, which doesn't sit well with me:
He tries to defend himself with "Everyone looks scummy! Of course Bard looks scummy to me!" I...no, I'm not sure I agree with that. Obviously, some people are going to look better than others (be it truthful or not), and feels like a bit of a slip.
If Snow actually felt suspicious of Bard...he'd have done something more along the lines of indicating it. No, I don't mean the full caps thing he tries to use as a hyperbole, but being subtle about feelings doesn't help. At least using a line at the end like "This is assuming you yourself aren't scum" or something indicates you at least are aware that Bard himself might be scum. He doesn't do anything like that; he just questions the reveal.
Andrew's vote on Snow does bother me a bit. He pretty much gives little explanation, just says "There are reasons to reveal without being provoked!"
He basically says "whole thing with Bardiche" and does little to elaborate. I feel like he's jumping on a train here.
...in fact, Andrew himself is causing me some concern in general beyond that! Will go and look over his posts, but for now, this should suffice.
But regardless, Snow's looking weird. However, I want to go back and look over a few people (Andrew in particular), *AND* let Snow at least get a chance to defend himself, before actually voting.
-----
Ninja'd by Bard and...Tai? Wtf? When did Tai get into this-...
*reads vote count message from mod*
...oh.
-
Ok, another post and such! Anyway, about Andrew like I said...
I'm...not seeing a lot of info from him. Vote on Bard based on...killing Tom when not letting him roleclaim? We already saw that Tom was basically under the gun, and seemed like he wasn't going to say anything new, I can't fault Bard for that. Sounds like Shale was gonna do the same thing anyway, but was beaten to the punch.
His vote on Snow feels very "Me-too." Brings up no reason other than some game mechanics. That's what I feel a good part of his posts have been; mechanic discussions. Talks about how Scum can still do stupid things, why its a good idea to reveal even when not provoked, etc.
Sums it up as "The whole thing with Bardiche." He doesn't really explain WHY it feels wrong, just that it does.
Andrew also brings up the 5 People to look at for voting thing (and Excal says there was a 6th person who FoSed both worth considering.) And, as Excal notes, he does indeed never once bring it up again EXCEPT in two cases.
A. When responding to a point I made about it specifically.
B. When he votes Snow, he says "not the original 5, but he feels the worst still."
So he proposes a strategy and doesn't really even go back to mention it at all. Feels weird, no?
He also states while not huge, its important. Well, if its important, then why aren't you following up on it? Feels like he's bringing it up, dropping the point, only bringing it up again to pretend he's actually still focusing on it (might be reading too into it.)
Like Excal says, Andrew feels like he's trying to show effort in a scum hunt while not actually being helpful himself. In general, something feels...off about him overall. Hasn't been really helpful, goes after Snow without so much as giving a decent reason why other than "the Bard thing feels wrong", bringing up something and not following up on it in any sort of useful way, and general lack of presence (which, like many people, he's hiding behind a RL excuse. This could be true, but these excuses can only go so far.)
As a result...
##Vote: Andrewrogue
-
Yay, I get back from the last day of training to meet impenetrable walls of text. Let me recompose myself before tackling the reading and forming opinions, because I'm sure I'm going to end up having to heavily defend myself.
-
... actually, no. I'm not going to bother defending myself extensively, or even attempt to. The overall timing I had with this game was just too crippling, and I've been as helpful as a brick, so I'll simply go the easy way out and whatever you guys make of it, I'll comply. I'm just about a pile of mush right now.
I am Count Werner Vertigo, town-aligned bipolar assassin trained by the KGB and roleblocker with an annoying quirk. My power is, obviously, to roleblock someone at night. However, I have a 50% chance to be too damned depressed to even use my nightpower - i.e half the time, I can't roleblock anyone. As you can see, it's not exactly a terribly exciting reveal.
Whether you decide to believe me or not is not even my concern other than the fact you'll be lynching town knowingly, which is just about the stupidest someone can be. I've had a fun, but stupidly exhausting week and I'd rather just let things slide out at some direction this day than try to sort out the trainwreck I've gotten myself into for overthinking Bard's roleclaim and not being around enough - and the parallel trainwrecks that are moving around. I'm not expecting to make it out of Day 2 alive, anyway.
-
Meeple
-Posts are too long, you know it, we know it, why can't you fix it, or even appear to make an effort to fix it? You say you're trying and I'm just not seeing it. This isn't just idle whining, it actually makes the game harder to play. If you spend like 5 extra minutes editing stuff out your post, you save all of *us* 5 minutes rereading it to figure out what you're actually saying. As Cor and others have said, "I'm always like this" is not an excuse, and you are indeed trying to use it as one.
<->
-I think Meeple's case on Ciato was decent enough. Not saying all that much? Check. Hypocrisy on speculation? Check. He OMGUS'd her? Um.. no.. she voted for him on day 1, it's day 2, now, and he didn't actually vote for her until well into his posting. Dismissing this as OMGUS is pretty short-sighted, especially when he hasn't focused alone on her reasons for voting him.
Furthermore, his detractors have dropped in a few weird shots as well; it seems like Meeple HAS in fact gone over day one stuff to me (mainly on the Ciato front, but I appreciate a straight case rather than rampant discussion of everything). Don't get where Cor is coming from on that. Also Laggy.. just... see the bottom of my post. Yeah. That was uncool.
-I am, however, rather unhappy with him pulling out this "you don't know me like those guys do!" line. That's freaking weird, since I'm pretty sure you've been a fixture in mafia enough that we all have a rough idea how you post. It's right on the money that he is trying to defend himself while claiming his defense isn't a defense. Defensively.
What I find most surprising and kinda clinches it for me is that Meeple just dropped his case on Ciato when it seemed decent enough to me. I would suppose he was in the face of some opposition and couldn't take the heat. He also doesn't really give much reason to drop it other than 'eh it's somehow not good anymore', so I'm ultimately more suspicious of him than anyone else at the moment... except for Snow.
<->
-Laggy had a brilliant line which I must quote, it's hilarious, I'm sure you'll all agree-
In particular, where you attack her for speculating on why OK was acting the way he was, she wasn't saying that such speculation was pointless - she was saying that you can't really read alignment from that.
I'm sorry, what was the whole point in analysis again? I must have missed the memo on the real reason we're bothering with any of this, but I'm pretty sure the reason to speculate and consider anything is to, indeed, try and read alignment from it. That he flipped Jester doesn't change that (and actually validates it in my mind, since hey, he WAS nontown after all.) I'd rather not just toss around "oh you can act weird, it's cool, we won't infer anything alignment-related from it", yeah.
Another some less silly line-
when this game isn't supposed to be about role madness, but his attitude still merits worry.
Yes, well, mods seem to take a perverse joy in lying to us about this, in my experience.
<->
Annnnnnd Snow claims with a good ol' "I can't be fucked" post with a 'you guys are retarded' thrown in for good measure. Does nobody even try to establish credibility anymore? Do people always have to accompany their foolish actions with "You guys will suck if you lynch me! Why do you not have psychic powers of know-my-alignment?" Is everyone too lazy to even try and establish credibility or defend themselves? Do you know that if we let shit like this through, it opens the gates for it to be used again?
Apparently not. I have a feeling your prediction will come to pass.
-
As I said, I can't give a damn tonight. Feel free. ^_^
-
Mang, Snow. I mean, I get the impulse, mafia can be annoying and time-consuming, but man why you gotta be all disdainful of us and the game at the same time. Oy.
Mrfff. Seconding Carth's feelings about how Meep has just sort of dropped his case against Ciato. But part of me's tempted to just vote the crap out of him because obviously he isn't going to be helping us out much. Even his dang ol' power role is basically useless. Grargh.
-
I'm sorry, what was the whole point in analysis again? I must have missed the memo on the real reason we're bothering with any of this, but I'm pretty sure the reason to speculate and consider anything is to, indeed, try and read alignment from it. That he flipped Jester doesn't change that (and actually validates it in my mind, since hey, he WAS nontown after all.) I'd rather not just toss around "oh you can act weird, it's cool, we won't infer anything alignment-related from it", yeah.
Point taken and noted. The context of the quote was different in that I don't believe her being unsure on OK's alignment just from his post style alone was at all a sure indicator of where he fell (crazy town role, scum trying to throw us off, third party jester, etc.), and I felt that was fair enough stance to take - indeed, people weren't going for OK's lynch on Day 1 primarily because of THAT, but because of his disruptance to the game in general (Tom being such a more obvious case superceding it). Stretching that into a general statement not to read people's tones for alignment is pushing it and not at all what I meant to word.
Yes, well, mods seem to take a perverse joy in lying to us about this, in my experience.
Yeah, well, if that's the case I'm not going to be a happy camper, that's all I'll say.
To Snow: I'll be uncharacteristically blunt. What the fuck, you don't sign up for Mafia if that's how you're going to decide to play and ruin the game for everyone else with an aura of apathy. Vote stays on you obviously, since you've given damn little choice at this point.
-
It's less being disdainful of you people than being disdainful of thinking at all. I've halfway dug my own grave by a sum of negligence, bad thinking and bad timing, so I may as well man up and finish the job. I don't fight fights where I think I have any chance at all of staying alive, and the lynchtrain might as well prove a bit more constructive to town later on. The little arguing I did was actually fun, but I'm not putting up with it tonight.
And Laggy: fair enough. I didn't expect to end up in this bad a situation, but I'm being as blunt as you just were tonight. I'm going down in flames and I'm going to like it.
-
Well, Rat, though I'm still reading, I do feel compelled to reply on your comment to Snow:
No, there never seems a point to bothering anymore because it's never enough to satisfy anyone, and in the grips of exhaustion such efforts look even more pointless than normal. Wish he had held back, sure, but eh. With the 99HITCOMBOWALLOFTEXTS we tend to churn out? Yeah. It's why I tend to be rather annoyed about the sort of attitude you have, as much as I can understand it; it'll be used every time someone's tired and pissed whether you like or not because this is human nature; we can only dream of being as perfectly expressionless and emotionless as some of you, of course, you stolid flaming ratbird wind beneath our wings. ^_^ And lynching every time gives scum opening to push for it every time, just as lynching it none of the time gives scum the ability to slip under the radar using it. As such that argument kinda ends up void in the air, to me. Arguably the latter is less preferable, but I suppose this is a discussion to undertake after the game or in general discussion. To me the two are equally advantageous for scum and bad for us, but.
Frankly I'm not inclined to go after him for this, I've not had a negative read of him so far and that post changes little either way, suicidal attitude be damned for now. If he's scum, egg on my own face here, but mrf. From my reading this is frustration. Complaints are perfectly damn valid re: it, but... eh.
Since I've yet to plant my suspicions in solid earth yet, and with the editing I'm working on for DL, for now just bear with this sliver of commentary; I'll be back with some more loose-leaf collections of notes later.
-
When he first posted, I do admit, I was a bit concerned as to why he would do this, and I still disagree that it would have been a difficult thing to hide for long. Easy enough to stick his vote in with a bunch of others, so there could still be speculation as to who exactly was the cause of the anony-vote. At the same time, however, having heard others' arguments on the subject, I've seen that should he have tried to keep it secret, it would have blown up in his face eventually, and (providing he is town) would have been bad for town as a whole.
Ashdla, to touch on why I, and most of the people who think it was prolly a good idea for him to claim when he did, if he did that (sticking his vote in the middle of a bunch so it would be hard to tell whose vote it was) we would have lost precious time arguing about whose vote it was/why they voted/why they tried to hide it (is he scum? third party? why hide if TOWN!?) etc. Having him say up front that it was him shaved off lost time trying to logic out the culprit. I think it has been explained a few times in mafia games before (and has played out in many) which is why I thought I'd mention it since this is your first game.
Yep, thanks QR, like I said in that post, I understand why he did it, since reading people's opinions on why they thought it was a good thing.
Something else I'd like to touch on here are people's comments on my posts lacking content. I'll admit, I'm new to this. While this isn't an excuse by any means, it has taken me a bit to really see how the game is played, and what my posts should contain in terms of opinions and theories. I apologize for having a bit of a slow start, but I think this post, and any following it, should fit the flow of Mafia better.
Now more to the meat of this post.
So apparently, a couple major things happened while I was at work, or at least, they seem major to me and will be what this post is mainly about.
First off, Ciato poofing and Tai taking her place.
I... really feel odd about this. By that I mean, brand new person added is kind of... ugh, hurting my brain. I'm not sure how this'll pan out, and I'd like to see how the game progresses a bit, see Tai's play ect, in order to draw a more conclusive opinion.
Secondly, Snow's roleclaim.
Well I... this seems odd to me. Though my experience is limited, having only half the votes on you needed to lynch isn't really the give up point, is it? Honestly, this is reeking of third party to me, and wanting to get lynched. I say, if he wants to quit anyway, he should do so, and then we can not waste our votes on him. He's perfectly capable of telling Cid he wants out of the game, isn't he? (if that's not the case, I stand corrected) In my opinion, that means we should go for someone who would actually be worthwhile to lynch. Moreover, if he's town like he says he is, then we'd be wasting a lynch on a town when we could be going after scum. Frankly, I'd like to call your bluff, Snow.
Thirdly, 'this is how *insert person here* always plays!'
I don't really care who this is directed toward, but since I haven't played Mafia before, personally, I'm not going to be taking into consideration who normally plays what way. For me, it wont be an excuse to act any given way. More specifically, yes Meeple, the way you post makes it difficult to understand the main thoughts you're trying to get across. I think something like that was said in Ciato's direction also, but I didn't find it overly distracting in her case. Just wanted to put that disclaimer out there.
Lastly, who I'm voting and why.
For the reasons I've listed above, I'm not going to be jumping in the dog pile to vote for Snow. It seems off to me, as I said. What I do agree with, though, is that the passionate defense Meeple gave Shale, and his jumpy defensiveness in general seems off to me. The way he continued to support Shale and divert attention to those who had targeted him doesn't look very good. Putting such a tangible link between yourself and another player generally isn't a good idea, from what I've gathered. Also, I'd really like him to try is best to format his posts in a way that is easier to read. People easily get put off by huge walls of text, and it might encourage them to skim posts instead of reading them thoroughly as they should. Not wanting people to look too closely at what you're posting also seems scummish, and for those reasons, my vote goes here.
##Vote: Meeple
-
Tai, the issue with letting someone go like this is pretty simple. Snow is under fire and is willing to offer no defense. He has stated quite clearly he is willing to offer no defense. The response consists mainly of "oh yeah, I screwed up, I know I did, I'm gonna die now and it was gonna happen anyway, have fun guys." Genuine or not, if you let someone off because of these reasons, then -where's the boundary?- When someone makes a slipup or screwup of ANY kind and then refuses to steadfastly defend that viewpoint and flails and becomes suicidal, it's okay to let them go, we're being too hard on them? Heck no, that is a barrier that anyone can hide under, scum included.
These are aside from the huge issues with anyone who's willing to be that unproductive and uncontributive to the game as a whole. That kinda defeats the point of the game, hence the "why are you playing/signed up in the first place". It is Mafia, you are going to come under fire, argue, defend and attack points. If you can't do that... yeah.
-
Bleh. I really didn't want to post anymore, after doing all this show. But I read posts and the stupid bug still bites me. I guess I owe people an apology, now that I'm actually concocting thoughts together instead of going on full auto trainwreck lover. So, I will apologize right here and now. You're not really forgetting this happened, but I shouldn't have gone suicidal like that.
First, I guess you could call it a bluff, yes, as Melsa said. In a sense, I almost vaguely hoped I could confuse the overaggro people enough, but I obviously gave this as thought as I'd give to a Die Hard movie. But the roleclaim is 100% true. What annoys me isn't the accusations (they all hold water, and they have all the right to hold them against me), but the fact that there are giant trees of text that say next to nothing other than proving activity and aggro accusations in order to get a train going against whoever the poster wants to be guilty instead of being actually suspicious. (Corwin, I'm looking at you.)
I overthought the implications of Bardiche's role, that's that. That's mainly because roleclaiming without being in an at least vaguely concrete threat bothers me, since I don't believe in roleclaiming out of heartfelt goodness in a game of manipulation and strings attached. This claim, obviously, makes my attitude right now even dumber and less credible, but so be it. At this point, I just wanted to headdesk because I couldn't make sense of anything.
So, in short, I apologize for lashing out and being childish like I was, and I don't feel suicidal anymore. But this is moot, by this point. As I said, I dug my own grave, may as well lie, right? Bleh, real life affects me more than it should.
-
He's giving in because he knows the wolves of the group here will chew him out no matter what. As I said, I wish he hadn't, but frankly you're doing precisely what he said, which doesn't help. Frankly I'd just be eyeing him until day 3, and if he's still limp body then I'd support the lynch. But since it's likely that he could start contributing, assuming he's town and left alive? Uh, yeah. I see no reason to kill him. He's only given up bec... wait, already said this part.
If I'm not mistaken, multiple people here even knew of his absence/time crunch here; had it been a sudden drop from existence, no excuse, then the same re-entry, I'd be on your side here. As is, though? Uh. I can't find a good reason to use the lynch on him, frankly, on anything other than what, in the end, feels like iffy grounds to do so. >_> As it stands, the Meeple role speculation day 1 is what's standing out most to me here, though I've not read day 2 yet.
Still editing. Shouldn't be too much longer.
-
He is contributing now. That attitude that he put up two posts back was one that basically screamed that he was not going to bother putting effort into playing the game further and that was unacceptable to me no matter what.
Now that he's actually posted something that explains how he felt more clearly and also his current suspicions, I am otherwise inclined to agree with you.
Frankly, "wolves or not", Mafia's a game where people are going to agree or disagree with you, and if it is a sizable number, then you get lynched. That is the mechanics of the game; saying that you're not going to bother because everyone is going to jump on you anyway is basically admitting guilt (or apathy, arguably just as bad if not worse, see what I said above). Using this as an excuse to react as such = no, you have to fight back! That IS the game, after all. In fact, you did so by making some valid enough points on Corwin; that's exactly the kind of thing you should be citing rather than flailing.
Furthermore, (and to Strago as well as Snow on this) attacking people for their absences was never the sole reason I cited for things. It's one of those areas where we all realize that yeah, things happen sometimes and you can't be around enough, but at the same time for those playing they can't kind of just give you a free pass on it all as well. Particularly for you, Snow, it was the combination of that AND your odd reaction to Bardiche which let me to press on you (and for Strago, how I felt his previous posts were lacking in original thought, etc.) Not sayin' you have to make the game your life, dude. Just that you need to take that into consideration from the perspective of other players, as well.
That said, I'm going to accept Snow's explanation for now, while I mull over things further. The roleclaim basically ... yeah doesn't say much, but well, it's a roleclaim.
-
The attitude I got was "I don't have any energy or momentum to contribute now. Roleclaim'd. Do as you will, I've got nothing now."
Usage of the two nows intentional, I can see where you're coming from more now, and sure, yeah, that is infinitely more infuriating, but I suppose I was still looking at it from my view and going "uhhh okay, see your point somewhat but this is vicious prophecy fulfillment on both sides, why is this going on, if he manages to re-sort himself then we likely benefit."
Editing done, going back to reading beginning of day 2 so I can see what else drew Laggy's attention to Snow, since apparently that was where some of the spike was and not just this incident which is good to know. >_>
-
Well, the roleclaim itself was just... uh, yeah, can't justify it other than what I said above, but this is simply what happens when I stop thinking. Don't do that, Snow.
If you care, I can throw the rosary of why I felt Bardiche offshoot, but it was said before best: I don't trust gratuitous roleclaims normally. The direction I took towards the roleclaim, though, was iffy, and I'll admit it. My mind just works like that, making roundabout and often nonsensical connections with ease and going with them, instead of simply going for the most obvious possibility: what if the roleclaim hides scum. Rat did have a point back then.
But that's neither here or there. I'm still not really very lucid, and I kinda want to refrain on talking more until my thoughts settle down.
-
Notes as I read, mainly attempting to keep eyes open. This being said, I've not paid much attention to timing of posts so if I'm poking someone to post more it's just a general thing.
Meeple: Feels like the most blatant case of digging at Rat's role without directly digging at it, looking the posts over. Does similar speculation on EvilTom's role. Day 2... have to agree on the general dig of the people eyeing him currently, and the vote drop from Ciato/me to Andrew is both interesting, nice of you, and somewhat rather odd, but to evaluate it more would mean a serious read of your posts again and my brain is just not going to do that right now.
Rat: Currently I'm taking the claim at full face value. Doesn't mean he's not scum, doesn't mean he is, but.
Corwin: Took Tom at face value. I'd think you'd know better by now. Assuming he's not lying town at this point seems to be completely pointless based on track record, while it's worth keeping in mind, eh. This being said I see nothing actually questionable about your play on a looksee, so.
Bardiche: Mmm...Only main issue I'm seeing here currently is second post page 6, where Bardiche always does what's a headache inducing move of saying "We won't be able to get scum most likely, so we should try to remove the one we think is least likely to aid us in discerning who's scum.", which to me reads "I know these guys aren't scum, let's decide who's most dead-weight anyway and go from there." This being said it may just be a syntax issue and isn't enough to lean on right now to make me actually think he's scum. Just interesting to note
Laggy: Have to agree with EvilTom's breakdown - the reply post to EvilTom's roleclaim was... off, especially sans vote on him, reaction post or no. Granted, second post in reply was far better about it. From there, no problems, so this is just me noting, same as Bardiche. Also find early comment re: Carthrat being voteless interesting, but eh, laggyxrat slash can only result from idle speculation of what feels like snark and none of us want to go there.
Excal: Main thing that caught my attention, leafing through, was an attack on EvilTom for, amongst other things, "flowery language". Granted, you had a list of other points against him, but EvilTom was being rather lucid this time, in all except that first post. So eh, just noting this.
Snow: Yeah, getting neutral read in general, hate me for not jumping on the lynch the suicidal instinct people but hey. His read-in of Bardiche's move... he had a train of worry going about that and it seems decently valid? Laggy's main point against him as far as I can tell is the omission of "what if he's scum", but the penalties for that seem obv. anyway and so I can't see bringing that up for discussion. May just be me. Is hardly confirmed town lawl in my eyes for anything, but I'm not sitting here singing for his death knell currently.
Shale: See Andrew. Had the same thing pretty much said for both.
Andrew: Kinda no vibe from him in general currently, but would like to see more if possible.
QR: Felt like she had the most... solid? argument against ET day 1 from my memory, which is admittedly Swiss. Would want to see more from her as well, but is 4th of july, not too worried about it just yet. Seems pretty solid to me, here.
NEB: See QR. Both these two currently feel rather solid to me, though after SSBB I'm going to try and not let that be a blinder for me. Bloody vampire.
Strago: Keep forgetting he's playing. Counterpoint, day 1 he wasn't around day 2 he seems to be semi-active and doing some poking at people for explanations, which I approve of.
Ashdla: Oddly, despite content which I just reread, no real impression. Note to self to reread and see if I get anything more.
For now, this is a tenuous vote, as I plan on sleeping and then looking it over, but for now, most suspicious is...
##Vote: Meeple.
-
##Unvote: Snow
Just got back from fireworks, and I want to put this out right now.
As it stands, his sort of defense? Never has worked. Ever. In fact, every time its been brought up, its resulted in near immediate lynching. It has never been an effective defense in the DL before. Thus, if scum were indeed attempting to use this as a defense, they'd be taking an incredible risk and counting on a ploy that has NEVER worked before to suddenly work now.
To be frank, I'm tired of this, because there is always a nagging voice to me that says "this guy must be town" but I go ahead and do it anyway. So. At this point, I'm really inclined to, just this once, let it slide. As it stands, this is about the only time it would be "safe" to let it slide. If it passes, it'll be a reasonable scum gambit again, but, for right now, I don't want to waste this lynch on Snow.
-
Ok, guess I'll get in a post before I go to bed.
Snow's back and speaking! His earlier posts upon returning made me head desk a bit, though, he has since started to actually recover in a sense (I suck at wording). The cases on him were fair, but I'm not sure they're enough, is the thing. That is, except for Andrew which I laid out and explained as one of my reasons for voting him.
For Snow's Roleclaim...eh, can't get much out of it. Sounds legit, but he doesn't really have any way to back it up, and there's no one here to debunk it, so...for now, I'll believe it I guess.
Regarding the swap from Ciato to Andrew...well, yes, I know I swapped off Ciato long before I posted Andrew, but...at that point, figured there was more on the table than what I had with Ciato. That combined with the heat I was getting from the case I had on her, it felt like a lose lose situation. Either I abruptly move my vote, and look bad cause of it, or I keep it, lack the support to hold onto it, and look bad for that. At the time, I idiotically didn't consider option 3 of "look for someone who might be more suspicious first, THEN change vote" which I ultimately did find in Andrew.
So far, Tai's done...nothing worth noting one way or another, beyond a vote for me.
He says I'm most suspicious for...reasons he doesn't really lay out.
I don't get why you say I'm digging at Rat's role when not directly digging, and then say I do the same with Eviltom. Care to elaborate on that, Tai?
My case on Andrew stays regardless. As I said, so far, he's not really said a whole lot beyond some playstyle and general mafia discussion, putting a vote down on someone with barely a reason why, and saying something is important but hardly doing anything about it. Doesn't excuse my abrupt Ciato pullback, but again, I will admit that was a bad move on my part and I should have held onto it until I was actually confident I was going to change my vote.
Next off...
Why is it really THAT weird that I defended Shale? If I don't see a case on someone being that big, and people are looking at him as a whole, I felt that I should throw in my (overly emphasized) two cents. Given the position I was in, I felt that if I didn't give a full out explanation (this is mostly paranoia, admittedly), I'd be called out. I am NOT confident Shale is town; I want to make that clear.
What I was, however, is disagreeing with the cases made on Shale. They were being overemphasized, felt like they were twisting some words to mean something, claiming things that he actually defended against later, etc. I just felt the case on him was weak, and wanted to explain why. Admittedly, I got out of hand.
Given I explained I wanted to look back at Shale and see the cases made, I felt I was obliged to actually go back and do so, especially since Elfboy called me out on saying he sounds suspicious for what others have said. However, when I went back, I felt he didn't really seem all that bad like some were saying.
-----
Ninja'd by Andrew! Removes his vote on Snow...except in improper format *hint hint*
HIs recent post has said...nothing but "Snow's defense never works!" Again, he's doing general mafia discussion, not really adding much.
-
To make sure it goes through, since tags hate me.
##Unvote: Snow
Tired and want to get back to your earlier post at a previous point, but I'm curious about your particular expectations Meeple. For example, while I will admit that I haven't managed to come back with anything definitive on the five I originally gestured towards (I've been having difficulty getting strong reads on anyone), I am still attempting to do what I can to give some direction to discussion and provide whatever insight I can while I strive to come up with actual cases.
I think you are minimizing what I actually say though, especially in this case. I'm not just saying that Snow's defense never works. I'm saying that, given history in the DL, that particular move on Snow's part renders me relatively sure that he is town. I'm also, fairly flat out saying, that this pattern has also been demonstratably linked to townie lynching. Thus, I'm encouraging that it might well be reasonable, this once, to bite the bullet and not go for the Snow lynch.
Yes, its based a lot in game theory. I'd say it is still, at the least, reasonable content and at least demonstrates that I'm putting in effort to provide SOMETHING to work with, as well as provide direction.
-
-JR: I'll be characteristically blunt, myself, and repeat what I said to Delta day 1: I don't want to waste a vote on someone who can't be bothered to play. Please bow out if that's your intent. Vote remains on you in case it's a lame trick to try and garner sympathy without an actual defense and skirt on by.
-Tai's post with his 'it's okay to be emo in mafia' attitude made me cry.
-Meeple! Fine. I believed I was concise enough, you obviously disagree. Even though this also makes me cry, I will go over the relevant posts again and give you specific quotes/links to underline what I meant. And I can't help but be slightly mean and mention that if even you are having trouble finding the promise I'm claiming you didn't deliver on, it might be a good idea to follow Rat/Ciato/me/other people and try to spend a bit more time thinning your posts down. >_>
Anyway, the Meeple response and some thoughts on Tai later today. Given our timezones, you guys are probably asleep for the most part anyhow and don't really care about the slight delay.
-
Okay, thus begins my weekend period of absence during which I shall try quite hard at least to remain caught up, and ideally to post myself a few times. For now, though, I'm keeping my vote on Ashdla because I still have reservations about her and would like to hear if anyone else is sharing them. My second choice is definitely either Snow or Meeple, but I'm not at all sure just yet which one.
Must run. Kisses.
-
Hrm, okay, we've progressed a bit.
Why is it really THAT weird that I defended Shale?
Meeple, in general, I always believe that one should defend himself in Mafia. Others providing your defense indicates that those others feel confident enough about your alignment that they shoot to your defense. This is alright if you are a Mason or something, and you're guaranteed of another's alignment. But in this case, you're defending someone you (likely) have no alignment read on, quite frankly, unless you have some investigative role or are scum. I don't want to hear if you have the former, but that's my explanation for why I take such problem with your defense of Shale.
Even after you were called out on it you remained over-zealous to his defense. A little defending of others is okay (ie: I didn't get that read out of it, how come you hammer on that point so zealously? as a defense) but when you take over the defense... Yeah. Anyway, I'll keep this in the back of my mind.
##UNFoS: Meeple
JR: Can somewhat understand the reaction. I myself am probably guilty of reacting in similar fashion sometime in the past, and cannot say for certain I'll go down in grace in the future. However, for now I am willing to overlook the matter of your attack on me being an uh, over-hasted attack. It is for this reason that I hold reservations towards speaking out, precisely because I am unwilling to submit myself to such gunfire as well. Keeping a close eye on you, but unwilling to support your lynch.
Andrew: Gonna have to second Meeple, reading over your posts. You haven't contributed much yet. Care to change that a little?
Also, I have to say, wading through these walls of text is tiresome, and I'm having trouble finding much to say on anything. I really have to reach out for some of the stuff here: Maybe I'm just not being attentive enough or seeing it. But yeah, I lack clear cases on people because I keep swinging back and forth. If you find me to be lurking a bit, that's my excuse.
-
WARNING: This is mostly just pulling up Meeple's long posts re: Rat/EvilTom day 1. This post can be skipped to the end, but I felt this to be the easiest way to address Meeple's request for reference.
Re: Meeple, you did so day 1; here's references.
Rat:
Rat, by claiming you can't vote, isn't that also basically saying "Scum! Leave me alone! I'm useless!" Granted, if you really have no vote power, I don't know what the best course of action is...if you never claim that, people will call you out for never voting, and you'd be forced to Role Claim anyway, so yeah, probably claiming that early is the best option.
Alternatively, Rat's a Jester or whatever that role is called, and he's TRYING to get himself lynched. Ludicrous claims like "I can't vote" "I'm useless" and the rest of his posts feel like he's trying to make himself stand out as much as possible...
...oh fuck it, I think I'm looking too deep into it.
(There was commentary on EvilTom here, but not the rolefishing I was commenting on; that occurred later.)
But back to Rat...if Rat really can't vote, either...
A. He's lying. Always a possibility. Only reason I could see him lying about this is cause he's trying to get lynched...but maybe there is some other weird strategy he's working with.
B. He really can't vote, HOWEVER, he's got some sort of power role that makes him not useless.
C. He's a completely useless player, and was tossed in by the mod just to add to the insanity of the game.
How reasonable these situations are? A...well, can't really say much about that unless we know more of what's going on.
B, there's two possibilities. Obviously, those are "He knows his Power role" and "Hidden Power Role not revealed to he himself." I don't expect Rat to claim the former if he does have one this early, for a number of reasons, and obviously, he can't speak for the second. Telling us he can't vote this early does in fact mean quite a bit.
C...uh, El-Cid, you're mad if you indeed did do that.
Also...if Rat is in fact lying...he's pulling one heck of a gamble. Why? By saying he can't Vote, he pretty much has to follow through, and never actually vote the rest of the game. Should he slip in n actual vote, well, something's obviously up.
For that reason, I'd be willing to more believe B's the case. C's just silly, but then, maybe I'm underestimating how silly this game is suppose to be, and A puts him in a situation where he has to follow through.
and EvilTom:
Eviltom looks really weird at the moment. Though, another thing sparked up that occurred to me:
Tom is a bomb. He's trying to dissuade lynching as much as possible cause dying means not only does he die, but the Hammerer dies too (that's how Bombs work, right? They take out the person who killed them?) Given the game like this, I so expect a bomb to be SOMEWHERE, though, OOC, do Bombs know they're bombs, or is it usually a hidden a role?
For this reason, I'm a bit worried about Lynching Tom. Think I agree with Rat that I'd rather go after someone else, and if there's a Vig, request that they go after Tom tonight. If he's a Jester, he'll not have won. If he's a bomb...do Bombs work on NKs? I'd like someone to help elaborate that cause I know a role of "you die, lyncher dies too" exists as something we've used before (Monkey in WoT Mafia at least, I think it was?), but unsure of the specifics of how that role usually works.
REGARDLESS, I do feel lynching Tom this early is a bit...dangerous. Though, his posts don't leave a very good taste in my mouth, and his attempt to explain his "Lynching me is useless" claim...well, if that was your logic, that would be moronic. EVERYONE has something like that implied around them, the question is...or alternatively, anyone would be willing to say that, since its basically the same as saying "Don't Lynch me, I'm town!"
OK needs to to say something, you know, of actual credit. However, at the same time...
...
Back to Rat...I stand by my 4 AM rant. The most likely scenario at the moment is Rat has some sort of power, but at the same time, can't vote. What that power is, who knows? Possible he doesn't know either!
If its scumploy...its a very risky strategy. Scum have only so many votes they can use to screw around with Town. By making a claim of "I can't vote!" means you more or less have to follow through the entire game, or else the instant you vote, red flags go off, and as such, scum lose one of their limited votes, giving Town better odds. For this reason, I'm thinking Rat's either Town with some sort of special, SIGNIFICANT role power, OR a 3rd Party with some weird Win condition like "Win if you are NK'd!"
So at the moment, not seeing any logical move for Rat to do that if he's scum.
So end result is Tom's looking bad...but I get the feeling Lynching him is a bad move too. I propose letting him live the day, and if any Vigs are around, Nightkill him. Similarly, Docs, don't protect him!
Granted, on a reread, these posts have a bit more content (admittedly trimmed so this is not as big a wall o' text as it may seem) than just the primary digging at roles instead of content/discourse. Still, speculation this deep when the man's already said he isn't saying more? Right. Uh. This just seems to be baiting for more role discussion and less content discussion, which was a lot of what prevailed in day 1. Mrf. The bolded sections are each are statements I feel were just... there to pull out more role discussion re: these two. Am I the only one receiving this impression?
-
-Tai's post with his 'it's okay to be emo in mafia' attitude made me cry.
Now you're getting into the spirit of things! Keep going! Those tears shall lead us to victory! Oh and lean over I need a few for my research. Cataloging and all.
Seriously, though, that wasn't my intent; the intent was to strive and ward off the suicidilynch, though you tend to be exempt from my concerns as I know your preference to avoid such cases out of spite; my preferred tactic, though the emotion I put behind it tends to be apathy and not spite.
Replying to Meeple next post.
Anyways. On a rereading of day 2, I see the reasoning for the offense on Snow more clearly, and it's something for me to bear in mind. I'm not sure I'm as down with him as a lynch idea just yet, and still wouldn't agree with a lynch on the grounds of the suicidamove, but. Corwin's reply to him... mmm. I don't get the "he's rewritten our goals" comment; the goal is to ensure town wins, everyone else loses. Detriments are eliminated, and he was noting Bardiche's role could very well be a detriment. Rest of Cor's reply there, no issue, valid points re: Snow.
Still reading/digesting some. Blah to mountain posts. Blah to contributing to them.
-
*replied to Meeple last post.
Was originally going to post that first and Meeplereply second, but decided to do the opposite. Forgot to change that to reflect. Blah. Gonna go puke more now kthx.
-
Tai:
Well, I've covered what I thought of your comments on JR. I don't really get what you mean by avoiding assisted suicide by lynch due to spite, but if you mean that I prefer not to vote people who prefer not to play and would like to see them replaced/modkilled, that would be a yes. On JR's specific case here, I would have to say that if he's giving up wholesale that the latter should happen. If he is NOT, then the case on him is still valid BUT he could always try to work his way through our concerns by providing analysis on other players and generally being useful.
I believed that the likeliest possibility was of Tom lying about something, if you'll go over my posts. It just didn't mean much with regards to his alignment, and he seemed scummy enough to push the lynch ahead. And as with Meeple, I see no way to play if we excuse scummy play with 'oh well they're always like this'. Need I remind you that Tom played as scum as well? If you give him a free pass, how exactly do you intend to catch him? Hope for a cop? It's a social game, we hunt down scumtells. In fact, you did the same with your vote on Meeple today.
On our goals. This strays a bit from the original context, but I wish to further my point there, Tai. There are several detriments to victory, and uncooperative townies can be an impediment to winning. I agree, yes. But if you think someone is a failure of a townie, you can ignore them or go for a replacement/modkill. If you think someone is scum, however, you don't suffer scum to live. The two cases are not the same. We can still win with the rest of the townies working together against scum, but if we start pruning town too much we are playing straight into scum's hands. First and foremost, find and kill scum. Always. That's it. Far, far below it is 'in extreme situations it might sometimes be acceptable to prune town from particularly dangerous and distracting elements'. Only the former actually directly and without fail brings about the town win.
Meeple:
Here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24988#msg24988) he defends his actions by telling us he thought what would seem less scummy and doing it. It's true that our job as town is to avoid getting other townies occupied with false positives on us and not letting scum exploit them... but our number one goal is still to HUNT SCUM. Seriously, does it need repeating? Do people still forget it as the play the game like a survivor and not like a townie? I suppose that if nothing else, this pushes Meeple a bit towards 'town that makes me headdesk' rather than 'scum flailing'. I suppose I'll have to watch and see.
Okay, back to your request for an explanation.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24895#msg24895
Also, Cor, you still haven't answered my question. You claimed I haven't made good on what I claimed I would. Care to, you know, point out specific examples? Simple taking a post, and saying "Meeple didn't do what he claimed later!" doesn't help. I looked at the specific post and saw something that I did actually follow up on. Maybe not in the way you wanted, but I did.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24662#msg24662
Anyway, gonna need to go over and analyze things. No clue where to start...well, ok, starting with those who interacted with any of the 3 role flips would be a start, but...yeah, this is going to take some time.
That's page 8. Meeple's next post is on page 9. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24756#msg24756) It covers Andrew; specifically, it says:
I've been looking at Andrew's posts after what Ashdla said, and well...I dunno.
I believe that to be a reference to the post Ashdla made just before Meeple's. As such, Meeple has moved on past the specific analysis he promised on page 8.
Said post also includes a defense from/attack on Ciato, thoughts on OK, and a blurb on Tom and Shale. I believe, however, as this quote from the same post shows, that those are Meeple's general feelings from the game and day 2 stuff.
I'll need to look over Shale's posts, to see if I actually find something off about him.
He clearly isn't going back to look over what was posted, but promising he would, just as on page 8.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24795#msg24795
This is another Meeple post on page 9. He references Bard and Rat, but the post is really about Ciato. It is supported with quotes so Meeple went back to look those over, at least.
No further Meeple posts occur until my own: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24829#msg24829
Now, I'll recap why anyone should actually care about all this. Do I think that people who don't comb day 1 posts are scum? Well, no, I never said that. Do I think that focusing on a given person while being general at most regarding others is scummy? Well, it certainly isn't helpful to town, but that's a whole new issue.
The issue I brought up was that some people find it easy to make promises of detailed analysis after a given reveal, and then don't deliver. This might allow them to coast and both gain cred as they are there on the scene and act all businesslike with their intent to investigate thoroughly, while not actually forcing them to own up to their own words and invest time and effort in said analysis. And that is something you are likely to see a scum do. Scum lurk, but they must also have the pretense of a presence. This is one of the ways to gain it.
I didn't exactly single out Meeple for this. Also, I find it curious that the two people who did this were Shale and Meeple, given Meeple's strong defense of Shale. It is important circumstantial evidence to keep in mind should one of them flip as scum.
-
Well, I've covered what I thought of your comments on JR. I don't really get what you mean by avoiding assisted suicide by lynch due to spite, but if you mean that I prefer not to vote people who prefer not to play and would like to see them replaced/modkilled, that would be a yes. On JR's specific case here, I would have to say that if he's giving up wholesale that the latter should happen. If he is NOT, then the case on him is still valid BUT he could always try to work his way through our concerns by providing analysis on other players and generally being useful.
Fair enough, that was what my far more flailing statements and more sardonic counter-notes were getting at. Thank you, you sum it up better than I do. Blah. English major needs remedial English classes so he talk more good.
I believed that the likeliest possibility was of Tom lying about something, if you'll go over my posts. It just didn't mean much with regards to his alignment, and he seemed scummy enough to push the lynch ahead.
Fair enough. That was mainly just a slight joke/bemusement on my part, I forgot to note this. Sincere apologies, though the resulting comment from you was good to read and so I don't regret saying it myself.
Also, yes, don't suffer scum to live, did I dissent from that by a miswording? Apologies if I did. Also wish more people held that sort of attitude day 1 since it tends to dissolve to "eh lynch the least townie" even if it's more a case of "well he's possibly town but the most scummy looking" without much actual push, from earlier games. I've been kinda eyeing the EvilTom lynch myself, but I'm frankly not sure how much it's worth it to really look it over currently just since it seems rather justified, considering the factors. Mmm. I should check one thing there, but it can wait until I'm not cross-eyed.
He's (Snow) suspicious but not overly so, looking at day 2, and have never seen suicidimoves as 100%= scum moves or even close so that didn't change much for me.
Mrf. Apologies for the disclearness or whatever the term is. Muddiness. There. Sleep now.
-
Woo, stealing internet from the first-class super-lounge adjacent to me in the train concourse! I am a sexy badass hacker.
Unfrotunately I haven't all that much to add at the moment. I will say that I've thought it over and I actually wasn't really down with lynching Snow... until his re-emergence and apparent interest in getting back into things. Ironically this makes it look even more like a scum ploy to me, and of course the question of "Would scum try to pull one over on us like that?" just leads to an endless WIFOM headache. Dammit. Tai's point that lynches in these situations have -- as far as I can remember -- about a 100% Townie Death return also gives me obvious pause, even though it shouldn't because maybe he's just tricking us bleeeeeeaaaaaargh.
So Ashdla's made a post and leveraged a vote on Meeple. Is it enough to make me stop suspecting her? I'm not sure, yet. First of all I do feel sympathetic to someone's difficulty adjusting to the way me play Mafia here, because we are strange and wordy and get hung up on the weirdest things sometimes. Obviously I don't know how much I want that to affect my judgment, though, because much of Ash's most recent post is just sort of blandly rehashing the game's recent noteworthy events. And even her vote for Meeple seems like more of a tame pressure vote than anything else.
Shit crap my train is boarding have to go.
-
Wasn't my point that it was about 100% townie death rate. Just because it was before doesn't mean it's the case now, just means it's not an effective blanket tell. Andrew was the one citing the 100% rate as his reason to be wary of it.
-
In all fairness, I can't blame anyone for getting the feeling of WIFOM - I admitted outright can't defend my moves regarding that, it was just about the worst thing I could do, were I town or were I scum (particularly because I've -seen- this kind of play get a person lynched) and lynching me for bad play is perfectly justifiable. But I'm just being perfectly honest, as I've been so far. I was frustrated, not thinking rationally and, if I'm going back into gear, this episode is going to follow me for the entirety of the game. It was kinda liberating, but.
Moving from this drama, what's kind of setting my alarms off in this current game, as a personal bug, is that this day has been a coordinate assault on the Meeple/Shale debacle. I really don't see -what- Meeple is getting from Shale that makes him so suspicious other than "not delivering promised content" (I'll grant, this is a worthy point, but then Meeple is in the same boat, no?). His general patterns are the same, his content providing is fairly typical of his play so far. And, come to think of it, Meeple never really clearly backed up what made him wary about Shale - Corwin did it instead, and is using it as ammo against mainly Meeple (?). This might be because Meeple is a generally easy target in Mafia, want it or not.
This quite frankly feels like a goading pattern, where it starts as a fairly clueless townie vs. townie dispute (in this case, a one-sided dispute) and a third person decides to add fuel to the fire. What's really difficult to swallow at this point is that the initial subject became a bit of... a prop, so it's now mainly Meeple vs. Corwin, and, considering how Meeple tends to be an easy painted target for more malicious gamers, I can't help but think there may be something wrong. I already noted how Corwin's usual defense/aggression game sets off my alarms, and the sheer convenience of the dispute here kinda makes my eyes grow a bit against him. As such:
##VOTE: Corwin
-
I don't get it. Now JR's defending Meeple and Shale? On the grounds of the almighty gut, which somehow blames me in a convoluted manner I haven't really understood? The entire second paragraph is unclear to me. Is JR saying Meeple and Shale are accusing each other? And that I'm somehow fanning it?
I'm not really sure how I'm supposed to be goading Shale. I have legitimate questions for him and I'm not the only one. I'm asking those, in the hopes that he could answer them to my satisfaction. While I have repeated my arguments on Meeple and Shale's cases, that was due to a request for clarification, mostly from Meeple and Shale themselves. I don't feel I'm particularly pushing for their lynch. That is because...
...I am pushing for yours. And have ever since I saw your day 2 posts. That hasn't changed. You acted like you were giving up, garnered enough sympathy to get a vote removed off you, and then moved on to, yes, OMGUS me because it doesn't look like much of anything else. I think I'm pretty comfortable with where my vote is, yeah.
-
Current votecount:
AndrewRogue (1): Meeple
Ashdla (1): Strago
Bardiche (0): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (0): Anonymous, Bardiche
Jo'ou Ranbu (3): Excal, Corwin, Laggy, AndrewRogue
Meeple (3): Elfboy, Ashdla, Taishyr
Shale (0): Taishyr
Strago (1): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu
Taishyr (0): Meeple
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
Snow: Please unvote before voting for someone else. >.>
EDIT: Error fixed. Thanks, Meeple.
-
Before I say anything, I feel it is my duty as a player of this game to say this:
NOTE TO THE MOD: The Vote Count is done awkwardly. You have me listed twice, with 2 separate sets of votes. The people voting are correct, mind, but if you can, please just merge them into one, so its not misleading regarding where votes are.
Ok, that aside...
Andrew's still not contributing in his posts, I feel. You claim you are trying to do what you can, but...I don't see you really doing all that much to help in the discussion, be it make an actual case on someone else, weigh in on the discussion, etc. This is part of why my vote is on you, and one of the reasons its staying. As I said, I also felt your vote on Snow, which you only removed after I brought it up, didn't say really anything. Others voting Snow have voiced their opinions, brought up cases (do I agree with them? Not entirely, but they're there), admittedly, Excal did it for reasons before Snow's actions, but still, he brought forth a case nonetheless.
You're still talking about game theory more than anything else, I feel. Again, you can blame RL issues as a reason to not post, but its not an excuse to post stuff with minimal content.
To Bard: Ok, thanks for clarifying why my defense on Shale seemed weird. It...yeah, I did go overboard, but as I said, I was a bit paranoid that if I wasn't so specific, something would seem off...looks like the complete opposite happened.
...perhaps from now on, I should work on the OPPOSITE of what I think is a good idea, since doing what I think is good tends to backfire horribly <.<;
(obviously, I'm not being serious there.)
To Tai:
First off, the Eviltom thing was cause everyone found his actions weird. People were wondering if he was a Jester, Zombie, etc. and trying to get himself lynched. I was merely tossing another idea on the table that Eviltom might be a Bomb, and trying to NOT get lynched for the sake of everyone (or alternatively, a scum bomb, but all this speculation is meaningless now that we know what Tom is.) I ended it with a mechanics question cause I really don't know how Bombs usually work. In any event, I wasn't the only one who found Tom's claim of "do not lynch me, it is useless!" weird, and I was trying to find sense in it, and toss something that wasn't considered. That's all.
Rat...was me thinking out loud. To clarify, Rat said he couldn't vote. This naturally is weird since a voteless player is...weird, without a power role. So I was trying to work some possibilities out. ADMITTEDLY, I didn't get anywhere, just went in a circle, and the analysis kind of ended up being fruitless.
Also, Tai, just cause this is SUICIDE SQUAD doesn't mean you have to be EMO about it! <_< >_>
To Cor:
I took to it cause, well, it felt like you were saying I did something that I didn't.
Also, I'm not saying "don't hunt scum!" I'm trying to say "Don't jump the gun, and focus on minor details!" That's what people were doing. Shale's one line...felt like a minor point, and he was getting actual flack (and more or less a vote based entirely on that.) Scum love to attack minor details like that, and watch Town get caught up in it. I was trying to avoid it. My issue wasn't that I felt Shale was town, but rather, his actions were being overemphasized.
Anyway, thanks for the clarification in any event.
To Snow:
First off, while I understand your position, outbursts like that never look good. If you're really feeling frustrated, its best to not say something like that all, and keep it to yourself (and possibly take it out on inanimate objects near bye! <.<; )
Something does stand out to me...unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean by this line:
And, come to think of it, Meeple never really clearly backed up what made him wary about Shale - Corwin did it instead, and is using it as ammo against mainly Meeple (?)
All I said was, I believe, that Shale "was not necessarily a town" after my defense. I never said I was specifically suspicious. I am not really getting much of a read on him. He hasn't done anything to make him look particularly good...but at the same time, hasn't raised any red flags. My defense, as I keep repeating and I know I sound like a broken record, was cause I felt the cases held on him weren't holding much water and wanted to weigh in on it.
Thinking Cases made on someone = bad =/= you think this person is a townie. Similarly, saying you aren't trying to paint someone as a townie does not necessarily mean you are suspicious. Shale's in a pretty grey area overall.
Unfortunately, its hard to really get anywhere when there's a lot of people who are absent this weekend (Damned its timing!) I'd like to hear from some of them.
-
Alrighty, today it looks like I'm only going to get in a single post during the day and possibly one more before I crash, so I'm going to try to make it count.
We're a couple days into the Day and I think it's a good time to start getting serious thoughts together on where the real cases are going at the moment because frankly trying to sift through the eight hudred walls of text that have sprung up in the Day are killing me. So far it seems there are only 2 real cases with any more backing than a single vote: the one on Snow and the one on Meeple. Each with 3 votes. What I would like to see is those with outlying votes (ie: not Meeple or Snow) make your cases for consideration or else consider consolidating your votes for a lynch after the Weekend of Dead Time ends. I'm open to reviewing others' logic, but I'd like to see some cases laid out for such.
The case on Meeple: I'd like to comment on a line from his last post that stood out to me: 'Scum love to attack minor details like that, and watch Town get caught up in it.' And I won't fault the logic, it's true scum will do that. HOWever, so will town because frankly it's the little screwups and 'off' things that let us catch scum. If you define something as a minor matter and then assume anyone attacking it is likely scum pushing their agenda then you ignore the fact that town looks for those things, too, well you've either got blinders on or you're trying to make a case out of what is esentially WIFOM. I find that this line of thinking worries me more than the case on Snow atm. Thus, ##Vote Meeple. His defense of Shale, the inherant difficulty in reading concise arguments in his walls of text tus making it all look like rambling and the line quoted above all add up for me to feel that of all the cases, this one rings closest to me for a possible scum.
Speaking of the case on Snow: I wasn't really feeling much about the case on Snow until the emo post. His retraction brings my hackles down a notch, though, as I do understand the frustration that builds with this game. I do consider him a contender for lynch, though, because by his own admission he was flailing around after not being able to defend himself. Laggy's post on the necessity of being able to defend yourself was right on the money. If we give a free pass to people who are backed into a corner because they're stressed and don't see a way out, we only invite the use of this tactic for scum to use in future games.
Also, I am looking forward to Tom's post for the Day. I think there are a lot of things being brought up that I would like to see what he has to say on the matters.
-
Blargleargleargleargle...
I don't know whether to be more upset by the fact that there's so many posts to wade through, or that with all the time I've been away there's been so few. Head hurts, somewhat groggy, and trying to get thoughts together, but I will get something substantive for you guys before I go to sleep tonight.
One thing I can comment on right now though is my agreement with QR. We need to start focussing on lynching soon. The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak. That said, QR, I'm thinking Andy may be a worthwhile addition to the list of folks to consider. I'll give more concrete reasoning why in my next post.
-
Mod: Snow is listed as having voted for Strago, when his current vote is on Corwin.
*kicks himself repeatedly until he posts*
Oh, there we go.
So, very brief review of stuff since my last post (I've been reading, but haven't put together the time to sit down and contribute).
Meeple stuff:
Yeah, the Shale defence is a bit odd, but not unreasonable. It was also a pretty quick reversal, but I have no idea what that means either. I'm having a pretty hard time pinning Meeple down now, but he definitely still bothers me.
Snow stuff:
The breakdown nonsense had me considering a votechange pretty strongly. For all that there's a decent chance he did it as town, I just... can not give him a pass over it. It's frustrating, as intuitively I don't think he's scum, and lynching town is the worst thing we can do. But that kind of defence can't be accepted. Yeah, I'm well aware others have said this, but it's worth restating. Fortunately, Snow seems to have recovered a bit. Not that this makes me unsuspicious of him, but it means I won't be calling for him to quit the game at least.
One thing I would like to see from Snow is an explanation for the Corwin vote (well it's not a vote yet but it's the thought that counts). He comes up with a conspiracy theory for Meeple/Shale being Corwin's creation. I go back and read his post and I... do not see it. Didn't notice it at the time, don't get it now. Definitely would like to see this elaborated on.
While on the subject of outlier votes... Strago->Ash is the only other one still around? Well, Strago admits at the time the vote is pretty vague. I don't especially agree with him anyway, as I've generally found Ash to be communicating thoughts clearly enough, and has taken sides. Regardless, yeah, this isn't really worth considering.
Snow/Meeple/Andrew debate go, unless someone has any brilliant insight soon. Andrew's definitely the #3 choice to me at the moment, but I'll admit one thing I have -not- done since my last post is take a look at his posts, or even go over his new ones closely. So yeah, waiting on Excal.
Vote, for now at least, stays on Meeple. I'm not wholly comfortable with lynching him, nor Snow, but I feel a jump to someone else this late in the day would be to grasp at straws. I've seen nothing to make anyone else look notably scummy since my big post, today.
-
Oops, disregard the comment to the mod. As you can see later in my post I caught the reason why, but forget to remove the disclaimer. My bad!
-
Alright, I tried to give it a go and look this stuff over. But... I got nothing right now. My head is too messed up and I need sleep, so I'm gonna sleep. Tomorrow, first thing, you guys will have my thoughts.
-
So, any chance of an actual explication on why I'm apparently candidate #3? I've got "has been helping (but apparently in such a way that looks SCUMMY)" and... that's about it really. Because if that's it, we've got other candidates (Ashdla and Bardiche) that you all should be examining with me.
Admittedly, I have mainly been working with game theory and larger problems, but I will freely admit. I'm having issues with analysis this game. Thick games like this, abounding with ridiculous amounts of posting and a number of fairly long posts, I'm finding it much easier to work with game theory until something jumps out at me. For example, Meeple lying through his teeth.
Meeple: Uh. I... did have a case for voting on Snow at the time. He mad an awkward move on Bardiche and professed a peculiar stance on roleclaiming that seemed scummy. Perhaps I wasn't explicit enough in my explanations, but encouraging Bardiche to keep his role a secret, which would likely result in a panic lynch down the line, is not behavior that resounded in a townie manner, you know? So, yeah. I DID explain what my issues with the "Bardiche thing" was. Perhaps I was just not explicit enough, but here it is in plain terms in case you couldn't fathom it.
Furthermore, me removing my vote from him had absolutely NOTHING to do with you, unlike what you imply. Go back and read my post. Seriously. I unvoted Snow because, as it stands at this point, historically, in Mafia, lynches like this have always caught town. Anyone who has gone the self pity route has gotten lynched pretty quick. There is, in this one case, practically zero reason for scum to go this route. As it stands, I'm tired of being forced to lynch town because of this, and was inclined to, this one time, let it slide. THAT'S why I unvoted Snow.
Beyond that, you keep bringing up the idea that I'm using RL as an excuse for my posting content. That's not really a fair assessment of my action. The most I've done is point out the rreasoning behind my day one post pattern, and then clarify to Laggy (who had mistakenly taken it to mean that I wasn't going to be around) that it meant something completely different. In fact, I've never attempted to correlate the actual content of my posts with real life, just the frequency. Which leads me to feel that you are striving to exaggerate you case on me. Which, in my experience, means approximately one thing.
##Vote: Meeple
In case its not clear. First and foremost, I feel that you are exaggerating and purposefully misreading my posts to interpret them in a decidedly unfavorable manner, especially in regards to my votes and unvotes. Further, you continue to rehash something that I'm not actually doing (which is to say, blaming RL for my content, when I simply provided for my day one and correct Laggy regarding what I was saying). Combine this with my earlier misgivings about you and the day one rolefishing, and I've seen enough to finally feel justified in really going after you.
Beyond Meeple at this point... today was a pretty sad day for posting it seems. Aside from the general plea to see more posting from everyone, I also need to, once more, call attention to Ashdla. The last post was pretty good, but material and posts do need to keep coming.
Excal needs the usual chide that we all need for stating: "I'll do it later!" It just leads to bad things in Mafia. Don't do it! <3
NEB, it is kinda weird to point me out as your number three suspect... but then provide no reasoning, openly state you haven't gone back over anything I've done and then state that you're waiting on someone else to do it for you. Relying on the analysis of other people is BAD because it can (and, in the hands of scum, often is) lead you right into traps. Scum will attempt to make things look bad. Rely on your own readings for actual analysis, and then supplement it with what you see from others!
-
So its clear, that first paragraph should also contain a reference to claims about my lower than average content, as well.
-
Things are looking grim and end-of-day-ish, so it's time for zombie wisdom!
I'm not seeing 'the Meeple' case. I am seeing the usual general rubbish, flung on Meeple as we've seen many times before, obfuscating real issues. This line of argument against Meeple contains no real substance and is not likely to catch scum. Back and forth, it looks like a massive towny argument, infighting etc. From an objective standpoint, this Meeple Train sucks, stop it. Instead, look at those who have stayed quiet.
Shale, followed by Strago, have been lurking hardcore. Not just today, but yesterday as well. Not just in post-count, but in post content, quality and controversy. Very much following the current vibes. Lynching Shale (or in the alternative Strago) would not be a bad idea. The chances of them being scum are highest right now. A quicklynch right now on one of these two lurkers would be far more effective than the current course of action against Meeps.
QuietRain providing the courses of lynch both on day 1, and today (6 posts ago) would normally be ok, but I don't like the Meeple vs Snow argument she's set up. It's just like the setup on day 1. It seems like an effective way to force (through suggstion) everyone to vote one way or another, and when the options are 'poor' and 'worse' (as they were on day 1), it doesn't look good. Potential clever scum action. If you find her sus then lynch, but at the very least keep an eye on her suggestions. If scum aren't lurking (as mentioned above), then this is the kind of ploy they might be working.
!!
There's no point replying to me obviously, since I can't post again till tomorrow. But you can follow my suggestions! Or at least debate them.
I'm a confirmed town. I suggest you take a step back as I have done and re-examine your current vote. There's a lot of people voting for Meeps right now, for very little reason. Don't be afraid to change your opinion on Meeple/remove your vote; it will not look scummy, because I'm confirmed town and I'm suggesting it!
Kill a lurker. At least have some substance behind your vote.
*Obviously I have no supercop powers etc. but you all know I'm town, and I have nothing to lose and everything to gain. And I have an objetive standpoint. Obviously I could be wrong, Meeple might turn out to be scum, but such is the way of zombie wisdom!
btw Excal: The cookies were poisoned.
PS. I don't know Dark Holy Elf, Ash, or JuonRanbo/whatever very well, having never played with them before. So I'm unable to get anything special from them. Watch them carefully!
Good luck! I'll be back tomorrow~
-
Everything Ciato did, Tai is still accountable for. Don't forget that, anyone.
Being an aggro whore is the superior playstyle, which should neatly sum up my opinion on most of Tai's posts.
<->
Jo'ou... man, I have issues with the content of his *rants*; like this - I'm going down in flames and I'm going to like it.
This translates, to me, to 'fuck y'all!' and is a way scummier slight than just 'I can't take it anymore! It's bad but you're going to kill me, so whatever, peace out.'
Other stuff he's said... blah. "I was hoping to confuse the aggro players"- why why why why why would you want to do this?! You want the aggro players knowing what the heck they are doing!
He also says he's not suicidal anymore, but then goes 'the point is moot, may as well go lie', which is it, man. Saying the Meeple thing is 'all about the Cor vs. Meeple' seems incredible weird to me, given that a) Cor is voting for Jo'ou, not Meeple, b) Meeple has plenty of detractors at this point.
It's also great if Tai doesn't encourage him. Sure, Tai writes the right things ("we can always kill him later/I wish he hadn't done this") but they're basically offhand comments, buried beneath an excuse to not participate- when this excuse happens to read as 'when he knows people who are playing optimally will savage him'.
It also detracts from the original case against him- which is the important part of 'why lynch him?' here. Just look how Andrew has already unvoted him without referrence to it! If you're going to rethink your argument, rethink all of it.
<->
Still gunning for a Jo'Ou lynch today. The case on Meeple is also fairly strong; I'm not seeing *his* case on Andrew (questioning Bardiche for what he did was perfectly reasonable; and as for Snow, I wouldn't call the vagaries of claiming, necessity to claim, and finding particular claims suspicous 'mechanics'. It may be true that he was a little short, but that did not seem like enough to me.)
Furthermore, if you were going to use 'unhelpful and uninsighful and parroting' as a basis, there's always... SHALE, who, as Dread Thomas pointed out, has done fuckall for most of the game. His last post was a while ago and did not bring out any case on anyone; whatever suspicion he had seemed light at best. He didn't do much on day one either, except parrot and go through obvious stuff. Picking Andy over Shale here is a weird, weird choice.
<->
On DT's post in general- I don't really agree that Strago has been terribly lurky, and he's already given a decent excuse. Shale is something else, as I just went through. I feel that Day 1 and Day 2 are, in fact, different things (only ONE of these days had three people behaving like morons in it), and that you can't very well say 'what QR is doing is usually good, except this time, when it's bad.''
-
So, any chance of an actual explication on why I'm apparently candidate #3? I've got "has been helping (but apparently in such a way that looks SCUMMY)" and... that's about it really. Because if that's it, we've got other candidates (Ashdla and Bardiche) that you all should be examining with me.
This is a bit too ambiguous to me. Are you saying you want to cast a FoS over Ashdla and me, or are you saying that we've acted in a way similar to you?
Reading EvilTom's post, he reveals an interesting theory. Trying to narrow the lynch choices on poor choices would seem like an excellent scum tactic to take away attention from scum itself. The act in itself isn't enough to make me want to lynch someone (not to mention that whether or not the options are poor is up for debate), but the fact we've kind of reached a near-impasse (there's still some stuff going on, but nothing really defined anymore) makes it a little bit excusable.
We're at least 100% sure that EvilTom is a town player, and there's a very likely possibility he's doing his best to win with the town. Clearly, him being dead doesn't mean he's 100% right, but at least we know he says what he does in the best interest of town.
That said, I don't yet know where I want to put my "vote", given that Shale's defense is rather acceptable, and that we were reaching for straws. (I've stressed this continuously) Given this, it suddenly doesn't look so odd there might be a QuietRain + Corwin combination or something, the two who've most been attributing to narrowing down who we want to lynch. Is this the ploy they are doing? IDK. I can't read thoughts.
Reviewing QuietRain's posts... Her speculations about my role makes it feel as paranoia inciting, stressing not once, but twice in consecutive posts that she fears I have a third party role, while not further pursuing the case in all actuality with reviews of my behaviour or what have you.
Another thing that strikes me is that she says it's good we lost Deltaflyer in the night.
Delta's death: I'm not really sure much can be gotten out of that. Whether it was a scum hit, a vig hit or a third party kill, it basically boils down to taking out someone who was a distraction at best and a downright impediment to town at worst.
Sorry, it just keeps going to me that someone with such a darn useful role is considered to be good to be lost, especially because
1) We know Day 1 cases are downright annoying and difficult to make.
2) It was a newcomer who wasn't even used to the game: He could've well recovered on Day 2.
Stating downright that it's good we lost a townie is something that makes me a bit wary. Even if they aren't the most helpful members (Look at QuietRain excusing Jo'ou in the latest post, although Jo'ou is considerably much an impediment to us as well with the entire "manic" gig) I think it's still something to be wary of when someone says it's "good" we lost townie.
Generally, after reviewing QuietRain's behaviour due to EvilTom's theory, I've become very wary of this individual.
Should we lynch QuietRain for this? It feels like an entire turn-around, to me, to suddenly abandon our standing cases to pick up an entirely new one. However, I do think QuietRain is suspicious, but the case on her is too minimal to actually support a lynch.
------
As far as between Jo'ou (that's Snow, right?) or Meeple goes... I don't feel strongly for either of the two anymore. If we must choose between the two, I'd go for Jo'ou, who seems to have recovered since then and seems to be pretty glad with the accomplishment the outburst acquired. Not to mention the case she made on me was pretty shoddy, and she was attacked with reason. The only thing that makes me feel a little less wary is that it's human to make mistakes, and possible that Jo'ou was hammering too hard on my case due to some sort of weird mood affection.
However, although Jo'ou seems the better of the choices, I'll make it clear that I will not vote for her, even if I was a regular voter whose power didn't increase with every vote.
Anti-Shale case... Yeah, he's been pretty lurkish. Meeple took over his defense which I feel he should have done himself. I feel he should still do it.
##FoS: Shale
-----
For the record, my FoS record is:
Meeple
Shale
-
Wow, talk about contradicting self.
... Wow, I just have no good excuse for it, it looks pretty bad. Shale's defense was mostly Meeple's, which I meant by "is pretty good" (honestly Meeple made a good case to me), and my FoS can be interpreted as a way of saying, "Shale, take over your own defense and excuse yourself".
Yeah, can't deny that post of mine looks pretty bad.
-
This one's going to be relatively brief, I think.
First, to Tom: Yeah, you're a confirmed townie, dude, but that doesn't mean you're always right about everything. The tone of your post seems to be trying to get people to believe the latter, which is both arrogant and frankly quite bothersome since you seem to be attempting to leverage it in order to get me lynched for reasons that I don't quite grok. Have I really been that much of an invisible parrot since Day 2 started? I'm one of the people who's trying to look past Meeplegate at other potential scum candidates, man. Now, nobody seems to agree with me on Ash -- except, I think, Andrew? -- but that's another kettle of fish.
I will say, however, that lynching Shale at this point really might not be a bad idea, because he's definitely defined coasting. This weekend is obviously a mess, but Shale's still been Lurky McLurkerson and it's hard to forgive that.
Argh, okay, even shorter than I thought. We really do need to take action on a lynch before this Day smothers us all in stultifying frustration, is what I think. As such,
##UNVOTE: Ashdla
Except now the problem is that I don't know who to vote for. Even though I'm constricted today by my schedule and don't know when my next post will be, I also don't want to rush into lynching someone I'm unsure of. Argh. On the one hand Shale looks like a very reasonable choice, and on the other I'll be damned if I don't want some kind of flip to help me make at least a little sense of this Meeple-centric situation. But in the interest of hunting scum... I'll go with the overt lurker.
##VOTE: Shale
A final question: is there anyone else who is somewhat swayed by Snow's vote for Corwin and Bardiche's parallel thoughts about him. Something in my gut says there's something there, but I'm finding it very difficult to substantiate.
-
Current votecount:
AndrewRogue (1): Meeple
Ashdla (0): Strago
Bardiche (0): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (0): Anonymous, Bardiche
Jo'ou Ranbu (3): Excal, Corwin, Laggy, AndrewRogue
Meeple (4): Elfboy, Ashdla, Taishyr, AndrewRogue
Shale (1): Taishyr, Strago
Strago (1): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu
Taishyr (0): Meeple
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
-
NEB, it is kinda weird to point me out as your number three suspect... but then provide no reasoning, openly state you haven't gone back over anything I've done and then state that you're waiting on someone else to do it for you.
I think you misunderstood me. (Though reading my own post, I can see why.) When I said you were #3, I meant #3 out of the three people getting consideration right now... i.e. the least scummy. (I included you as one of the three because you essentially have multiple votes, following Excal's declaration he intends to vote for you.) As I said, I don't really have much of an opinion on you yet! And as for Excal's case on you I was waiting for, that was as much for my opinion on Excal as my opinion on you. Likely more. I readilly admit I need to go back and look at your posts. So I'll do that sometime today.
A final question: is there anyone else who is somewhat swayed by Snow's vote for Corwin and Bardiche's parallel thoughts about him. Something in my gut says there's something there, but I'm finding it very difficult to substantiate.
Corwin, I'll concede, frustrates me vaguely for his style, but Snow's vote on him... well, I've already called for clarification, which should say what I think of it in isolation. Bard accuses Corwin and QR of "narrowing down suspects = scummy!" which... there's a case for, but it's such WIFOM as always. Also ignores that several others have called this a good thing, too (Excal, you yourself).
Depending on how today shakes down I'd be willing to give Corwin a good, hard look. For now, I think attempts to bring him into the list of suspects today feels... distracting. Of course, it doesn't help that Snow and Bard are two of the higher people on my scum-o-meter at the moment. (Or possibly a TP-o-meter, but I digress.)
Excal needs the usual chide that we all need for stating: "I'll do it later!" It just leads to bad things in Mafia. Don't do it! <3
I can't speak for everyone else, but if I didn't feel able to post without finishing with a "I'll do it later!" I'd hardly ever post at all! It's pretty much part of the game, but what we have to do is keep an eye out for such posts and pressure people into delivering what they promised.
I have a couple people to review myself, then I'll try and make sense of this day.
-
Andrew, I don't mind you bringing up more people to look over. After all, it is possible for some people to slip under my radar. However, with your comment about people promising to do something and then not doing it, and chiding me over that, you're missing the core of the reason why that's bad. It's bad because you say you'll look, and then it's dropped, hoping no one will remember that you never actually followed through on it as events sweep them away in a different direction. However, I feel that if you actually cannot follow up at a certain point, then it is perfectly acceptable to post and say why not. That way, you aren't banking on people forgetting you never did it while still getting the credit for having done it. You are, officially and on the record, giving up credit for doing it, but making sure that there will be no misconceptions as to whether or not you have, in fact, looked at the people in question.
-
Yeah, gotta say I agree with Excal on that one. In fact, that much should be clear from my own posts on the subject, but here it is again.
On the subject of... me. Guys, seriously, what is this crap? "Corwin is being himself and I am SUSPICIOUS." I'm sorry, what would you have me do, lurk or be out of character? This is to JR, mostly, but it seems he's not the only one who cites stuff like gut feelings about some offness. Mafia doesn't actually work that way; you use gut, sure, but to decide between several lynch candidates or to follow up on a hunch (by studying a given person's posts or hounding them with questions). Seriously, how do you expect me to defend myself from this? With pepto?
DHE, specifically. I don't believe I was narrowing down our field of lynch candidates. In fact, I did not even speak out for (or against) it as yet. It is troubling to see you group me with QR who is doing this. Before you go give people long, hard looks, what's up with that, man?
On JR. I think he looks the scummiest, his play is sloppy, and yet he went into self-destruct and recovered so swiftly and completely I don't believe it holds any water.
On some others. Andrew. He has been on the lurkerish side, the way I consider Strago. And Shale has been even less prominent, and while having things that actually bother me about him. So why am I not doing my traditional lurker hunt? Yes, going after lurkers is a way to win the game, and we should do that. HOWEVER, 4th of July weekend and all that. I would feel better if we delayed to day 3 with that, to gain a more accurate picture of actual lurkers. Also, JR. Did I mention I think he's been acting incredibly scummy and we should lynch him?
On Excal, Laggy and QR. Neutral read. Decent enough participation. Tom's words on QR are troubling, but other than watching there's not much to do here. Bardiche's participation is equally satisfying, and he is making every effort to be supportive and helpful. I don't think it's too much, either, and a way of buttering us up.
On Ashdla. I don't know. Didn't have a good opinion originally, and... nothing actually changed there. Ditto with Meeple, except my bad opinion of him started later, and recently moved up slightly, as documented.
That leaves Tai and Rat, who... really need to participate more. Rat has a decent presence, sure, but his claimed lack of a vote means he should make up for it with content to be of use and help us, y'know, win.
-
Bard accuses Corwin and QR of "narrowing down suspects = scummy!" which... there's a case for, but it's such WIFOM as always. Also ignores that several others have called this a good thing, too (Excal, you yourself).
Interesting. Okay, first of all... I think I can safely say I haven't directly said, "Hey, they are scummy for doing this", but clearly cited EvilTom's post as an inspiration to keep this possibility in mind. Like I said, I don't know if such a ploy is in effect, and I don't think we should lynch either of the two based on such a theory alone.
Thinking something is good and then later on seeing the merits of the strategy being used in favor of scum seems like human oversight to me. I don't think re-evaluating one's original opinion and shifting from it after a guaranteed town presents a theory isn't all that scummish.
Try to keep the things I say in proper context, what I actually say, and not what you can twist them into.
Though it could be misreading on your part, be wary of stating what people say, because it doesn't really make me feel better about you.
-
Furthermore, if you were going to use 'unhelpful and uninsighful and parroting' as a basis, there's always... SHALE, who, as Dread Thomas pointed out, has done fuckall for most of the game. His last post was a while ago and did not bring out any case on anyone; whatever suspicion he had seemed light at best. He didn't do much on day one either, except parrot and go through obvious stuff. Picking Andy over Shale here is a weird, weird choice.
Actually, Shale is one of the people I wanted to speak up. The fact that I KNOW he's been around to some extent (I've seen him in chat, for example) has been making me wary. I also noticed that since my defense on him...he hasn't said anything. He hasn't even commented on it. You'd think he'd at least respond to a defense made for him in some manner.
Elfboy was another person in Shale's boat...in fact, felt he was worse to some extent, cause he was MORE active in chat, thus by extension, more available to post. He had at least made a more recent post than Shale before a decently large inactivity phase, so he wasn't gone for quite as long. Granted, he started posting again, so that's good.
Anyway, regarding Andrew...
My issue with Andrew was that I genuinely felt he's not being helpful. His reasons for jumping on Snow were...actually the same as 2 other people, and not too different from why Rat FoS'd him.
Also...Andrew posted once soon after Snow's comment, and even commented on it (in a neutral manner). He didn't vote there. He came in and votes again later, when nothing new regarding Snow had transpired. Suppose this could be seen looking too into it, but also felt that if he genuinely felt that way, he'd have made his vote first. The fact that it came after Laggy and Cor, and is very similar reasoning, and much later, felt a bit off.
Also, its not until Andrew's LAST POST that he finally responded to me, and tried to justify himself. Two posts ago, he takes his vote off Snow (in improper format! So officially, one post ago <.<; ), and in both, all he says is "Snow's defense doesn't work" and "I didn't come back to the 5 people for this reason!"
Like Excal said, if you looked at the 5 people you singled out, and came back with nothing, it would have been nice to actually have made some indicator of some sorts. Instead, feels like you just dropped the issue, and hoped no one would notice. I know Cor was going after some people for not doing what they promised, to some extent anyway, and well, he hasn't mentioned you, which strikes me as odd, cause you fall in nicely with that. Possible Cor/Andrew linkage? Perhaps, but unless one of them flips, there's no way of knowing, so not going to look at stuff like that yet.
It wasn't til his last post that I actually felt real content. The fact that he was participating but not saying a whole lot (like I'm one to talk ._.) felt worse than not appearing at all. The latter can be RL issues, which I'll grant, while fair, can only be used so much (the amount Andrew didn't post for it? I'll let slide. Shale at this point though, its a lot less forgivable.) The latter, though...I believe Smoke Screening is the term? Andrew's been posting, not saying a lot. Yes, I'm bringing the RL thing up again, but I talk about why I bring it up later.
He also made that point earlier of how "just cause Scum know scum doesn't mean they aren't prone to not making mistakes!" comment. That struck me as an odd thing to say; scum making mistakes is the one of the main way people can catch them, outside of Power Roles or dumb luck.
Also, where did I say that my vote on you and the removal were connected? I didn't. I was merely reminding the order of events, so people don't come out and say "he removed his vote though!" Granted...the wording wasn't the greatest, so I can't fault you for thinking that.
And your reason for removing the vote felt weird too. you say Snow's defense doesn't work, and...then you go "I'll give him the benefit of the doubt!" I dunno, just kind of felt weird.
He says I'm lying out of my teeth...um, what? No, I'm not. That's just an accusation and a bit of an over aggressive attack. People said the same thing in Clue Mafia due to a mis-interpretation, two people (both towns) WOULDN'T GIVE UP ABOUT THAT with me...and it cost them the game cause they were blinded on this. I'm not lying at all. Your reasons for Snow's vote weren't very firm to me; again, the main thing is it felt very much training. You say you brought forth reasons...reasons that were more or less the same as that Cor had, who voted long before you did, and your post before Cor indicated you saw what he did.
Also, here's a case where you bold faced lie in your last post:
Beyond that, you keep bringing up the idea that I'm using RL as an excuse for my posting content.
I didn't say that. What I said was THIS:
You're still talking about game theory more than anything else, I feel. Again, you can blame RL issues as a reason to not post, but its not an excuse to post stuff with minimal content.
Read what it says. The actual meaning is that while you can, and others have, used RL excuses to say "I can't post much", that's fair. However, it was to note that people who post and with little content have no excuse.
I mention the RL thing once earlier, and say you use it to explain lack of presence (which I noted many people did as well, I can't fault you for that, nor do I there), but when you are present, you still aren't doing a lot. THIS is what I meant. You're completely mincing words. You're rehashing the fact that I rehashed something, AND are twisting the words to say something that I didn't say.
So this is why I went after Andrew, and his recent post makes me look more weary at him. He actually is posting, but saying little. This is worse than barely posting at all. For the record, given how long he's been gone, I'd not be opposed to changing my vote to Shale somewhere along the way, but for now, it stays on Andrew, who I feel is worse.
Next off, regarding why I didn't look at Ashe?
She didn't stand out to me as much at the time, and she did post something not long after my vote for you that was filled with content. You...didn't.
I'll admit, she's not quite in the clearing, but she hasn't done some of the other stuff you did like, as I've noted many times, bring up a case, and then nearly drop it almost as though you had completely forgotten its existence, for example (as Excal is quick to point out.)
The last thing I have to say, and I apologize for the post size...
And his vote on me feels OMGUS! Lets look at it!
In case its not clear. First and foremost, I feel that you are exaggerating and purposefully misreading my posts to interpret them in a decidedly unfavorable manner, especially in regards to my votes and unvotes. Further, you continue to rehash something that I'm not actually doing (which is to say, blaming RL for my content, when I simply provided for my day one and correct Laggy regarding what I was saying).
This statement alone, he's talking nothing about my actions against him. Nowhere does he give another reason. That followed by...
Combine this with my earlier misgivings about you and the day one rolefishing, and I've seen enough to finally feel justified in really going after you.
Wait...when did you have misgivings about my role fishing? You don't mention this once in the entire topic (at least, I didn't see it). Feels like you needed another reason to help secure your vote as something not just OMGUS, and you pull that out. It just happens to be very similar to the reason Tai voted against me, so really feels like a forced reason that you didn't actually have until you conveniently needed it.
-
And today is the last day of light posting from me. Gate's feeling better which means I get to dive nose first into housework that has accumulated. So, things to chat about:
Tom's comments on me. Well, I certainly won't deny that I'm the one that said both days that we need to start focusing in on a lynch. I would also like to point out that we're 4 days into Day 2 so trying to get where we're going seems like a good idea to me. This weekend had pretty much crawled to a slow almost stop at that point. Without definitive day ends, I think trying to get a serious feel for actual cases makes sense. I saw the arguments for Snow and Meeple which is why I laid my thoughts out on them, but I also asked for other cases because frankly trying to find them mixed into Walls of Words was somewhat hard. I'm glad to see a few more cases laid out for review since then. We need to get cases out at this point and start seriously debating. We only lynch by majority so letting things trail off helps scum and scum alone by leading to confusion and apathy. Should I stay in the background and hope someone else does it so I don't seem pushy? Maybe. But I'm not the fading flower type. I can take a little heat if it means kick starting the posts and getting some serious discussion going again.
The case on Andrew: I don't really see it, I'll be honest. Going back and re-reading his posts, Andy's been providing content and making good comments, not just 'me too's. His case on Meeple is solid and just re-inforces my own confidence on my vote on him from earlier.
Tom's comments on being a confirmed townie. I couldn't have said it better than Strago did. Confirmed town does not mean you are right. Good gravy there are how many tonwies playing right now and we're all over the board for the most part. But, yes, unlike the others, I do look to your words as actually being what you believe and not something you're trying to mislead us all with. THAT is what confirmed townie grants you: everyone's belief that what you say is what you really think and not a scum/third party ploy. But that's all it gives you.
Bardiche's thoughts that my speculating that his role might be a third party one was 'paranoia inducing'. Seriously? Even assuming for a moment that you are a townie, can you not see how that ability could be a third party role? And I have never pushed a case against you. I have mentioned the possibility of your role being third party a couple of times, yes. I hope that should I be lynched or NKed in future Days that looking back over my posts will be helpful to town so I make comments as they come to mind on issues that stick out and seem like they're possible. To date, you've been providing decent content and have stated that you are willing to not go hog wild with your vote weight as per the popular consensus of town being that it would make us uncomfortable. Those are all actions that are a lot closer to townie/helpful third party than it is to scum. I would really like to see where I'm trying to incite paranoia about you.
As for why I thought it was good to lose Delta despite his role? Were you gone Day 1? Did you miss the purely apathetic and town-harmful posts? Someone like that did NOTHING to help us. I'm not going to retract being glad he's gone. Am I sad he was a townie? Hell yeah. But whether scum/TP/townie, he was about as useless as could be. I've seen these games implode from the inside out by lesser drama queens than he. The last thing I want to see is it happen again. I am not glad the ROLE is gone. I am not glad a TOWNIE is gone. I am glad HE is gone. Let's just be clear here. It's venting and I may get some flack for it, but frankly, I don't mind people taking issue with what I say (that's part of the game), I take issue with people making up meaning to my words.
Moving along now, Shale has been somewhat lurkerish, but I think we're past LAL frankly. We do have cases on people that are based on more than 'not posting much'. I wouldn't raise a serious fuss if that was where the final lynch went as LAL is important, but it's not important enough to me to move my vote off Meeple.
So, keeping my vote where it is for now. New cases definately bring up suspects that I consider good to keep an eye on, but nothing has changed my own mind about who I believe most likely to be scum.
-
Interesting. Okay, first of all... I think I can safely say I haven't directly said, "Hey, they are scummy for doing this"
Uh? Okay, I'm just going to quote the line in question since it's important here.
Given this, it suddenly doesn't look so odd there might be a QuietRain + Corwin combination or something, the two who've most been attributing to narrowing down who we want to lynch. Is this the ploy they are doing?
Now yes, you acknowledge there isn't enough to go on a lynch here, but you implied the possibility. Which is cool; possibilities are what we address here after all. Strago raised the subject of Corwin, making reference to you in doing so. Why? Because of that line of yours I just quoted. Clearly he thought the same way I did upon seeing your line, so I don't see how I could be twisting your words.
Though it could be misreading on your part, be wary of stating what people say, because it doesn't really make me feel better about you.
If you feel you are misrepresented, then explain yourself! Don't get all defensive about it. However, don't pretend you can throw out possibilities, then run away from them with "I didn't actually SAY that! You are misrepresenting me, I can't trust you! ;_; ;_;" If you're not accountable for your words, there's really no reason for you to be posting at all.
Speaking of Corwin,
DHE, specifically. I don't believe I was narrowing down our field of lynch candidates. In fact, I did not even speak out for (or against) it as yet. It is troubling to see you group me with QR who is doing this. Before you go give people long, hard looks, what's up with that, man?
It was Bard who threw you into this group, not I. Though tracing back through the day... you're right. You haven't really done much "narrowing down". Which, while I'm not too happy with you making aggressive toss-outs at a significant number of players (including myself), I'm now finding Bard's comments more unsettling still.
Bard, can you explain why you grouped those two together?
And Corwin, as for giving you a good look, it may be simply due to the fact that I'm uncomfortable with you. I find the aggressive sniping to put me off balance a bit, and I'm far from the most emotional one in this group. It does feel like you've stirred up trouble today, but whether as town or scum, well... I dunno. People as active and aggressive as you deserve a good look. They can be very helpful as town, but as scum... well, I don't need to finish that thought.
Regardless, don't get too defensive about it. You have no requirement to defend yourself from "I'm going to pay attention to you!" If anything, you should welcome it, it means you are participating in the game, and, if you are town, you should have no problem defending yourself from any ACTUAL concerns if looks turn them up.
Andrew:
Reviewing his content for today... yeah, I'm satisfied with it. He's clearly examined multiple cases (Snow and Meeple in particular), defends his own arguments well enough. The Snow-is-town argument of his is... unorthodox, and I'm not sure how willing I am to buy it. But I can follow his logic and good for him for getting it out there. He's defended himself solidly from attacks too. For someone whose biggest black mark so far was some lurking... he's not even the first person who should be lynched for that. Looks like the promised cases on him have largely fallen through, too, besides Meeple's.
-
Fallen through? Not so much, just what I've seen of him doesn't promote him as a lynching target for today. I can't help but feel that his original reasoning for going after Snow feels a little weak, a little off. But, looking through everything he's said, yeah. I'm fine with leaving him be.
-
Bardiche's thoughts that my speculating that his role might be a third party one was 'paranoia inducing'. etc
Yes, I feel that it was a-plenty to mention it a single time. Mentioning it twice in consecutive posts, however, is trying to stress it a bit too hard, I feel. As far as I am personally concerned, getting rid of an ITP player is as good as getting rid of scum, but it may be that I feel it more as paranoia because I find both equally good lynches. I'll concede to that then that I place more priority to the lynching of ITPs than you do, and re-evaluate your posts taking into mind that an ITP is of lesser importance than scum.
Strago raised the subject of Corwin, making reference to you in doing so. Why? Because of that line of yours I just quoted. Clearly he thought the same way I did upon seeing your line, so I don't see how I could be twisting your words.
Strago said:
A final question: is there anyone else who is somewhat swayed by Snow's vote for Corwin and Bardiche's parallel thoughts about him. Something in my gut says there's something there, but I'm finding it very difficult to substantiate.
He mentioned my "parallel thoughts", didn't say, "Hey Bard is saying Corwin is scum, do you agree?" You implied I said Corwin is scum because of doing something. This is the difference I draw.
If you feel you are misrepresented, then explain yourself! Don't get all defensive about it. However, don't pretend you can throw out possibilities, then run away from them with "I didn't actually SAY that! You are misrepresenting me, I can't trust you! ;_; ;_;" If you're not accountable for your words, there's really no reason for you to be posting at all.
;_; ;_; ;_; y u do diz ;_; ;_; ;_;
So... I don't see what the deal is with, "explain yourself", "don't get all defensive!", "pretend you throw out possibilities then run away with" when you were saying:
Bard accuses Corwin and QR of "narrowing down suspects = scummy!"
And I can't recall saying, "Narrowing down suspects = scummy!". Evidently, if you got it out of my words that I was suggesting they are both scum for their actions, then that is a problem on my syntax. I was pretty convinced I implied I was going to watch them closer because of the possibility presented by EvilTom and threw the possibility out to the rest of the group as well, but it seems I unwillingly also implied I think that they are both scum based on that theory alone. It begs me to pay closer attention to avoid such a scenario from slipping under the eyes while being aware of its possibility, but in no way does it suddenly make their general stance "scum", although the possibility did make me examine QR's posts and, yes, look for content that could be questionable.
The findings on her make me more wary of her, but still aren't enough to convince myself (or probably any of you) that she is a good candidate for a lynch train.
Bard, can you explain why you grouped those two together?
I grouped the two of them together because QR said, explicitly, that we should narrow down the list of suspects and... IDK, but to me, Corwin really seems to be sniping people and being generally rather aggressive in play. Being aggressive is a good way of shifting points on people that make some ambiguous statements, thus clearing the stage for aggression on a few choice targets and allowing QR to close the train by getting the town to eventually zone in on two. Obviously you can disagree with this, but that's why I put the link between the two of them.
-
Mrghle. Okay, so the weekend's wound down, and no lie: I was not exactly thrilled with motivation to wade back into the pool here whatnot with walls of text and all that over the last day. With that in mind, I plan to keep to post as lean and to the point as possible.
First off, QR already said it, but it's worth repeating: it's been four days into Day 2. Soon to be five. I don't think we'll actually get a lynch around until Monday at the earliest (to allow for people who are busy on the holiday weekend to come back and weigh in), but this is ridiculously long. Don't abuse no deadline like this; it's time to get our act together and settle on a case.
1. Case on Meeple. Well, I bit the bullet and went to read his posts more carefully, and I can definitely see some of the points of contention that make him look bad... I tend not to see his content so much as a scumtell as his behavior when confronted. The cases he's made and suddenly quickly dropped and his lack of defending himself adequately as compared to others, bothers me much more than his actual arguing. On the other hand, the way it feels it's been all overblown... WALL OF TEXT does not help here (on any side) and Dread Thomas does make me reconsider it a bit more, but at the same time I don't think the points raised against Meeple are minor or somehow derailing. The only other cases right now are pretty much Snow and Shale to me, with Shale only taking it due to unresponsive lurkerdom. Strago has satisfied me enough for the time being as far as content goes, as has Andrew.
2. Case on Snow. Currently on this one, as is my vote; may or may not change by the time I finish this post. It's hard and WIFOMey to see whether the sudden blowup and retraction was a scumploy act or genuine, but I find myself leaning more towards Andy's feelings on the matter. I obviously pressed very hard on Snow when he did his meltdown and I also just as obviously still believe what I said in that regard is perfectly valid; at the same time, that infuriating nagging feeling that he's a townie who did a poorly thought play and is trying to scrape back up and shape his thoughts, even if not in the most concise of ways, persists. I would still like to hear more on him, as last I heard he said he was not feeling up to going through all previous posts to build his case against Corwin or hyperaggro play in general (which, while I can understand giving him some leniency, I do not agree with).
3. Case on Shale. I actually don't think LAL is all that bad a plan to go with when I look back and see how many freakin' scum were guilty of this in all our past games, but following up with what was said first, it feels much more like a Day 3 route than now. Definitely going to follow up on it if he does not show some radical change.
Finally, I beg a question which oddly seems to have been overlooked: whose flip will tell us the most? Well, Snow's already made a roleclaim (to be believed or not), and if he gets lynched... so we'll have the answer to a WIFOMey solution and could possibly draw a bead on Tai (who defended him quickly and vehemently). Meeple may shed some light on Shale, there's his original press for Ciato to consider, evokes feelings from everyone in general... yeah, I think I've made my decision.
##Unvote: Jo'ou Ranbu
##Vote: Meeple
P.S. Bardiche, if at all possible, I recommend you do NOT try to be on the majority lynchtrain if it can be helped. As stated before, you really don't want that vote power to swell out of proportions, and you're just going to look worse to town if you try to pull that route.
-
Alright, spent the morning going over people, so here are my present thoughts heading into a hopeful Day 2 endgame.
Andrew I already summed up, and do not consider him a viable target.
Ciato/Tai comes from my initial look. Ciato came away as clean to me, and Tai has been generally looking good since then, I'm happy with ignoring him for the time being.
Bard was my third target of the six I've looked over. He seems to feel like an overly inquisitive town who's not entirely sure what's going on. Late to the trains, and his insta-hammer was a bit dubious, but there's nothing in his posts that makes me feel like devising a lynch case for him.
Shale I was able to give a good deal more thought to. Mostly because he was sitting a bit higher in my list of suspicions, and also because not only is his writing more terse and better contained, but also because he's posted a good deal less than Bard has. Simply put, he has as many posts in the first three pages as he does in the following ten. This is worrying because scum typically like to pad numbers and a sense of being here by posting frequently to start, and then hoping to coast on that. However, part of that is to avoid having to get involved in exchanges where their faulty logic can be exposed. In Shale's case, whenever he does post, he usually comes along with some decently detailed thoughts and attempts to be helpful. He also announced intention to vote for Tom before the hammer fell, which likewise inclines me to trust that he was telling the truth when he announced his proposed vote. For now, the only reason I can think of to vote for him would be LAL, and I'm not keen on using that as a default when we have other criteria that could work.
Snow comes next. My original vote on him was as much a mark to get attention tossed his way as anything else, and as he continued to look bad, I felt better and better about leaving that vote there. However, to be honest, by the time I left on Friday, I was getting iffy about leaving that vote there, and the only thing that's kept it there so far is his explosion. Given that that has resolved in a way I can accept, I'm happy with moving away from him for the time being.
Which means, Meeple. His speech, is well, Meeple-style. However, his arguments have been all over the place, as Cyril noted. Not only that, but he's not only been delving far too much into roles (Rat was a consistant focus on Day one and early Day 2) but he also seems to be trying to find reasons to get Andy lynched. Andy was his joke vote, the first serious target he went after, and he came straight back to Andy the moment there was the slightest excuse to do so (and he's been attaching my name to his arguments there, almost as if to attach me to a crusade I had never had time to properly choose to persue, and now that I have, have decided there's little to actually hunt). This means that I can feel quite comfortable siding with the current majority.
##Unvote: Snow, ##Vote: Meeple
I would also like to back Cyril's request that you not lynch Meeple, Bard. The bigger that vote of yours get, the scarier it will look to everyone who isn't you.
-
(for the oblivious, i.e. Bardiche, Cyril = me, and expect Excal to keep referring to me as such.)
-
Alright, back from a weekend of work and family outings and I am... overwhelmed with all the information and arguments that have been posted since I last got a chance to seriously look this over.
Ok, I'm going to start from the beginning...
First, I guess you could call it a bluff, yes, as Melsa said. In a sense, I almost vaguely hoped I could confuse the overaggro people enough, but I obviously gave this as thought as I'd give to a Die Hard movie. But the roleclaim is 100% true.
Seriously Snow, you admit you roleclaimed to get people to lynch you, and then expect us to believe your claim is 100% true. I really don't know why you expect us to trust that claim, in all honesty. That's pretty much all I have to say on him at this point. I don't trust Snow, if for no other reason than he apparently can let stupidity overtake him so much that he would find the need to roleclaim, and ask for a pity party afterward.
He clearly isn't going back to look over what was posted, but promising he would, just as on page 8.
Thanks to Corwin to pointing this out, in regard to Meeple. I admittedly didn't notice this, but you're right, he never does go back and do the analysis he promises. This only strengthens my feelings toward his lynch, and my vote is staying where it is, in case anyone was wondering.
As for Tom's post... I know I'm repeating here, but no, you being town does not make you right. I really don't know what to think of the rest of his post at the moment, my brain is still a bit mushy.
In terms of this whole 'saying lynching someone needs to happen is scummy!' thing that's come up recently... Isn't... that the point of the game? To lynch people who seem scummy, in the end? I could understand this case on QR and Corwin pushing for a lynch if it was the beginning or middle of a day, but I'm pretty sure that point has long since passed. I see nothing wrong with promoting a little speed when it's been Day 2 for so long now, and to be entirely honest, I agree with them. At some point, you've learned as much as you're going to from general debate, and it seems that you really need some type of new information to get the ball rolling again.
Just a couple ending questions.
Meeple, for the love of god, at least attempt to thin out your posts, please?
Also, what does 'LAL' mean?
-
Also, what does 'LAL' mean?
Lynch All Lurkers (i.e. go after people who aren't contributing/posting much content, easy scum shields.)
-
Lynch All Lurkers.
Also, I wasn't going to post A-OK! to the request because it seemed kinda silly, but just so no one else seconds it, don't worry, I won't place a vote at all today, but be sure to keep track of who I FoS every so often.
(also, thanks Laggy. <_< It already took me days figuring out who "Snow" was)
-
Ah, oki doke. Thanks.
-
Oh yea, something else I forgot to mention earlier.
For all those who are confused, I am, in fact, a she. >.>
-
Being an aggro whore is the superior playstyle, which should neatly sum up my opinion on most of Tai's posts.
Oh, I see.
So since I have the inferior playstyle, I clearly won't be able to contribute anything new anyways, what with my faulty, idiotic, dense, and banal methodology, and thus should just go play Dragon Warrior 7 for the rest of the day as it's clearly all a person like me, so hopelessly mired in a different mindset, could ever hope to accomplish! Why thank you, Rat, for opening my eyes to this brilliant revelation!
Now I remember why I quit playing for a while in there. A nice reminder, that. I'll be back in the late evening after I've finished cooling my jets.
-
argh walls of text make me tireds
My main thing right now is that, as with everyone else, I'm sick to death of Day 2 not being over. As such, I'm doing this.
##UNVOTE: Shale
##VOTE: Meeple
Frankly I've got nothing to add to the case against Meeple, and I probably wouldn't have been comfortable switching to him now were it not for his recent backpedaling attempt to pin a case on Andrew. Granted, I've been getting at best a null read on Andrew and at worst a vaguely scummy one, but... mrff. It just needs to be Meeple at this point, if this effing Day is ever going to end.
The best thing about lynching Meeple, to me, is that his flip should be fairly revealing either way. Dude's been pretty polarizing and almost everyone's expressed an opinion, so ideally this will help us learn something or other.
Aside from that, right now? I'm uncomfortable with people who seem to think that Lynch All Lurkers becomes a less valid strategy later in the game. Hell, we aren't even that late in the game right now. How the deuce is Shale's prolonged absence -- combined with fairly spotty contributions when he has been around -- not cause for alarm and potentially a very solid lynch case?
Shale I was able to give a good deal more thought to. Mostly because he was sitting a bit higher in my list of suspicions, and also because not only is his writing more terse and better contained, but also because he's posted a good deal less than Bard has. Simply put, he has as many posts in the first three pages as he does in the following ten. This is worrying because scum typically like to pad numbers and a sense of being here by posting frequently to start, and then hoping to coast on that. However, part of that is to avoid having to get involved in exchanges where their faulty logic can be exposed. In Shale's case, whenever he does post, he usually comes along with some decently detailed thoughts and attempts to be helpful. He also announced intention to vote for Tom before the hammer fell, which likewise inclines me to trust that he was telling the truth when he announced his proposed vote. For now, the only reason I can think of to vote for him would be LAL, and I'm not keen on using that as a default when we have other criteria that could work.
This in particular is a bit baffling to me. The LAL stuff I've mentioned, but... the bolded bit... how is that townie? It's the definition of null read to me, and I see no way in which it negates his lack of contribution. Laggy, for instance, says he'd rather wait on LAL until Day 3, which I understand -- we've had more than enough conversation about other suspects that we don't need to default to it just yet, but Excal both disregards it as a course of action and presents a further defense of Shale that I find odd.
QR also disregards LAL as a course of action. Seriously, why do people see this as only a Day 1 thing? At any point during the game someone can use inactivity to their scummy advantage. Any time. Hell, if we set a precedent of not caring whether or not players contribute, it'll be even more advantageous for scum to lie low in the lategame than early.
Yeah. I think that's all I've got for now. By the way, this puts Meep at -1 to Hammer, I do believe. So let's wait for some defense before we twist the screws, ja?
-
Okay, leaving the discussions about what's the superior playstyle to a later moment, I guess I collected myself enough to actually try to mingle coherently yesterday's and today's info and posts. And I'll concede that Shale's absence has reached the point of being truly worrying, and I take back my defense over him. At this point, he really needs to give a signal of life (and justify beyond RL his prolonged absence, since it's been... two? days since his last post? Yeah).
Now, for Meeple, I... still don't see it the way Corwin or others do. It seems to, as Laggy said, to be an attack more against his posting style and behavior than his actual content. I've seen him get lots of flak for it more than once in Mafia and get picked apart for it, which is why it bothers me. It's pretty much metagaming at this point, but analysing playstyle and patterns isn't too bad a lead in the DL Mafia environment, or at least so I find.
Which leads me to the explanation on why Corwin bothers me: yes, it's because you act like your usual self the reason you nag at me. I'm being as blunt as you characteristically are. In fairness, I OMGUSed against you, and I'll be ready to admit it. It's not even because you attacked -me- (I deserve the flak), but because your typical aggro style sets me off due to pregress DL Mafia history showing that the aggro serves scum far better than it serves town. Aggressiveness in Mafia is a fine strategy! Just not when used with reckless abandon in this kind of environment, since it breaks town down more easily than scum, and the engagement into Aristotelic (or was it Platonic? Regardless, greek logic) logic of "he broke down, he MUST BE SCUM" ends up nailing townies instead. And the insistence also serves as a smokescreening device, which ends up configuring a trap to fall into. I'm not one to talk, of course, but it's food for thought as a general idea. Regardless, you're hardly the worst offender for it this game, and your current history has far less precedents for a vote (and, regardless of what I think of your style, you have been productive and insightful, for better or worse), so I think this needs to be done. I was unfair and I lashed out at the closest target when I voted, so:
##UNVOTE: Corwin
For Andrew, I do believe others' concerns about him are fairly valid, but he actually provided comprehensive defense about them. I admit I kinda raised an eyebrow when he defended me so abruptly, but the follow-up responses feel explanatory and clear.
Now, the one person that still consistently bothers me for the general sum is the rodent. I can't shake off the feeling that he is hiding something under his sleeve with the no-voting issue, and I can't help but feel he's getting too comfortable with the sudden freedom he seems to get with it. Call it metagaming, but his situation is pretty oddball in and out of itself, and the idea of a role only having this sudden, crippling drawback and no sort of compensation, either on alignment or underlying power, doesn't seem right. Coupled with his usual aggroness -and- the knowledge on how poorly it works for town in the DL Mafia environment, this sets me off particularly badly.
But this is just food for thought. I guess that I'll just go with what seems more immediately worrying now. Since unwanted roles have managed to get under the radar for excess lurking time and again, and I think his absence has reached the point of insufferable by now...
##VOTE: Shale
-
Yeah. I think that's all I've got for now. By the way, this puts Meep at -1 to Hammer, I do believe. So let's wait for some defense before we twist the screws, ja?
Quoting for emphasis so no accidental hammers happen this time. *cough*
-
Disregard this!
-
Actually it's possible that WAS hammer. If I'm reading right... QR's vote for Meeple was never counted by the mod. In case it's not too late,
##Unvote: Meeple
Since it's be crummy to end the day due to a mod error. (If that's what it is.)
Requesting everyone wait for the mod, otherwise.
-
Well, looks like I'm fucked. Call this a defeatist attitude, but when I'm at -1 to hammer, and no one seems willing to change their vote on me, well, what am I suppose to say? Be naive and think I have a chance to change the opinions of 7 other people?
Anyway, first thing, I want to get one thing cleared:
Bard, your second vote. Is this going to last the rest of the day or the entire game? If only the former, that answers my second question. If the latter...
Does jumping on other trains lead to MORE votes?
I kind of doubt the latter given...well, you could just rack up so many votes that by LYLO, if you last that long, nothing else matters but your lone vote. In any event, knowing how this works would be a good way to gauge how you should(n't) use it.
Ok, mechanics stuff aside...
I might as well role claim. I would have done this a while back...except the Role Claim doesn't really do much for me since it doesn't say a fuck ton about me.
I am Major Victory. I have no real clue who he is, though, reading my flavor text, something like I was protecting the country from Communists, then my entire platoon died out, and I was labeled a traitor, and now I want to get back at them.
And due to being on the enemy side at one point, apparently, I'm a miller as well.
Yeah, as you can see, this role claim...doesn't say a lot; I'm basically a Vanilla Townie that flips scum. Lovely, isn't it?
Anyway, might as well say a few things on people. Why? Cause even though I'm dead, you can look over what I said about people after I flip and hopefully get insight now that my role will be confirmed.
I've said my word on Andrew. I am not changing that, and I stick to what I said.
For others...
Shale...we all know what's going on with him. He's lurking, no questions asked. If he really can't play, I feel by now he would have been modkilled or replaced. Again, I'm not really adding anything here.
Elfboy strikes me as a bit odd on hindsight. He says Shale came to his defense adequately, when...to most people, they didn't seem to believe that, and it was only after I defended Shale that people stopped looking at him, and only once he wasn't posting that people started looking at him. He was quick to dismiss my case against Ciato, which apparently, Rat thought was legit. In fact, I am not really seeing him saying much at all in his last few posts since he became active.
He tossed a vote on me early, then never really went back to it, and kept on it the entire time with barely an explanation.
Excal sticks out to me! Why? Cause after last night, he said he promises us some stuff on Andrew...
Well, I was waiting for something like that and...the most we got was him just replying to why Andrew's promise was not good. I smell some hypocricy here.
Cor has been aggressive, but I don't see this being one way or another. He seems to be attacking minor issues, which does strike me as off.
Ashe won't stop whining about my post size. Her latest actions make me feel really uncomfortable. Again, Cor's claiming I didn't go back and do things I promised was clearly an embellishment, then she goes and BRINGS IT UP LONG AFTER ITS BEEN SAID AND DONE. She acts like its this big revelation that's a huge massive scumtell when in fact, it was noted that I actually did go back and do what I said, despite Cor's claims (just maybe didn't do it the way he wanted.) She still won't stop attacking my post style, long after we just had a whole shit fest regarding it.
Tai...beyond my stuff on Ciato from earlier, I have nothing. I'm inclined to credit those as Ciato just playing really weirdly and being pressed with real life issues, as since she was replaced by Tai, I haven't seen anything worth noting one way or another. He seems to have done his best to catch up with all the craziness.
As of now, I'm thinking there's a scum between Andrew, Elfboy, and Ashe. Elfboy claims to have been absent cause he was constantly reading and kicking himself into posting but...I'm not inclined to take that as an excuse. That excuse feels forced, frankly. "I was trying to get myself to post but I couldn't!"
Oh, forgot another thing to add to Elfboy...
He calls me out for saying something simple like "If what people say is true about Shale, then he's not looking good" and says "That's it? Come back with actual substance!" He acts like I was making a case on Shale, like I was voting on him based off that. If you read the lines, its clear I was speculating that I'd have to actually look at what others were saying. As you all know, I actually DID do this eventually and pretty much disagreed with the stances given.
Ashe, as I said, is still bitching and whining, going back to excuses that were used a while back and have since been deflated, and actually isn't that dissimilar than Andrew.
Andrew I've covered all too much.
Anyway, that's all I have to say. I can't defend myself more than I already tried, and I can accept the fact that I am screwed. So yeah, might as well hammer me, whoever wants to do it. Again, call this a defeatist attitude if you will, but its mostly me just realizing I'm fucked, I'm not getting out of it, and we might as well end the day. Though, seems like some of the votes are due to "Not conformable with lynching anyone, but Meeple's flip at least will be a lot more revealing" which feels odd, but whatever. Don't expect much more posts from me, since I really don't think I can add much more.
-----
And It seems I probably SHOULD have been hammered already, but a mod error, etc. But whatever, I've said my part!
-
Current votecount:
AndrewRogue (1): Meeple
Ashdla (0): Strago
Bardiche (0): AndrewRogue
Carthrat (0): Anonymous, Bardiche
Jo'ou Ranbu (1): Excal, Corwin, Laggy, AndrewRogue
Meeple (8): Elfboy, Ashdla, Taishyr, AndrewRogue, QR, Laggy, Excal, Strago
Shale (1): Taishyr, Strago, Jo'ou Ranbu
Strago (0): Laggy, Snow
Taishyr (0): Meeple
Corwin (0): Jo'ou
With fourteen alive, it takes eight to lynch.
The last few votecounts have been incorrect, the mods headdesk and deeply apologize for this. Unfortunately the votes are in fact all there in plain view and valid so this does have to be hammer.
Meeple, aka Major Victory, aka William Vickers, Self-Aligned Miller Survivor, was lynched day 2!
It is now Night 2, send actions to Cid.
-
They turned against an outsider on the second day, one who had good cause to hate the Squad and everyone associated with it despite being a member himself: Major Victory, true-blue patriot and American Hero, stalwart defender of truth, justice, and etcetera and so on, forced to join the team by the powers that be after the Squad itself obliterated his former superhero team in a particularly nasty case of bureaucratic in-fighting. As administrative blunders go, this one probably ranked somewhere around Bay of Pigs on the Headdeskometer. Needless to say, things quickly turned unpleasant as the pressure mounted against the erstwhile freedom fighter:
"You're all against me! You all must die!"
And these words did not endear Major Victory to his comrades-in-arms, who promptly decided that it was in fact YOU, William Vickers, who must die. So they conjured up a portal to a convenient pocket dimension and chucked him in. You don't mess with folks who have their own alternate reality at their beck and call. We can only hope he's gone to a better place. One with Hogan's Heroes on 24/7, perhaps.
And this was somewhat of a success for the team, since Major Victory clearly wasn't one of them...but they didn't find any indication that he was one of the killers, either. He may not have liked them, but he probably could've been more useful alive. Ah well, spilt milk and all. With some disgruntled mumbling, everyone dispersed for the night. In the morning, another of their number turned up dead. June Moon, possibly the most harmless person on the team (well, when she wasn't in one of her psychotic fits, at least), was found strangled to death in the mess hall amidst signs of a scuffle, her trademark witch's hat stomped flat in the debris.
Ashdla--The Enchantress, AKA June Moon (Town Power Detector)--was killed overnight!
---
It is now day three. With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.
-
asdf
Still incensed over the erroneous vote counts and the unintentional hammer (seriously, two of these in a row? What the fuck?).
More third-party. I see. Not really all that happy with the flip (we need to seriously have hit scum by now), and he was self-aligned to boot so he might as well have been town in scum's eyes... but mrf.
Ashdla was the nightkill choice. Certainly she wasn't ringing loudly on anyone's scumdar, but she seemed to be more in the background than anything else and had at least gotten some voices of suspicion placed on her. Possible that her nature hinted hiding a more significant role. Probably unproductive to speculate wildly, and unfortunately her death doesn't really reveal that much at first glance, which is probably why she got hit.
I loathe to go back through Day 2 again, but it's necessary to be done, in particular interaction with Meeple. I will, however, say right now that I am very much still wanting to hear from Shale, and as such, I don't see any reason not to open up the day by driving this point home:
##Vote: Shale
-
Hoo boy.
Okay, so lynching Meeple ended up being not a complete bust in hindsight (not ideal, regardless). However, we're still on a somewhat uncomfortable situation. Whatever brought down two night kills in a row last night seems to not have attacked this time, at least, but I have no idea what does this say as of now (since OK or delta may have been the extraneous killer? I dunno). Losing Melsa sucks, though, since, if her role was at least self-explanatory, we will get essentially no insight on whatever she might have found.
But I'll just go and do what I did just before hammer and try to drive the point home about someone lurking excessively:
##VOTE: Shale
Also, ninja'd by Laggy. Eh.
-
I can vote today! Who is responsible for this madness? It certainly wasn't anything I did. I think the guy responsible knows who he is.
Unrelated, but apparently a pie hit me last night, to no effect.
With this sudden infusion of enthusiasm, I shall get to work immediately.
<->
Laggy, friend, you're forgetting that there are two killers out there. We've no idea if he or scum are responsible for this insanity. It's going to be impossible to speculate on reasons in a meaningful sense.
You are right in that Shale is to be slammed for lurking with extreme prejudice at this point, though, not much to add. ##Vote: Shale ahahahaha, happy happy!
Ninja'd by Jo'ou, mwaf, nothing exciting there.
-
I can vote today! Who is responsible for this madness? It certainly wasn't anything I did. I think the guy responsible knows who he is.
MADNESS AND INSANITY WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING OBVIOUSLY SCUMMY
Laggy, friend, you're forgetting that there are two killers out there. We've no idea if he or scum are responsible for this insanity. It's going to be impossible to speculate on reasons in a meaningful sense.
Yeah, while this is true, I have trouble seeing another killer off Delta and then Ashdla in the same breath. The first kill seemed pretty obviously a town-slanted move, and Ashdla... no, just can't see it. Shale would have been such a much better target. Also more importantly, scum pretty much NEED to kill every night to, well, win! For them to pass up on a nightkill (unless someone got hit last night and survived, obviously correct me, I forgot that this may in fact BE role madness despite mod lies blarg arghle) and then assume our MYSTERY KILLER acted...
Okay, I see what you mean by trying to speculate being a little meaningless. Still think it's worth thinkin' scum was behind this, more likely, than not.
You got ninja'd by Strago, not Snow.
-
Or I can not read at all and realize it was actually Snow. I blame the avatar you damn Brazilian.
-
Yeah I think speculation over scum NK is always pointless anyway, just even more so in this case.
And it looks a lot like Snow to me. Yes. Right. Good stuffs.
-
Also, Rat, I believe I can say this confidently: I am responsible for your sudden ability to vote.
More specifically, I roleblocked you last night. My roleblocking also works on passive roles, which should explain -that-.
-
Fair enough. (Also I forgot I was typing up a post so now here it is!)
Okay, more coherent thoughts.
Strago possibly could have dropped his vote knowing that it was actually hammer and stealthed it in, but I seriously doubt it. It would count on the mods ruling that they would let that pass despite the bad votecount, which apparently they did, and just assume that it wasn't an honest slipup. So I'm not inclined to press hard on that even if I want to flip and kill something for these accidental hammers.
Reading over Meeple's last post now, since I see no reason to discredit him as he roleclaimed truthfully (minus self-alignment over town, obviously) and basically wasn't really putting any hope in seeing the day end without him being lynched. In effect, he was trying to be protown at the end.
He proposes scumteam of Andy, NEB, and Ashdla. Well, we know the last is town, so that clears that. NEB... in cahoots with Ciato/Tai and went after Meeple early and never really let up, OMGUS defense or genuine? Eh. It feels like both of them were sniping each other a lot about "well they were around in chat, and could have posted but didn't!" Yeah, a lot of us are around and active and not always feeling up to posting a giant wall of text in Mafia. NEB quickly coming to Ciato/Tai's defense... and not really offering anything new? I dunno, NEB's responded at least reasonably fairly when asked, although I did feel his content wilted off as the day progressed on, but hell, so did mine and largely lots of people on Day 2. The only real thing he's got is that he did lead the train on Meeple.
Andrew. It says a lot that Meeple said he brought up Andy lots of time as to a case and I can barely remember what it is. *backtracks* Okay, he says Andy is not really being helpful, remains too neutral, doesn't vote hard and basically ended up doing nothing. Andy ultimately was on the Meeple train after switching from Snow (had an early Bard vote that dropped quickly). Between him and NEB, I'd be inclined to give Andy a harder look - as while I think he's been replying and defending himself adequately, how he ultimately ends up voting and the justification for such does deserve scrutiny.
NINJA'D BY SNOW: Oh. Wow. Well that's spiffy, on the surface.
-
Well bugger me sideways for hammering Meeple. Yeah, had no intention of doing that. At least he wasn't town, I guess. In addition, a weird part of me is actually glad that Ash got axed, simply because I couldn't shake my feelings regarding her. Since they were obviously wrong, now it frees me up to think about other angles? Trying to be optimistic, anyway.
A cursory glance at Snow right now makes him look pretty townish to me, despite some of Snow's actions on previous days. If he knew his power null'd passive roles, anyway, blocking Carth's votelessness does not seem a scum move. Of course it's possible that he didn't know that and was working on a hunch that the Flaming Ratbird had some other unrevealed power. I suppose on second thought I'm not going to read too deeply into alignments based on those toles.
Laggy: I'm not exactly sure where I stand on Elfboy, but keep in mind that his having led the Meeple train is not exactly a town tell. Meep was third-party, after all, so a hyptothetical scum Elfboy could've thought he was training a townie.
Finally: ... spoon of the wratherisms? El Cid is cuh-razy.
More soonish.
-
A cursory glance at Snow right now makes him look pretty townish to me, despite some of Snow's actions on previous days. If he knew his power null'd passive roles, anyway, blocking Carth's votelessness does not seem a scum move. Of course it's possible that he didn't know that and was working on a hunch that the Flaming Ratbird had some other unrevealed power. I suppose on second thought I'm not going to read too deeply into alignments based on those toles.
I will be blunt and admit that my logic for roleblocking the Rat was based on my suspicion that he'd have an underlying power rather than the goodness of my heart. This is Mafia, suspicion is the order of the day. >_> Regardless, I don't think it was a dumb move, especially considering that this new condition of his, temporary as it may be, could give further insight into his behavior and patterns if so needed, so this is probably for the best. However, according to him, something else targetted him, if I'm reading his wording correctly? This is probably useless speculation/excessive metagaming, but the pie doesn't seem like something to come from me taking a flavor perspective. Rat, you mind to clarify if you can?
-
Laggy: I'm not exactly sure where I stand on Elfboy, but keep in mind that his having led the Meeple train is not exactly a town tell. Meep was third-party, after all, so a hyptothetical scum Elfboy could've thought he was training a townie.
Oh, and I hardly was painting it such as pro-town. If anything, it was one of the possible points against him, for all that, as I read his original attack post, NEB listed some (at least the time) plausible reasons... but I'm still going to take some cues from our confirmed townies here (Meep and Tom, though Tom didn't directly list NEB as a suspect, just didn't believe in the case on Meeple at all) and at least watch him closely more, whether their suspicions turn out to be correct or not.
-
Was about to ask Jo'ou some stuff but he answered my question anyway. With that said, if you think I have some underlying power, should you not be, um, dropping a case on me right now, I don't really want to encourage this behaviour, but if you are a townie roleblocker, should you not be trying to hit scum, not just 'he might have a power!'
If he'd said 'because Rat deserves his vote' I would've called for his lynch on the spot, anyhow, that would have been bullshit. Ah well.
The pie was unrelated to the roleblocking, it didn't seem to do anything but.. well.. pie! I've no idea what it could mean.
<->
As for people who aren't Shale, I am pretty suspicious of Bardiche.
He...
-Is really interested in his own role and presenting it in a townie-friendly fashion. In fact he has pointed out he avoids doing certain things in order to avoid being scummy several times. He is very, VERY concerned with his image.
-When he initially goes after Meeple, he offers very little reasoning, as seen here; Moving on, I'm more suspicious of Meeple at the moment. The entire assault on Ciato seems uncalled for. It also doesn't sit well with me how you defend Shale. I mean, sure, I defended Deltaflyer, but I think I was much less zealous on it to the point of attempting to null suspicions on him by saying things he should've done himself.
Apart from this he says very little about the State of the Game, as it were, preferring to focus on just how he's going to implement his super awesome role and such.
-Later, he jumps off Meeple here -
Meeple, in general, I always believe that one should defend himself in Mafia. Others providing your defense indicates that those others feel confident enough about your alignment that they shoot to your defense. This is alright if you are a Mason or something, and you're guaranteed of another's alignment. But in this case, you're defending someone you (likely) have no alignment read on, quite frankly, unless you have some investigative role or are scum. I don't want to hear if you have the former, but that's my explanation for why I take such problem with your defense of Shale.
Even after you were called out on it you remained over-zealous to his defense. A little defending of others is okay (ie: I didn't get that read out of it, how come you hammer on that point so zealously? as a defense) but when you take over the defense... Yeah. Anyway, I'll keep this in the back of my mind.
##UNFoS: Meeple
The thing is, he takes problems with how Meeple defends Shale, ok fine whatever, but then he jumps off of Meeple for this action, pretty much drops the case, and doesn't really pick up a new one or FoS anyone else for a while. Yet it still reads as if he remains somewhat suspicious of Meep.
After Dread Thomas throws his thoughts out there, though, Bardiche leaps upon them with what can only be described as savage glee, repeatedly hyping to us that it's fine to just go where some dead townie of questionable ability directs us (I believe 'getting yourself lynched apparently on purpose on day 1' counts as 'questionable'), and seems to use this as a way to jump over at QR on minor points (like not caring that Delta died, um, did *anyone*?). I'll admit he has something about her speculating over third party roles but not doing anything-
-take note, QR: scum, 3rd party, it's all good to us if we lynch them since their intentions aren't aligned with our own-
-but then calls that stuff minor, anyway, in lieu of going after Shale for lurking.
He seems to take his own mistakes rather harshly, which is weird when it really came down to a choice of word and not actual intent or content. It didn't seem like much of a reason to get all tense to me. In general I feel he hasn't really been adding to the cases floating around and rather just tagging on to whatever seems convenient at the time. What I find particularly troublesome is that he doesn't seem to present his votes/FOS's and cases and such with any confidence, either.
-
Was about to ask Jo'ou some stuff but he answered my question anyway. With that said, if you think I have some underlying power, should you not be, um, dropping a case on me right now, I don't really want to encourage this behaviour, but if you are a townie roleblocker, should you not be trying to hit scum, not just 'he might have a power!'
Which is kind of the point, I suspected you might have a scum power. Incomplete logic, however, and I'm sure you'll chew on me for it. But I feel I should be as clear as possible regarding my own move.
-
Current votecount:
Shale (3): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.
Mod's note: Given Shale's inactivity near the end of day two, he will modkilled if hasn't posted within twenty-four hours of this game-day's start (~9:30PM EST tomorrow).
-
Laggy: I'm not exactly sure where I stand on Elfboy, but keep in mind that his having led the Meeple train is not exactly a town tell. Meep was third-party, after all, so a hyptothetical scum Elfboy could've thought he was training a townie.
Oh, and I hardly was painting it such as pro-town. If anything, it was one of the possible points against him, for all that, as I read his original attack post, NEB listed some (at least the time) plausible reasons... but I'm still going to take some cues from our confirmed townies here (Meep and Tom, though Tom didn't directly list NEB as a suspect, just didn't believe in the case on Meeple at all) and at least watch him closely more, whether their suspicions turn out to be correct or not.
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
Mrrrffff. I was just going through the topic in an attempt to build up a case against a few people other than the obvious Shale, but nothing's really coming together for me right now. For the moment let's not go crazy with a Shaletrain, simply because if he is just bogged down in life it'd be pointless to use our lynch on him. That said, he'd better have some pretty solid contributions over the next day or so.
-
Ahoy-hoy!
Very sorry for the absence. Real life just ate me alive yesterday - I logged in once all day, for about three minutes - and I've been working, exercising or watching Doctor Who since I got home this evening.
Even considering real life, though, my lurkerdom through the first two days has been inexcusable by any reasonable standard. I'll put in all the effort I can today, but I can't blame anyone who wants to hold it against me.
I'm not ruling out Ashdla as a scumkill by any means. Like Laggy said, she was in the background, which makes for a pretty good target if you're just trying to whittle down town's numbers instead of killing the more helpful contributors. Not to mention that the other options are a trigger-happy townie vig (I'd hope we'd all know better by now), or a serial killer, in other words yet another third party.
I've managed to muddy the waters for myself, too (lovely), since I've put the scum in a damned good position to attack me by simple application of Lynch All Lurkers, and I can't argue that it isn't a valid argument. In fact, looking over the posts I missed yesterday, QR's comment that "I think we're past LAL" looks very off to me. Scum lurk when they can get away with it. Just look at my play in the anonymous game. Now, I know you're not scum defending a scumbuddy here, which makes me unsure of exactly why scum would argue that way, but it still feels off, and I'd still love to hear the thinking behind it.
General caution to everyone to treat yesterday as a mislynch for analysis purposes. Woo third party with uncertain win condition gone, yes. Better than a poke in the eye. But scum would still have thought he was a townie and argued accordingly.
The best thing about lynching Meeple, to me, is that his flip should be fairly revealing either way. Dude's been pretty polarizing and almost everyone's expressed an opinion, so ideally this will help us learn something or other.
The irony is awesome.
More within the hour, but I wanted to post something before this gets even worse.
-
Yay, new day.
First of all, even if Meeple isn't scum, I must say I feel some vindication at what he was. I figured Meeple was acting off, generally not posting thoughts that made sense as town, and whaddaya know, I was right. I'm a bit miffed to see some people suggesting that lynching Meeple was a bad thing, and even moreso by Laggy's bizarre assertation that he is somehow a "confirmed townie" (what? Meeple has NO REASON to advise town towards its success).
^_^ Sorry, I'm just not happy at the thought of having to defend myself from a dead Third Party.
Other things, mostly scattered thoughts:
-Yay, voting Rat! Too bad it's only a 50% roleblocker, since that's probably the best use I can think of for a town roleblocker really. (Trying to nail the scum killer in a game with a potential Vig seems really pointless.) This doesn't, of course, confirm Snow as town, but I hope he continues to report his Roleblock targets, since that helps. I can't say I've forgotten Snow's actions yesterday, for one, though I haven't yet seriously thought about top lynch candidates yet.
-Unshockingly, I pretty much second everything Rat says about Bard.
-No second kill. Bulletproof? Second roleblocker? Dare I suggest Rat as the vig/SK, since he was hit by the first roleblocker? No idea, really, we were promised some whacky roles, so I'm not inclined to take it tooo seriously. But it was a thought that crossed my mind.
-Shale finally posts. Yay! QR's comment... yeah, is a bit odd, would also like to see explanation. At least QR herself can't be accused of lurkerdom. Other than that, not much to make of his post yet, which means he needs to post a lot more today to shed that lurker tag.
-
First of all, even if Meeple isn't scum, I must say I feel some vindication at what he was. I figured Meeple was acting off, generally not posting thoughts that made sense as town, and whaddaya know, I was right. I'm a bit miffed to see some people suggesting that lynching Meeple was a bad thing, and even moreso by Laggy's bizarre assertation that he is somehow a "confirmed townie" (what? Meeple has NO REASON to advise town towards its success).
Meeple was self-aligned and pretty much resigned to his fate. There was no real reason to leave a post that detailed what he thought aside from trying to help town (unless he did it purely out of spite from being lynched, a possibility I don't really believe in, given that we've had -plenty- of Mafia games where third-party aligned people ended up playing pretty much protown. I would see a case if Meeple had accomplices, but he did not.
Nor am I saying that his lynch was, or is, a bad thing (after all, in the grand scheme of things, nontown is nontown) - just that whatever he had to say doesn't really make any sense if you blanket it as "he has no reason to help town!" Unless you think that his last post was actually all a ruse to try to throw us off and save him from being lynched. I guess. I'm taking it with a grain of salt and hardly gunning after you dead on, but I don't think at least making note of it is at all unreasonable.
-
Also, just to add a point - one of the things about Meeple being third-party is that, from scum's viewpoint, he was town (or at least nonscum) and as such they would have treated him as they would any other townie. Indeed, while Meeple's alignment and intents may or may not have not been conducted with a mindset intended to help town, scum hardly had foreknowledge of this to react appropriately. It would be just as easy for scum to gun after him as any other townie would have, so it doesn't say anything either way. (This is in reaction to dismissing everything Meep had to say as instant non-town third party - his actual content may not be really taken at face value, but the interaction around him? Certainly.)
-
Oh, I agree that Meeple had resigned to his fate at that point. That was... kinda my general point. He doesn't win with town, and has no reason to cheer town on. His final post, well... why should it help town? Seemed to me more like lashing back at the people who had gotten him lynched (Andrew and I, in particular), and being vindictive in general.
I agree with the point about him being town as far as scum is concerned, unless they nailed him with a rolecop or something like that.
-
Eh, fair enough, and on hindsight that does make sense. I suppose I kneejerk against people (who have no reason to do so, i.e. not scum with buddies) wasting time lashing out on their last posts instead of being productive, but you do definitely have a point there.
-
Hmm. Well, in theory, you're right - when you're resigned to your fate, as town, you should do everything you can to help. In practice, it doesn't always work that way. You're angry at being eliminated from the game, and sometimes you let your judgement be clouded and lash out. We've seen it before. Hopefully, the fact that you can still help town tempers your anger and stays your hand here.
I just see no reason that temperance would have taken hold in Meeple's case. He's not just being killed, he's losing the game, and gains nothing from the usual townie-facing-death calm.
-
Yeah, actually, the fact that he claimed Vanilla Townie Miller (as opposed to his actual third-party miller role, which okay, would be writing his own death warrant but shows that he still had a sliver of hope left) cements that further. Like I said previously, I was also alluding to past Mafia games where third-party roles, more often than not, lean protown than other way around, but that's a dangerous assumption and this further makes me rescind considering his last thoughts seriously.
-
I've managed to muddy the waters for myself, too (lovely), since I've put the scum in a damned good position to attack me by simple application of Lynch All Lurkers, and I can't argue that it isn't a valid argument. In fact, looking over the posts I missed yesterday, QR's comment that "I think we're past LAL" looks very off to me. Scum lurk when they can get away with it. Just look at my play in the anonymous game. Now, I know you're not scum defending a scumbuddy here, which makes me unsure of exactly why scum would argue that way, but it still feels off, and I'd still love to hear the thinking behind it.
As requested, in response to the above and...I think it was Bardiche's comments earlier related to this (how he thought I was pushing for his lynch because I mentioned the thought that he might be a third party), I think it's fair enough to explain what my thought process is in this regard. The below are in order of people I will go after from first to last:
1 - Someone I am convinced is scum
2 - Someone I am convinced is a third party
3 - Someone I really think might be scum
4 - Someone I really think might be a third party
5 - Lurkers
6 - Someone acting as a distraction to town to the point where nothing can get done they are acting so strangely
7 - Only when given no other alternatives, whoever gives us a lynch so we don't lose one (this is for games where we have days last only a certain amount of time, not applicable in games such as this)
For example, if I have seen Person A slip up and am convinced they are scum and yet I had some investigative role and knew Person B was a TP, I would work to lynch Person A before lynching Person B (although they would both need to go, obviously). And either of them would need to go before people I only suspected or those who lurk. Given Meeple's actions, I flung him a lot higher on the list than lurkers. Thus, my vote and my saying that taking out lurkers should be a secondary concern. Could someone give me a counter argument where taking out someone who is lurking is a better idea than taking out someone you think might be scum? I would like to hear it because I am not having an easy time making that mental jump on my own.
Hmm, maybe it was just my phrasing? My use of 'past LAL' was in the Day, not in the game. At that point in the Day there seemed good indications that Meeple was either scum or TP and thus it didn't make sense for me to go after lurkers at that point in the Day.
Onto Day 3 stuff, I am a little confused by the single kill compared to last night's two. But speculating on the hows and whys is such WIFOM territory. I think Ashdla's death likely to be a scum kill simply because it gives us very little in the way of actual information.
EDIT: Ninja'd by many posts, but nothing that I need to add to before going to bed. I will post more at work tomorrow (how sad is it that I get more of a chance to post for work than home...)
-
Okay, working backwards, still assimilating the flow of the day, but one thing jumped out at me right quick, namely Snow. That last post he had yesterday rubs me all kinds of wrong. Why? Weeeeeellllll....
Now, for Meeple, I... still don't see it the way Corwin or others do. It seems to, as Laggy said, to be an attack more against his posting style and behavior than his actual content. I've seen him get lots of flak for it more than once in Mafia and get picked apart for it, which is why it bothers me. It's pretty much metagaming at this point, but analysing playstyle and patterns isn't too bad a lead in the DL Mafia environment, or at least so I find.
In short, "The argument here isn't post content, it's style and metagaming."
Which leads me to the explanation on why Corwin bothers me: yes, it's because you act like your usual self the reason you nag at me. I'm being as blunt as you characteristically are. In fairness, I OMGUSed against you, and I'll be ready to admit it. It's not even because you attacked -me- (I deserve the flak), but because your typical aggro style sets me off due to pregress DL Mafia history showing that the aggro serves scum far better than it serves town. Aggressiveness in Mafia is a fine strategy! Just not when used with reckless abandon in this kind of environment, since it breaks town down more easily than scum, and the engagement into Aristotelic (or was it Platonic? Regardless, greek logic) logic of "he broke down, he MUST BE SCUM" ends up nailing townies instead. And the insistence also serves as a smokescreening device, which ends up configuring a trap to fall into. I'm not one to talk, of course, but it's food for thought as a general idea. Regardless, you're hardly the worst offender for it this game, and your current history has far less precedents for a vote (and, regardless of what I think of your style, you have been productive and insightful, for better or worse), so I think this needs to be done. I was unfair and I lashed out at the closest target when I voted, so:
"The argument here isn't post content, it's style and metagaming."
Now, the one person that still consistently bothers me for the general sum is the rodent. I can't shake off the feeling that he is hiding something under his sleeve with the no-voting issue, and I can't help but feel he's getting too comfortable with the sudden freedom he seems to get with it. Call it metagaming, but his situation is pretty oddball in and out of itself, and the idea of a role only having this sudden, crippling drawback and no sort of compensation, either on alignment or underlying power, doesn't seem right. Coupled with his usual aggroness -and- the knowledge on how poorly it works for town in the DL Mafia environment, this sets me off particularly badly.
"The argument here isn't post content, it's style and metagaming."
I've been lurking like mad, but that is high-word-count-low-content at its finest. You took a full page of text to say the same thing three times, never actually bringing scuminess into your assessments, and then cast a vote against someone who doesn't have post content to analyze. His earlier tangent about Puppetmaster Corwin manipulating me and Meeple into conflict is also kinda odd, and the roleclaim and resignation to doom with four votes on him ...eeeeh, could just be depressed townie, but it's a null read at best, leaning scummy at worst. Aside from the circumstances, the only noteworthy text in the claim seems to be...
Whether you decide to believe me or not is not even my concern other than the fact you'll be lynching town knowingly, which is just about the stupidest someone can be.
Because if we believe you're a roleblocker we therefore must believe you're town?
QR: Hm. Well, at what point does lurking become scummy in your eyes? The point of LAL isn't "lurkers are dumb, throw rocks at them," it's "lurking is something scum tends to do."
-
Jesus fucking Christ! How the hell did this come to pass? "Oh, that ploy never works. Those who try it are always quickly lynched and end up town!"
Yeah, better update that scoreboard, there, cause JR just pulled a fast one and ESCAPED HIS RIGHTFUL LYNCHING.
Okay. Okay. I can't get tunnel vision, I can't get tunnel vision, I have to at least look at other people in case they are FAR SCUMMIER than the SCUMMY JR.
First, though, thoughts on Meeple's flip. Well, then. I recall musing that one of the Meeple/Shale pair flipping as scum would be informative. With Meeple's flip, I can at least now dismiss such a link as accidental. And what irony, too. While I was blasting the more passive and feel-good players for playing like survivors and not as town, I had no idea we had an actual survivor in our midst.
Okay. Moving on.
DHE: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25083#msg25083
People as active and aggressive as you deserve a good look. They can be very helpful as town, but as scum... well, I don't need to finish that thought."
Actually, I would request you to finish that thought. "If scum is talkative, this is bad for town because..." of what, exactly? Since town now has that much more to analyze and poke holes in, as scum inevitably lies due to having more knowledge than they have any right to?
I'm not sure if we have a difference of playstyle opinion, here, or a sinister attempt at making participation of the more active part 'suspect', thus plotting the course for easier lurking and taking things easy.
Regardless, don't get too defensive about it. You have no requirement to defend yourself from "I'm going to pay attention to you!" If anything, you should welcome it, it means you are participating in the game, and, if you are town, you should have no problem defending yourself from any ACTUAL concerns if looks turn them up.
Yes BUT we all know that saying "I'm paying attention to you" is pretty much a form of FoS and if people say that about you and get lynched and suddenly flip as townies people start to believe there's something actually there! And that's total bullshit unless those people looking at you with such an analyzing eye actually had anything to say about you.
Like with promising content after some event in the game and not delivering afterwards, this is the lazy, shortcut way to claiming credit for participating.
Am I taking this a bit too far and too personally? Maybe. But geez, what else do I do when people invoke gut and eyeing? Just sit there and take it and let it fester until someone starts quoting it the next day as if it were gospel cause I haven't challenged any of it at the time? It's a damned if you do and if you don't case.
Bardiche: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25088#msg25088
I grouped the two of them together because QR said, explicitly, that we should narrow down the list of suspects and... IDK, but to me, Corwin really seems to be sniping people and being generally rather aggressive in play. Being aggressive is a good way of shifting points on people that make some ambiguous statements, thus clearing the stage for aggression on a few choice targets and allowing QR to close the train by getting the town to eventually zone in on two. Obviously you can disagree with this, but that's why I put the link between the two of them.
Two problems with this paragraph. First of all, the two are not the same. Actively narrowing down the field and the potential possibility of it somehow happening while playing aggressively, that is. In fact, if you had an actual example rather than a vague hypothetical, you would have brought it up, I'm certain.
The second one rises from the criticism of an aggressive play. By which I don't mean playstyle which is mean and nasty to people and gliding into personal lines; I'm talking about not letting go of so-called 'minor' slips and investigating every damn lead we get our hands on. I believe in that one, and saying it is easily used for misdirection and thus suggesting this playstyle's use should be discouraged is something I disagree with, yes.
JR. My main suspect. Need it restating that I don't believe him?
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25127#msg25127
In this post, JR opens with saying he wants to move past playstyle issues, only to revisit them in paragraph 3 as his defense.
You also contradict your own post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25017#msg25017) where you tried to build a weird case on me, by admitting in the newer post that it was OMGUS all along.
There's also your unhealthy obsession with me. Now, for Meeple, I... still don't see it the way Corwin or others do.
Um. You did realize, at the time, that I was not voting Meeple nor have I been advocating a vote on Meeple that day? In fact, why I was arguing with Meeple and demanding him to explain certain things, I haven't been actually pushing for his lynch. Other people were, however, and yet you call the lynch mob 'Corwin and friends'. I find it troubling, especially given the previous point of you admitting to OMGUSing me.
And then you happened to voice suspicions on Andrew and Rat... and voted Shale.
Hum. Huuuum. And your reasoning for this?
But this is just food for thought. I guess that I'll just go with what seems more immediately worrying now. Since unwanted roles have managed to get under the radar for excess lurking time and again, and I think his absence has reached the point of insufferable by now...
Glance at the boldened text. Shale has an 'unwanted role', which you claim is worrying to you enough to warrant a vote. You claimed partial roleblocker. How could you be possibly know anything about Shale's role to worry about him more than the people you yourself suggest as 'food for thought' for looking scummy to you, or Meeple, who was acting weird (yes, he was!) and the town's main target at the time?
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25251#msg25251
Your first day 3 post lands a second vote on Shale within 8 minutes of Laggy's! It's Shale, again! Even though you claim to have roleblocked Rat (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25259#msg25259), whom you said you considered having a scummy role (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25269#msg25269), and the night phase only listed one kill instead of two.
Let us consider this in silent contemplation.
You have every reason to believe, if you have the power you've claimed and have done what you said you had, that you had a direct effect on the night phase, and yet you don't even mention it and go...
Whatever brought down two night kills in a row last night seems to not have attacked this time, at least, but I have no idea what does this say as of now (since OK or delta may have been the extraneous killer? I dunno).
Okay, let's go look at the flips!
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24654#msg24654
Deltaflyer2k8--The Thinker, AKA Cliff Carmichael (Town Messenger)--was killed overnight!
OblivionKnight--Deadshot, AKA Floyd Lawton (Self-aligned Jester)--was killed overnight!
JESTER. MESSENGER. I don't see serial killer or vigilante or anything remotely plausible here. How could you possibly miss this?
By only paying passing attention to the game. By coasting. Which is what scum do.
Screw this, how can you find someone scummier?
##Vote: JR
I'm at work, etc, next post will cover Shale (who seems to have reemerged, I'll need to read thoroughly to see if I buy the absense excuse), Rat (there seems to be something connecting him to JR, or more like JR trying to connect himself to him, it's weird) and QR because she's pretty much been central in making two lynches that mislynched in a row take place.
-
...
I am currently very irritated, but I feel one thing needs to be noted, regardless of my opinions of the rest, positive or not;
QR was central in making two lynches mislynch? MOD MISTAKE on the second, and you were one of the first to lead the charge on Tom! This is I what that's arrrrrgh set fire to the world. I don't really care if you look at her or not - she's done nothing to make me wary thus far, but maybe you'll actually find something of note - but speaking of "careless reading" and "coasting", that's one huge slip, there.
I am working on a post, before someone goes "lol Tai where's your FUCKING POST FROM YESTERDAY LOL LYNCH".
-
I would also disagree on calling QR out. While she was instrumental in culling targets, we've by no means been limited to the folks she has suggested, nor has she just unilaterally decided who it is we should focus on. In both cases, she came in near the end of the day, said we should start looking at a lynch, and then picked out the two people with the most votes and best cases. This is highlighting what we've done, not taking charge and deciding for us.
-
To Corwin:
Firstly: Congrats, Corwin, you have pulled together a full case on Snow that bears everyone's consideration. I've given it my own, below.
You have also managed to bitch that we didn't lynch him (oh so obvious!) last game day (because it was so clear that he is {according to you} scum that clearly no one else could have had a case)! And you rant, despite putting forth the case after that day is over, and pretty much saying beforehand "I feel this is suspicious and I doubt this is feasible!"
Right. Um. Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. Right or not that pisses me off to no end, as it's pretty much the same blatant level of dismissal of everyone else's abilities and analysis that would have lead people to the conclusion they reached (Meeple).
Secondly: Your comment toward DHE seems to be there solely to incite suspicion toward him. Active and leading scum can successfully drag town into the abyss, merrily leading them by the nose. Lurking and inactive scum slip under radars and are of no help. This seems blatantly obvious - but I may be overestimating the effect such a mindset has on someone, be you on town's side or not. Scum that leave everything to town give full control of town's only weapon to them; active scum can make definite moves to wrest that control away, and often-times do so.
Thirdly: what do you do when someone invokes gut and eyeing? Well I guess you get to do what most others do with agressive bumrushing and rudeness; ignore it and continue on, present your point frankly and politely (or not, knowing how this works) and move on! Yay! Resolution!
Re: Bardiche, I've no issues with your comment as it stands, though no doubt you can guess with my tone that I have issues with how it's been implemented.
And then, the Snow analysis. Okay, let's look at this for a moment, and I'll see how I think it hashes out.
Okay, first quote: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25127#msg25127
In this post, JR opens with saying he wants to move past playstyle issues, only to revisit them in paragraph 3 as his defense.
You also contradict your own post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25017#msg25017) where you tried to build a weird case on me, by admitting in the newer post that it was OMGUS all along.
Okay um a few notes here already.
1) Post referenced, he said he would address playstyle issues "at a later moment". The same post, while something is being typed, likely constitues a "later moment" to not only the writer, but also most readers.
2) He admitted to a reactionary vote. Congrats. This is a valid point.
3) You also seem to have skimmed over the reasoning why he launched that vote; his reasoning for this was stated in both, though in the second example you cite, far less clearly, that he found the aggressive attacks on people, from previous games he has witnessed, to be effective smokescreens for not only activity but also as a way to get camoflague as a good townie.
Granted, that is all weighed on an OMGUS vote, and while I feel his point is valid the situation makes it null at best.
There's also your unhealthy obsession with me. Now, for Meeple, I... still don't see it the way Corwin or others do.
Um. You did realize, at the time, that I was not voting Meeple nor have I been advocating a vote on Meeple that day? In fact, why I was arguing with Meeple and demanding him to explain certain things, I haven't been actually pushing for his lynch. Other people were, however, and yet you call the lynch mob 'Corwin and friends'. I find it troubling, especially given the previous point of you admitting to OMGUSing me.
Counter: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25000#msg25000
Indeed, you were not voting for him! You were voting for Snow, as you are today. The OMGUS relevance is also worth note. However, the post I reference above is a rather scathing note on what Meeple had been doing, though apparently you had another reason for throwing that analysis of Meeple out there, that of people saying they'd do things and not do so. While vaguely fair, aren't you supposed to be hunting scum, and not just pointing out things that annoy you? Oh, but...
The issue I brought up was that some people find it easy to make promises of detailed analysis after a given reveal, and then don't deliver. This might allow them to coast and both gain cred as they are there on the scene and act all businesslike with their intent to investigate thoroughly, while not actually forcing them to own up to their own words and invest time and effort in said analysis. And that is something you are likely to see a scum do. Scum lurk, but they must also have the pretense of a presence. This is one of the ways to gain it.
From the post I linked above. So by this, Meeple had a pretense to be hiding under! (One that everyone else had kinda been saying as "Shorten the damn posts Meeple", but hey, another small note). Oh, but wait...
It's true that our job as town is to avoid getting other townies occupied with false positives on us and not letting scum exploit them... but our number one goal is still to HUNT SCUM. Seriously, does it need repeating? Do people still forget it as the play the game like a survivor and not like a townie? I suppose that if nothing else, this pushes Meeple a bit towards 'town that makes me headdesk' rather than 'scum flailing'. I suppose I'll have to watch and see.
So it's pretty much "hey, I consider this behavior scummy, but he just makes me headdesk". Right. Your main point is noted, but I can't say that I don't see this post as an advance on Meeple. Thusly, I can see him grouping you into that set, especially since you were the one his supposed anger, truthful or not, was pointed towards.
And then you happened to voice suspicions on Andrew and Rat... and voted Shale.
Hum. Huuuum. And your reasoning for this?
But this is just food for thought. I guess that I'll just go with what seems more immediately worrying now. Since unwanted roles have managed to get under the radar for excess lurking time and again, and I think his absence has reached the point of insufferable by now...
Glance at the boldened text. Shale has an 'unwanted role', which you claim is worrying to you enough to warrant a vote. You claimed partial roleblocker. How could you be possibly know anything about Shale's role to worry about him more than the people you yourself suggest as 'food for thought' for looking scummy to you, or Meeple, who was acting weird (yes, he was!) and the town's main target at the time?
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25251#msg25251
Your first day 3 post lands a second vote on Shale within 8 minutes of Laggy's! It's Shale, again! Even though you claim to have roleblocked Rat (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25259#msg25259), whom you said you considered having a scummy role (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25269#msg25269), and the night phase only listed one kill instead of two.
Okay, handling the first part of the post... wow, that's either a horrible misread or a blatant twist of the words. "Unwanted ROLES[/i]". As in "SCUM AND THIRD PARTY." Not as in "I KNOW SHALE IS THIS" but "I KNOW UNWANTED ROLES LURK, SO LET US STAB THIS LURKER."
Continuing on, so it's completely unimaginable there's, you know. OTHER ROLES out there, Cor? Sheesh. Rat was blocked, there was a kill missing. Congrats. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IN HELL CAUSED IT. You, drawing the line from Snow to Rat and pointing madly at it? If anything that draws a line between you (You know rat's scum and that the kill was blocked by someone, and that Rat was the one out!) and Rat (scum killer, natch, assuming this little paranoid scenario.) As it is, I'm still ambivalent on the Rat but this makes you stick out like a sore thumb.
Let us consider this in silent contemplation.
You have every reason to believe, if you have the power you've claimed and have done what you said you had, that you had a direct effect on the night phase, and yet you don't even mention it and go...
Whatever brought down two night kills in a row last night seems to not have attacked this time, at least, but I have no idea what does this say as of now (since OK or delta may have been the extraneous killer? I dunno).
Okay, let's go look at the flips!
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24654#msg24654
Deltaflyer2k8--The Thinker, AKA Cliff Carmichael (Town Messenger)--was killed overnight!
OblivionKnight--Deadshot, AKA Floyd Lawton (Self-aligned Jester)--was killed overnight!
JESTER. MESSENGER. I don't see serial killer or vigilante or anything remotely plausible here. How could you possibly miss this?
By only paying passing attention to the game. By coasting. Which is what scum do.
Screw this, how can you find someone scummier?
1) Certainly he should be suspicious, but there's also the noted-above fact; other roles. Remember, they might be out there. Should be basic.
2) You are right in pointing out that Snow seems to have been completely oblivious to the Night 1 results, assuming we were told everything. I think it's a fair assumption, mind, and thus I'm not calling you out on that. It's definitely something to keep in mind overall.
This posts borders on the obscenely long, which forces my apologies; I plan on addressing other things later, but I felt Corwin's post deserved this much comment after a few rereads of it. Right now? I'm unsure who to vote for as Cor and Snow are both beginning to ping wildly for me after all this, and Shale's quiet lurkering isn't much better.
-
More DHE: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25277#msg25277
-Yay, voting Rat! Too bad it's only a 50% roleblocker, since that's probably the best use I can think of for a town roleblocker really. (Trying to nail the scum killer in a game with a potential Vig seems really pointless.) This doesn't, of course, confirm Snow as town, but I hope he continues to report his Roleblock targets, since that helps. I can't say I've forgotten Snow's actions yesterday, for one, though I haven't yet seriously thought about top lynch candidates yet.
O-kay. Let me say the problem I see with this.
Roleblocker is neutral at best. Even if you believe Rat and think this proves Snow's role, why do you trust him? Despite the obligatory 'this doesn't confirm Snow' thing, you're doing exactly that, and it's extremely puzzling. I would be ecstatic to live in a world where JR and Rat were townies happily working together towards building a scum-free utopia, but that's total bullshit because JR is very scummy. Why are you taking this particular view?
QR and criticism on me giving her a look. Several things QR has done rub me the wrong way. Yes, culling targets is no sign of scummines, Excal. However, in both cases, she has come after considerable time has been spent without decisive action (which you noticed yourself) and her actions ended up sealing the fate of the lynch. Attribute that to luck or accident if you wish, but I won't because QR is a very good mafia player and so I'm wary of someone like her doing it twice in a row without any guarantee that she's doing it for the good of town.
I'm not entirely sure there's a way to talk to Tai without getting WAHLOOKATME attitude right back, but here goes anyway. How does me finding Tom scummy and working to get him lynched (a mistake, we all know now with the powers of HINDSIGHT) contradict in any way QR also being instrumental in that? You talk about large slips and misreads and what not, but I just don't see how that works.
Could I be wrong? Yes. But seeing the strong opinions I got here just for mentioning the possibility only made me more determined to take a second look.
Shale.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25287#msg25287
I agree with him on... pretty much both JR and on his clarification to QR.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25273#msg25273
I've managed to muddy the waters for myself, too (lovely), since I've put the scum in a damned good position to attack me by simple application of Lynch All Lurkers, and I can't argue that it isn't a valid argument. In fact, looking over the posts I missed yesterday, QR's comment that "I think we're past LAL" looks very off to me. Scum lurk when they can get away with it. Just look at my play in the anonymous game. Now, I know you're not scum defending a scumbuddy here, which makes me unsure of exactly why scum would argue that way, but it still feels off, and I'd still love to hear the thinking behind it.
This is a troubling passage for the following reasons. Shale admits he was lurking by any reasonable definition, and then goes on to say scum tend to lurk. And brings himself as an example (from another game, right). Then, he says the phrase I've boldened out, and my only question is 'how'?
After this, and taking his extreme lurking into consideration, Shale is now my suspect #2.
General caution to everyone to treat yesterday as a mislynch for analysis purposes.
I do agree with this sentiment, at least, as must be apparent.
Another thing that jumps at me is that Shale mentioned Bardiche as one of the people of interest to him, but we've heard nothing on Bardiche from him yet. Did he change his mind? Is he working on a post to address that? Mystery. Noteworthy because I believe his day 2 criticism of Bardiche were justified, and not following up on them is strange.
The Rat section is pretty small, I'm afraid. While I can feel something off about him (specifically, I don't believe Rat was being entirely truthful with us), I don't actually see any slips on his part, and his participation, while on the scarcer side than I'm used to from him, is sufficient content-wise. He also doesn't merely go for the conventional targets. Even though he made the third lurker vote in several minutes for Shale, I can't blame him because Shale is pretty damn suspicious even without lurking. If JR flips as I expect him to, there would be more here.
And Tai posts again, I'll deal with it in a separate one.
-
Re: Tai's second post:
Yeah, whatever. Look, man, I'm not putting together a case after the fact. I am placing arguments from late day 2 (past my bedtime) and early day 3 that support my day 2 case of JR being scummy. As said case was obviously not enough to convince people not myself to lynch JR day 2, and he continued to act scummy afterwards, said further arguments were posted. I don't dismiss everyone's abilities, I just question everyone's judgement late day 2. Some people voted Meeple with the intention of having the day just end already, and I question that. It's what I'd call a momentary slip in judgement, not massive fail as a human being or mafia player, and I think you're inventing reasons to enrage yourself there. Finally, what exactly SHOULD I do in response to eyeing and gut feels? I've already explained why I feel it necessary to defend myself from such accusations, and it's pretty much the accuser that needs to explain their feelings clearly and frame them into argument, not me who should just bend over and take it silently. You lecturing me on politeness just takes the cake, though.
I'll address what feels relevant from your defense of JR/attack on me (done as part of making a case on JR, to boot, as Tai says in the opening paragraph).
1) Post referenced, he said he would address playstyle issues "at a later moment". The same post, while something is being typed, likely constitues a "later moment" to not only the writer, but also most readers.
It reads as dropping them in lieu of discussing more productive things. Apparently, only I show utter arrogance and disregard for the combined abilities of others by informing them how they should think.
Counter: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25000#msg25000
Indeed, you were not voting for him! You were voting for Snow, as you are today. The OMGUS relevance is also worth note. However, the post I reference above is a rather scathing note on what Meeple had been doing, though apparently you had another reason for throwing that analysis of Meeple out there, that of people saying they'd do things and not do so. While vaguely fair, aren't you supposed to be hunting scum, and not just pointing out things that annoy you? Oh, but...
This is a counter... how? I did not want to go into that after a simple Meeple section in a post that grouped those who promised analysis, which took a look at whether they delivered on it. Meeple kept on hounding me with demands to show exactly where he did not deliver. I finally decided to make such a post to prove it to him and to anyone who might be taken in by his denials.
Case in point, and not the only time Meeple asked: "Also, Cor, you still haven't answered my question. You claimed I haven't made good on what I claimed I would. Care to, you know, point out specific examples?" (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24895#msg24895) So I did point out those specific examples.
I also noted the following at the beginning of the Meeple section in the post you reference, Tai: "I suppose that if nothing else, this pushes Meeple a bit towards 'town that makes me headdesk' rather than 'scum flailing'. I suppose I'll have to watch and see."
While I am hunting scum first and foremost, I cannot ignore people who ask me for explanations. Letting those thing stand would muddy the waters and open the floor to attacks on me on the grounds of being evasive. I clearly had no reason to be evasive, as my points re: Meeple were sound and legit. They just weren't enough for a vote, nor did I call for one on him.
"While vaguely fair". This had to be quoted specifically. Niceties aside, is this a grudging compliment, there, or do you actually have issues with the way I presented what I had?
From the post I linked above. So by this, Meeple had a pretense to be hiding under! (One that everyone else had kinda been saying as "Shorten the damn posts Meeple", but hey, another small note). Oh, but wait...
You know it (and me) better. I clearly referred to content. Content is not post size. I likewise called on Meeple to condense his posts better to reduce post size. You are trying to look for contradictions where none exist.
So it's pretty much "hey, I consider this behavior scummy, but he just makes me headdesk". Right. Your main point is noted, but I can't say that I don't see this post as an advance on Meeple. Thusly, I can see him grouping you into that set, especially since you were the one his supposed anger, truthful or not, was pointed towards.
This is a deliberate misreading or misrepresenting of my words, take your pick. In my posts prior to the one you quote from, I considered Meeple a suspect and said as much. This post (the one you quote, made later) said that my suspicion of Meeple remained, but had lessened as a result of his more recent posts/behavior. So it's not that he makes me headdesk for acting scummy. It's that the less scummy he acts as we get to the end of day 2, the more I want to headdesk as he looks better on the town/scum scale (but worse on the 'good play' scale).
Okay, handling the first part of the post... wow, that's either a horrible misread or a blatant twist of the words. "Unwanted ROLES[/i]". As in "SCUM AND THIRD PARTY." Not as in "I KNOW SHALE IS THIS" but "I KNOW UNWANTED ROLES LURK, SO LET US STAB THIS LURKER."
Continuing on, so it's completely unimaginable there's, you know. OTHER ROLES out there, Cor? Sheesh. Rat was blocked, there was a kill missing. Congrats. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IN HELL CAUSED IT. You, drawing the line from Snow to Rat and pointing madly at it? If anything that draws a line between you (You know rat's scum and that the kill was blocked by someone, and that Rat was the one out!) and Rat (scum killer, natch, assuming this little paranoid scenario.) As it is, I'm still ambivalent on the Rat but this makes you stick out like a sore thumb.
There is indeed a horrible misread. On your part.
But I don't mind explaining it. Let's say you're town and a roleblocker (everything JR claims, and I don't believe). Fine. Let's then proceed to say that you find someone to be the likeliest scum in the game. He worries you enough to have you land your vote on him twice, across days. (I've done this with JR, myself!)
And you don't roleblock him? Even as you cite the strong possibility of Shale having a role?
So our Town JR thinks Shale is likeliest scum, is worried Shale might have a role, and his reaction is... to block someone else. Please, please, please tell me how that computes.
Or JR is, you know, scum. And is worried about Shale's presumed role, which he or his teammates could've found out. I won't speculate, but I see the possibilities.
1) Certainly he should be suspicious, but there's also the noted-above fact; other roles. Remember, they might be out there. Should be basic.
2) You are right in pointing out that Snow seems to have been completely oblivious to the Night 1 results, assuming we were told everything. I think it's a fair assumption, mind, and thus I'm not calling you out on that. It's definitely something to keep in mind overall.
I believe I've addressed the former above.
And as for the latter, I don't see a point to Cid lying. As matter of fact, we could go ahead and ask him to make a mod post. Are flip posts fully truthful? [y/n/can't say]
-
Current votecount:
Shale (3): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (1): Corwin
With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.
If you think you see errors in the votecount, please mention them to a mod.
Flips contain full standard role names.
-
I'm not entirely sure there's a way to talk to Tai without getting WAHLOOKATME attitude right back, but here goes anyway. How does me finding Tom scummy and working to get him lynched (a mistake, we all know now with the powers of HINDSIGHT) contradict in any way QR also being instrumental in that? You talk about large slips and misreads and what not, but I just don't see how that works.
I am saying that you made such a statement when QR was in truth -incidental- to both; you say she was instrumental, when in truth day 2's lynch only makes her notable due to mod error, and day 1 she was pretty much just another person in the train. As I said, investigate her as you will, but saying she's "instrumental" as your reasoning is rather badly fallacious.
Also fuck you too. As much as you may consider this self-fulfilling prophecy, I read that and no longer have any interest again thanks to assholery. Funny how that works, eh? Back later, too angry to think again.
-
Fine. Was I over the line? Yes. Was it because the moment you posted you attacked me and my playing style while injecting emotions into the game? Yes. I'll avoid it in the future if you could manage to keep your private life out of this as well.
Day 1, QR made the Tom train prominent and gave it momentum. Day 2... what does a mod error have anything to do with it?
-
1) Me having a vote is nothing special. Only I should be terribly excited by this. That DHE says it's the best use for a friendly roleblocker is weird, because it's.. not really, the best use for a friendly roleblocker is to pay one mana, tap target scum. At least, not until you think we're hitting LYLO and my vote could indeed spell the difference between life and death. But that's not here and I doubt anyone really thought it could be.
2) Remember, everything Tai says about 'I don't care, you guys suck, hate this game' and shit is stupid. He joined. He saw the playerlist. He knew what he was getting into. I have absolutely no sympathy for 'I CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE' in a game like this, and it continually baffles me as to why people get surprised by the way they are treated. His whole indignance shtick is really tiresome. (And for fucks sake, I'm like one guy who can't even vote under normal circumstances. Why you cared so much about what I thought of you is retarded, with so many other players there to convince- most of which, I believe, do not subscribe to the same school of thought I do. No matter how much I wish they did.)
Secondly: Your comment toward DHE seems to be there solely to incite suspicion toward him. Active and leading scum can successfully drag town into the abyss, merrily leading them by the nose. Lurking and inactive scum slip under radars and are of no help.
What the heck does this even mean? "Convincing scum are convincing?" "Active people are more likely to be scum because scum must be active to win?" "Any given scum is more likely to be active than not?"
Being active and argumentative is just good play regardless of what side you're on or whether you subscribe to 'aggressive' or 'not aggressive' or whatever. You don't actually say if what he said about DHE was unwarranted or not, so where the heck were you going with this?
3) Jo'ou said the right things that lead me to think he's less scummy at the start of the day, which is why I wasn't on his throat to begin with.
Unfortunately he doesn't have a case on me at all and he absolutely needs to if anyone is going to take him seriously. I am with Corwin, here. Night actions need to match up with day actions once revealed. He's had ample opportunity but he barely even tossed out a case in the slightest sense at me; nor has he really given any hint of these feelings in day two.
Remember, he...
-Ramped up suspicion on Bardiche for a perfectly sensible claim.
-Seemed to ignore the obvious ramifications of Bardiche's role to start.
-Behaved like an idiot at a lousy time on day 2 when things were still up in the air.
-Gunned after Andrew instead of Shale on the basis of 'not being useful', to sum it up.
-And, of course, today, plays his roleblock card and followup in an inexplicable fashion.
-Who did he try to block on night 1, anyway? Did I miss this somewhere? Did it work? Why did we all forget to ask this question?
##Unvote, ##Vote: Jo'ou
4) QR goes into a long and detailed post about how she thinks on Shale's request. Am I the only one who isn't really getting anything useful from this at all? She's happy enough to respond to barely relevant questions in florid detail, but not, y'know, make case etc blah.
-
I've managed to muddy the waters for myself, too (lovely), since I've put the scum in a damned good position to attack me by simple application of Lynch All Lurkers, and I can't argue that it isn't a valid argument. In fact, looking over the posts I missed yesterday, QR's comment that "I think we're past LAL" looks very off to me. Scum lurk when they can get away with it. Just look at my play in the anonymous game. Now, I know you're not scum defending a scumbuddy here, which makes me unsure of exactly why scum would argue that way, but it still feels off, and I'd still love to hear the thinking behind it.
This is a troubling passage for the following reasons. Shale admits he was lurking by any reasonable definition, and then goes on to say scum tend to lurk. And brings himself as an example (from another game, right). Then, he says the phrase I've boldened out, and my only question is 'how'?
Because if I were scum, I think I'd have noticed, and that question was going through my head - "it looks weird, definitely, but why would scum defend a townie that way?" And in general, I can't really make that point without highlighting the ways I'm suspicious. Like I said before, I'm not going to turn my back on LAL just because I've played poorly in this game.
Another thing that jumps at me is that Shale mentioned Bardiche as one of the people of interest to him, but we've heard nothing on Bardiche from him yet. Did he change his mind? Is he working on a post to address that? Mystery. Noteworthy because I believe his day 2 criticism of Bardiche were justified, and not following up on them is strange.
Working on it. I went to sleep after my last post, and just now woke up. Like I said, I've got a backlog to work through. I'd cut to the chase and post something on Bardiche now, but I've got about forty-five minutes of cardio to do and I wanted to get something out there rather than fall into a habit of infinite procrastination again.
-
Don't have much motivation to write WOTs (wall of text fyi) everywhere, so just responding to Rat for now. Response to other people's suspicions pending.
-Is really interested in his own role and presenting it in a townie-friendly fashion. In fact he has pointed out he avoids doing certain things in order to avoid being scummy several times. He is very, VERY concerned with his image.
Well, yes. I don't want to give off the wrong image like last time, which left most town in jeopardy over my true alignment, but due to others being apparently more scummish stayed their hand and left me until the end. (at which point, I believe, Taishyr targeted me with roleblock in case I was scum, meaning they still didn't trust me!) I'm aware now, in hindsight, that trying too hard to come off as town comes off as being scummy instead, but that's just playstyle error on my behalf then.
-When he initially goes after Meeple, he offers very little reasoning, as seen here;Moving on, I'm more suspicious of Meeple at the moment. The entire assault on Ciato seems uncalled for. It also doesn't sit well with me how you defend Shale. I mean, sure, I defended Deltaflyer, but I think I was much less zealous on it to the point of attempting to null suspicions on him by saying things he should've done himself.
Apart from this he says very little about the State of the Game, as it were, preferring to focus on just how he's going to implement his super awesome role and such.[/quote]
Of course, my super special awesome role is more important tha-- wait, what? Yeah, I mentioned sometime that day, I was rather lost on suspicions at the time because everyone tossed to and fro with arguments, some which seemed reasonable enough to me to not want to press further accusations. I also didn't see much reason in attempting to start up a new case with nothing but little straws, since they never seem to be a good foundation for a case.
-Later, he jumps off Meeple here -
Meeple, in general, I always believe that one should defend himself in Mafia. Others providing your defense indicates that those others feel confident enough about your alignment that they shoot to your defense. This is alright if you are a Mason or something, and you're guaranteed of another's alignment. But in this case, you're defending someone you (likely) have no alignment read on, quite frankly, unless you have some investigative role or are scum. I don't want to hear if you have the former, but that's my explanation for why I take such problem with your defense of Shale.
Even after you were called out on it you remained over-zealous to his defense. A little defending of others is okay (ie: I didn't get that read out of it, how come you hammer on that point so zealously? as a defense) but when you take over the defense... Yeah. Anyway, I'll keep this in the back of my mind.
##UNFoS: Meeple
The thing is, he takes problems with how Meeple defends Shale, ok fine whatever, but then he jumps off of Meeple for this action, pretty much drops the case, and doesn't really pick up a new one or FoS anyone else for a while. Yet it still reads as if he remains somewhat suspicious of Meep.
Yes, I took Meeple's defense. I agreed with him upon re-read of his posts where he argued he wasn't defending Shale's alignment but attacked the people who attacked his posts for straws.
After Dread Thomas throws his thoughts out there, though, Bardiche leaps upon them with what can only be described as savage glee, repeatedly hyping to us that it's fine to just go where some dead townie of questionable ability directs us (I believe 'getting yourself lynched apparently on purpose on day 1' counts as 'questionable'), and seems to use this as a way to jump over at QR on minor points (like not caring that Delta died, um, did *anyone*?). I'll admit he has something about her speculating over third party roles but not doing anything-
-take note, QR: scum, 3rd party, it's all good to us if we lynch them since their intentions aren't aligned with our own-
-but then calls that stuff minor, anyway, in lieu of going after Shale for lurking.
Yes. Would any of you consent to a case on QR based on what I presented? I don't think so; I wouldn't even pursue such a case based on such shoddy reasoning. I threw that out there for when I die.
He seems to take his own mistakes rather harshly, which is weird when it really came down to a choice of word and not actual intent or content. It didn't seem like much of a reason to get all tense to me. In general I feel he hasn't really been adding to the cases floating around and rather just tagging on to whatever seems convenient at the time. What I find particularly troublesome is that he doesn't seem to present his votes/FOS's and cases and such with any confidence, either.
What exactly is troublesome about not being confident in your own cases, since they are guesses based on people's words? As someone who says questionable things even when town, I recognize that people may err and am unwilling to lynch someone based on a minor err myself.
I'll post something of substance about the day itself, the flips of the other day, re-evaluation of the last day and such at a later time, when I feel more up to it. I just wanted to defend my actions before it'd get buried under the present argument.
-
BEWARE WALL OF TEXT. Today will NOT be a day where I can reliably post here at work because our internal audit group decided to give us a surprise inspection. Yay. Luckily I started this post this morning before I came in and should finish before they start. I want to get in some comments before my day is shot to heck. Luckily I should be able to make a couple posts from home tonight.
QR: Hm. Well, at what point does lurking become scummy in your eyes? The point of LAL isn't "lurkers are dumb, throw rocks at them," it's "lurking is something scum tends to do."
Lurking is one of those things that I fall back on, not something that I rely on. Frankly, we all have periods where things happens and we just frankly don't have TIME to post. To my eyes, a lurker has only a bit better chance of being a scum than it does a townie who just frankly has RL issues or is just having trouble wrapping their heads around the current situation enough to post. It's certainly the best yardstick to use when no one else is giving off scum/TP vibes. If there are precious few cases going on for me to analyze, then that's the point I turn to LAL and push for content. But if there ARE cases for me to analyze, I would always rather focus there until I feel relatively safe that the cases in point aren't believable. Does this make sense where I'm coming from?
and QR because she's pretty much been central in making two lynches that mislynched in a row take place.
Since when did 'lynching a third party' start equating 'mislynch', Cor? A mislynch, correct me if I'm wrong, is when we lynch a townie thinking they're scum. Lynching a TP is actually *gasp* almost as good as lynching scum (and some would argue that there IS no difference). And necessary to do in the long haul anyway. What are your reasonings for thinking a TP lynch is a mislynch?
4) QR goes into a long and detailed post about how she thinks on Shale's request. Am I the only one who isn't really getting anything useful from this at all? She's happy enough to respond to barely relevant questions in florid detail, but not, y'know, make case etc blah.
I find that NOT responding in good detail when asked a question or made a point upon usually leads to a quick lynching or at least a quick slide up the scumometer by most people (and myself included. I find it very off setting to ask a question and get either no response or just a cursory one). If asked, yes I will respond with as much data as I can to hopefully resolve people's questions. As to not making cases, if you're speaking historically I find that really odd considering Cor's frantic push to paint me scummy for making cases on people that are front runners in my mind. And if you're speaking about that post in particular, sorry I didn't stop to make a case last night, but getting a semi-decent night's sleep before work is always a good idea. The day had just started and the morning is soon enough to start commenting on issues.
Now, my thoughts for my vote today.
I think Shale's starting to provide some content and I'm glad he's shown back up. I don't see the need to pressure him with a vote at the moment as he already has quite a few on him and we're still very early in the day. His disappearance does put him a few notches up on my meter and I'll be watching his content rather closely today.
Now as for the 'something else targeting Carth'? Well that was me. Phearz the power of my pie tossing. Which does jack and &*^%. It's for game flavor and that's all. I can only toss it at people who vote for me (which Day 1 meant I had to toss it at OK but his death meant no one actually knew it) or if no one votes for me in a day then I get to toss at it at whomever I chose or not toss it at all. I chose to toss it because frankly, this &*^% is bananas and he was as good of a place to express this opinion as anywhere else since it doesn't really do anything. Oh, and if the bananas part made little sense, I hit him with a banana cream pie.
Now, considering Ashdla's flip I went back over her posts, trying to see if she left anything for us to pick through later in regards to whatever her information role told her. She snarks a bit at Snow for his attitude, but I'm not sure if that's anything other than annoyance. Mostly, she sticks to the Meeple lynch pretty securely once she takes a stand on the lynching issue which doesn't tell us much since he did turn out to be TP. I'm not sure if she was swayed by the evidence or garnered a clue through her role. Either way I'm not seeing much to go on further in that regard, more's the pity.
My own vote today is that of the two people I found most scummy yesterday, one still lives. And no one has really surpassed that level of scum on my meter yet (although Cor's attitude of fanatical lynch is slowly getting there. I think Snow looks suspicious, too, but frankly the overzealous attitude is actually making me re-think the decision rather than cement it because tunnel vision training is usually where we go wrong as town). So, for now, ##Vote Snow.
I'll be back tonight when I get home to post more.
-
QR! Hi!
Since when did 'lynching a third party' start equating 'mislynch', Cor? A mislynch, correct me if I'm wrong, is when we lynch a townie thinking they're scum. Lynching a TP is actually *gasp* almost as good as lynching scum (and some would argue that there IS no difference). And necessary to do in the long haul anyway. What are your reasonings for thinking a TP lynch is a mislynch?
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25307#msg25307
General caution to everyone to treat yesterday as a mislynch for analysis purposes.
I do agree with this sentiment, at least, as must be apparent.
Proper context, etc.
For those of you who actually wonder why and can't be bothered to get said context, I'll provide it here along with another reason: a survivor is one of the less harmful TP roles; in this particular case, we even had Meeple post his list of suspects and his reasoning. I happen to believe he was being sincere and trying to help town in that pre-death post, and not spiteful as has been suggested. I believe this further suggests he was trying to survive alongside us, at least to the endgame, which clearly made him a viable target for scum. And speaking of scum, the most important reason this should be treated as a mislynch: scum likely wouldn't know about Meeple (barring investigations, etc), and would therefore see him as not-them. Getting TP lynched in most cases is hardly something that gives town cred; in some cases, it even moves the weights in the direction of scumminess.
Now, to the point. Does being what I consider prominent on both lynch trains make you SCUM? No. Does it warrant a second look from me? I feel so. Do the reactions suggesting that you being scum is beyond the pale worry me? Yes, and warrant that look even more, given we shouldn't trust each other too much without damn good reasons.
My own vote today is that of the two people I found most scummy yesterday, one still lives. And no one has really surpassed that level of scum on my meter yet (although Cor's attitude of fanatical lynch is slowly getting there. I think Snow looks suspicious, too, but frankly the overzealous attitude is actually making me re-think the decision rather than cement it because tunnel vision training is usually where we go wrong as town). So, for now, ##Vote Snow.
Fanatical? I was clearly not emphasizing the level of JR's scumminess enough yesterday. Okay, I've accepted that, and he survived. If he's truthful about his role, that means scum had use of that power role one more night. I honestly don't know what else I can do. So if I look a little bad as a result but we get the scum, it's fine by me.
Moving on to a glance through QR's posts:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24406#msg24406
QR votes Tom, putting him to 3 votes. Delta swiftly follows, pretty much cementing it. Huh. I recalled it the other way around, with QR being the fourth vote. Aha! There was an unvote along the way. Well, it does lessen my suspicions to a degree, but she still placed Tom ahead of everyone else.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24468#msg24468
She's going after Tom and convincing others as, yes, I was. Tom lying day 1 before didn't help there. >_<
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24503#msg24503
The first consolidation of suspects post. I discovered what grates at me -- this time, the third suspect feels artificially inserted. It is as if QR has decided just two wouldn't be enough, and is suggesting a third, just picking at random from the weaker targets while mentioning herself she doesn't feel particularly convicted ("I have a harder time seeing that one, but I'd hear arguments about it. "). This feels off about her, to me, and finally I can put it in words.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24667#msg24667
Day 2 stuff, now. QR mentions not feeling bad that Delta the player is gone (ditto, really) and pleased that OK is gone. I find it puzzling that she both thinks his flip isn't surprising and at the same is surprised someone would target him. Why? If you thought he was trying to get himself lynched to win, why couldn't someone else? Someone with a night phase role?
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24810#msg24810
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24862#msg24862
Promises thoughts and delivers on it to a point. She only really covers five players, and not to a very great detail. Bardiche worries QR. I haven't seen her return to it yet during day 3. Are you planning on it?
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25034#msg25034
The second consolidation post. Nothing actually questionable about the subject matter, but the last line makes me pause.
Also, I am looking forward to Tom's post for the Day. I think there are a lot of things being brought up that I would like to see what he has to say on the matters.
Having reread your day 1 thoughts on Tom, it strains my disbelief that you were truly interested in Tom's insight.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25082#msg25082
The 'past-LAL' post. I don't really want to get into an argument over playstyles again, so I'll just let it go. Seeing lurking as a condition below regular scumtells in importance is kinda wrong (given how many scum statistically lurk), but we could leave that debate for after the game.
And I've pretty much caught up on QR's posts. Before I give my tl;dr summary, I would like to hear from QR on the matters I've raised.
-
3) Jo'ou said the right things that lead me to think he's less scummy at the start of the day, which is why I wasn't on his throat to begin with.
Unfortunately he doesn't have a case on me at all and he absolutely needs to if anyone is going to take him seriously. I am with Corwin, here. Night actions need to match up with day actions once revealed. He's had ample opportunity but he barely even tossed out a case in the slightest sense at me; nor has he really given any hint of these feelings in day two.
Remember, he...
-Ramped up suspicion on Bardiche for a perfectly sensible claim.
-Seemed to ignore the obvious ramifications of Bardiche's role to start.
-Behaved like an idiot at a lousy time on day 2 when things were still up in the air.
-Gunned after Andrew instead of Shale on the basis of 'not being useful', to sum it up.
-And, of course, today, plays his roleblock card and followup in an inexplicable fashion.
-Who did he try to block on night 1, anyway? Did I miss this somewhere? Did it work? Why did we all forget to ask this question?
Okay, I'll respond to this first because it's less daunting than finecombing Corwin's Unlimited Wall of Text right now.
The justifications for not roleblocking Bard are simple: why, from an objective standpoint, would try to roleblock the extra voting at this point? He gave me no reason to believe he has an underlying night power which could be potentially harmful - and, as such, my roleblocking would be hilariously pointless on him (ohnoes, now he can only weigh in once! zomg). I haven't eased much on my impression of his roleclaiming, it still feels gratuitous. But the kind of attention he deserves is hardly the attention my role can give. However, I had the gut feeling your own role would have bigger odds of having underlying assumptions. Feels pretty simple and self-explanatory to me. I could also try to ZOMG ROLEBLOCK SCUMKILLS, theoretically. But unless I turned psychic overnight, don't see how that is happening outside sheer dumb luck. I acted out of honest kneejerk suspicion against your role and just went from there to see how would it affect the next day for discussion and possible hindsight leads. Also, when did I gun at Andrew? I gunned at -Corwin-. I know that OMGUSes generally look all the same, but I expect you to make more careful assumptions about me.
Now, you may give me flak for "ignoring" the ramifications of Bard's role, but, IIRC, I got flak for actually -pondering- the ramifications of the role, but in a way you all disagreed with. As such, I just laid it down, since I'd probably get into more issues if I started trying to pull leads out of it while under negative scrutiny anyway. Of course, this hardly mattered considering I behaved like a moron later on, and no matter what, my behavior there will give good reasons for me to get lynched until the end of the game. It's okay, though, I have no one to blame but myself.
Also, I find nice that you probably didn't read my roleclaim in full and didn't notice NEB's assessment over my effective roleblocking. I have a 50% chance of not being able to roleblock at night at all, and the chance of not managing to do it kicked in at night 1. As such, I didn't roleblock anybody that night. That clears things up for you?
I'll try to digest Corwin and possibly respond him a bit later.
-
Okay, I feel I got enough of a grasp on Corwin's content to try and answer his points, although I doubt it'll give him any change on prospects in his agenda.
Also: ##UNVOTE: Shale, since I believe that this pressure vote is no longer necessary.
First, Corwin, I don't think I need to reiterate how the case against me is very easy to follow through - there is rhyme and reason, and my behavior obviously set all alarms into red mode. However, why try so hard to press it on when it's basically given on a silver plate at this point? I'm halfway to lynch and I'm hardly surviving past today, but I'm putting all my cards on the table as you all request it and whenever necessary.
And I also never claimed my logic on voting for you was sound and sane, unlike you seem to try make it sound. I probably sound like two entirely different people comparing my breakdown posts and my post-breakdown posts, but that's what actual consideration post-suicidal momentum does to me. As such, there are glaring contradictions that will speak against me. I could try to explain them, but not justify. It was an OMGUS post, of course, which mitigates my words a fair deal. But, quite frankly? Your current content is leading me to believe my nagging concerns aren't a complete blow into the water.
So far, you've tried to pound harder the train on me (perfectly fair. If we were in switched situations, I would at least consider doing the same, albeit less scathingly) and essentially went into OMGUS mode against NEB and Tai. Your logic may even be sound (I see the meaning. "Good hard look" does feel like a soft-FoS, of course, but why respond to that so excitedly and furiously? It's almost as if this hits a personal nerve, which by all rights shouldn't), but the offense on Elfboy feels a little bit too defensive, which shouldn't be considering his logic - not to mention this is arguing over a rather minor point. And, while you have a point for being hard on Tai for his behavior, you... just answer him in a way that will feed -more fuel to the fire- of WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHLOOKATME, when it's painfully obvious that you know how to rub the buttons right or wrong.
As such, asides from the case on me, your actions have this vague smell of smokescreening and chaos induction, which scum thrives on. Hell, after your comment of "when I flip like you expect to" makes me half-inclined to vote myself just to get this done with and prove you wrong because of your utter blind arrogance - although I know better than that. It's almost as if you're eager for my blood for the sake of proving the size of your massive e-penis instead of actually bringing town the win. Which one is it, Cor?
Anyhow, I'm done with Corwin for the moment. I'll read some more arguments and posts on QR and try to unmuddle my thoughts here, since we have a bit of a fine mess going in this day.
-
Oh, forgot this addendum: I'm not saying you're scum for your behavior, Cor. What I mean is that the way you act is bound to be harmful to town regardless of your actual alignment, and you might want to reconsider your modus operandi. I know this is the pot calling the kettle black, but at least I'm admitting how stupidly I acted and trying to make amends - and hell, I even think that lynching me might be a solid clarifying action for town to do this day. But I'm not willing to give up the fight anymore.
-
Current votecount:
Shale (1): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (3): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain
With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.
-
Was at the doctor's. Reading back and putting together a post right now.
-
Audits suck. Anyway, finally out and going to make a post before heading home for the day.
I'll tackle Cor's hellalong post an issue at a time.
A - Cor, when quoting others, could you keep in your quote tags the name of the person you're quoting? It is very difficult to determine exactly who said things for me when you quote without that context. Just a request, thanks.
B - I'm not objecting to you looking at me or questioning me. I haven't said that anywhere to date nor do I intend to do so. EVERYone should be looking at EVERYone. I'm not sure where you're getting that I am saying your poking at me is *gaspevil*. I've done things that you seem to disagree with, so of course you're going to point them out. That's the GAME.
C - I am not disputing the fact that Snow looks the scummiest so far (hence my vote), but as he has as much as admitted that he's not going to be able to change anyone's mind with his sudden loss of suicidal tendancies, where exactly is the harm in not Quick Lynching him and instead opening up discussion? We're barely a day into the new Day and it's a little early for KILLLLLLL HIIIIIM. Right now the only ones that helps is scum who get to have a day phase where we don't get much new input but they get to go ahead and make another kill.
Now we get into your analysis on my posts.
1 - If I'm reading your analysis of my Day 1 views on Tom correctly, you don't find anything hideously scummy there so I don't thing there's anything to respond to in that regard.
2 - You think my insertion of Delta into my list felt 'forced'. I guess I can see your side of the issue there. Personally, he was on several people's tongues because of his disruptive playstyle and antagonistic attitude. Was he a Top Contender? Perhaps not to you, but there were a lot of people voicing concerns. That's why I said he was out there, but that I didn't feel the case there that much. They were the only 3 people with more than a single vote to their names as well which is why I listed all 3.
3 - My comments on OK's flip. My 'not sure what to make of it' was actually explained in the next 3 sentences following that phrase. I didn't know whether to believe it was a SK/Vig taking him out because they thought the one who slid under the lynch was the true scum, whether a scum took him out because they thought he had some power role considering his actions, or whether it was either of those just being freaking scared of OK in general. I wasn't surprised that he flipped with an ability and my unsure of it was strictly in the sense of why he was targeted, not that someone would find him worth targeting. Sometimes if you can get a sense for why someone is targeted you can get insight into who targeted them. This one left me with little clue there as there were too many possible 'why's.
4 - Why haven't I returned to Bardiche? Because I haven't seen anything new out of him that worries me more or notches him up on my radar. I don't feel it helps to constantly give the same points over and over. I've made my comments about him. That's all I can do until either he does something that makes him more suspicious in my eyes or else he does something that removes all suspicion of him from me. Right now, he's still flying at the same level. I have nothing new to add there. Before the last lynch, he was about even in my mind between whether I thought him a townie or a TP, leaning just a tad to the TP side. After the flip and with 2 TPs removed from the game, I am thinking maybe I was overanalyzing that because 3 TPs is a bit much. However, this IS Suicide Squad and if there was ever going to be a game where there were more TPs than necessary, this would be it, so I am not removing the idea of him being a TP from my table completely, just giving it a tad less weight for now.
5 - Why would I look forward to Tom's post? Because while I don't think he's any more or less likely to be right than anyone else, he is the ONLY one of you bunch whose words I can trust are exactly what he thinks. He may be wrong, but he has NO reason to lie or mislead. I weigh what he says with my own anaylsis and thoughts, but I do like having a voice that gives an honest thought. Everyone here pushes for a lynch off an agenda. For some, that agenda is to help town, for some it's to survive and for others it's to kill the townies. I have no way of knowing who has what agenda except Tom here. Doesn't mean I believe his anaylsis more than others, just means I believe he means what he says.
Yours was a pretty long post. I hope I didn't miss anything. If I did, let me know and I would be happy to answer it.
Day 3 is still young and I don't have anything new to offer yet on anyone else. Perhaps there will be more posts when I get home for me to analyze.
-
Just a heads up. The water heater at my place burst a seal sometime today, and it came to our attention a good deal after that fact. I will be cleaning up three flooded rooms instead of posting tonight.
-
First and foremost, I'm inclined to take ANYTHING Meeple said at the end with a grain of salt. While it looks like a wall of pro-townie analysis... ultimately, he was still masquerading as town as well. So... I'm not inclined to view his parting commentary as pro-town. He has absolutely not investment in giving town a helping hand on the way out. A dead townie at least still wins if town wins. A dead third party survivor has nothing left to do but achieve a moral victory through causing the loss of whichever side they feel the most bitterness towards.
This doesn't mean that what he said shouldn't be looked at (he doesn't know alignment any better than us) at all, but it shouldn't be taken with a pro-townie slant.
Snow... margh. I gave him the pass yesterday based on game logic, but his recent posts really aren't confidence inspiring. He theorizes along fairly questionable lines (OK/Delta as killers without listed kill abilities) and then jumps at a very vulnerable individual. His attacks have been... flighty? He's been jumping at whoever presents themselves with shocking ferocity, and has been falling into some of the normal traps of lashing back at detractors, etc. I also do not like that, despite your power not working, you have yet to clarify who you actually targetted. I would like to hear as well, even if it didn't work.
Laggy... you know, to be frank. I've been uncomfortable with you all game, but I've never had any actual reason to be. Now that day three has arrived though, I think I'm starting to see some actual evidence for that bad feeling I've been getting. You are very subtly trying to get town to think along dangerous lines, and then, as you are called out on it, shifting your stance so it looks like an earnest mistake or just an off-handed comment. For example, your initial acceptance as Meeple as being in a pro-townie position, despite a lot of evidence that would point to the contrary (see: him being third party, him lying about being third party, the general nature of his power role). Hell, you even call him a confirmed townie, which is a pretty large stretch by any definition of the terminology. Then you backtrack as soon as NEB calls you out on it. I really have a hard time believing you are falling into a trap of protown-ish third parties when Meeple was pretty obviously not one in any apparent manner.
There are other little nags. For example, way back you made an off-handed remark about powers that bothered me, positing that there are many abilities that townies get that probably should not be exercised when conversing to Bardiche. Town really should use the weapons it has at its disposal, and such a contrary statement (especially without more specifics) looks like its intended to be the kind of thing that gets other players with strong roles to maybe, maybe hold back. Which is a problem. While townie powers can backfire thanks to lack of alignment knowledge, it also prevents town from making killing strokes (role blocking scum powers/kills, vigs, etc).
Thirdly, you make a curious comment about night kills and softly encourage anyone with knowledge of a failed kill to step forward. While there are safe manners to do it (getting hit and surviving because of intervention from an unknown party), the pairing it without a comment about role madness and such really does feel like a very soft encouragement for individuals who shouldn't be speaking up here (BP, Docs, etc) to talk. Again, I might just be overreading, but... this feels clumsy from you?
##Vote: Laggy
Talk to me a bit if you could? Just about the things I've brought up.
Excal: You're falling back into a lurky mode which, well, I obviously can't blame you with circumstances. THe problem is, looking back... you've had a pretty vague position all game. A quick glance back gives me... very little. You jumped on the obvious candidates and have vaguely pointed fingers around. While you have a decent number of posts and text... it doesn't add up to a lot of content. I'd encourage you to post more, but... well. Real life problems. Talk when you get back!
Shale: Need more obviously, but good to see you are around.
Still have a couple people to deal with, obviously, but I'd like to hear a bit from Laggy at the moment.
-
I also do not like that, despite your power not working, you have yet to clarify who you actually targetted. I would like to hear as well, even if it didn't work.
Let me clarify once again: when I say that I have a chance of not being able to roleblock, it means I can't even -target- anyone to roleblock. It's not a chance for my roleblocking to fail, it's a chance of not being able to perform a night action at all. I hope this is clear, now.
-
Laggy... you know, to be frank. I've been uncomfortable with you all game, but I've never had any actual reason to be. Now that day three has arrived though, I think I'm starting to see some actual evidence for that bad feeling I've been getting. You are very subtly trying to get town to think along dangerous lines, and then, as you are called out on it, shifting your stance so it looks like an earnest mistake or just an off-handed comment. For example, your initial acceptance as Meeple as being in a pro-townie position, despite a lot of evidence that would point to the contrary (see: him being third party, him lying about being third party, the general nature of his power role). Hell, you even call him a confirmed townie, which is a pretty large stretch by any definition of the terminology. Then you backtrack as soon as NEB calls you out on it. I really have a hard time believing you are falling into a trap of protown-ish third parties when Meeple was pretty obviously not one in any apparent manner.
Considering that NEB and I went consistently back and forth on this (and the fact that I STILL don't think that just automatically assuming Meeple was out to misinform town in his parting post is firm and hard fact, although as a result of several things - one of which I brought up myself, the fact that he still claimed townie at the very end) I really don't have anything new to add to it. I stand by my view that, while it's the safe route to assume all third-party members will do everything to throw town (and scum) off, it's, again, NOT written in stone that they will always do so (hell, if I recall, Survivor just has to survive to the end of the game to win!). And past games have plenty of clear evidence in this regard.
I have retracted saying that Meeple is anything remotely close to confirmed town, but I still have issues just saying to blind yourself to anything he said and to what honestly looked like an effort to leave some last word input, whether it's true or not.
There are other little nags. For example, way back you made an off-handed remark about powers that bothered me, positing that there are many abilities that townies get that probably should not be exercised when conversing to Bardiche. Town really should use the weapons it has at its disposal, and such a contrary statement (especially without more specifics) looks like its intended to be the kind of thing that gets other players with strong roles to maybe, maybe hold back. Which is a problem. While townie powers can backfire thanks to lack of alignment knowledge, it also prevents town from making killing strokes (role blocking scum powers/kills, vigs, etc).
First off, Bardiche's role and how volatile it can be/could get is obvious and I seriously doubt you're going to find people thinking otherwise. Secondly, the specific examples I gave (I could be recalling this wrong, I don't have my original post in front of me) were vigs, governors, etc. which, yes, as a matter of fact, I DO believe should be used with discretion. Such discretion is almost inherently obvious in all of the roles. Bardiche had repeatedly demonstrated in his posts that he apparently did NOT believe in such discretion at least at first; see Rat and the myriad of posts where he basically said look at me, I have a power role, I should use it! This kind of reaction set off alarms in my head and I used other examples to make the hazards of such a mindset clear. To twist it and say that I'm telling the rest of town not to use their roles and ignore how it was pointed directly to Bardiche's attitude... I dunno, man, it really feels like you're reaching for straws there. "Be careful" is a scumtell, now?
Thirdly, you make a curious comment about night kills and softly encourage anyone with knowledge of a failed kill to step forward. While there are safe manners to do it (getting hit and surviving because of intervention from an unknown party), the pairing it without a comment about role madness and such really does feel like a very soft encouragement for individuals who shouldn't be speaking up here (BP, Docs, etc) to talk. Again, I might just be overreading, but... this feels clumsy from you?
I would like to see the exact quote and context of where you claim I say that I encourage people to step forward. If anything, I recall speculating about which party was behind it and why (with an added self-disclaimer that such speculation was probably pointless) and then, after Rat said that he didn't believe that such discussion was at all productive, I dropped it. I do not remember, at all, asking or even alluding to an explanation (quite the contrary). I am hardly alone in this case, as well; QR concurred on my initial kneejerk that it was scum inflicted due to the lack of information the kill provided.
I'll look silly for a moment and even admit that I'm surprised I haven't drawn a lot of scrutiny up to now and can see perfectly why you feel uncomfortable with me, but when you're okay with Snow doing that massive meltdown and screwup after the (very justified) case built on him enough to swing away from him on Day 2... and then gun for me because I'm willing to back up, acknowledge when my thoughts are flawed and correct them, while explaining my initial reasoning behind them? That just smacks me of oddness.
-
...Okay.
For the sake of my own mental health and to attempt to keep something else going, I am looking for a replacement. If none can be found, I will take the modkill; I have a few people I will ask for the replacement first, and after that, well, if none is found, I will post requesting the modkill. This is not unknown by the mods.
I entered this game solely on Ciato's behalf, since she needed to bow out due to RL pressures. Didn't check who was playing, didn't anticipate this sort of a reaction because frankly previous games have never been like this. I had figured it would not be that much of an issue to sub in, but I guess I thought wrong, eh?
This being said, Cor. I owe you an apology. I took your statement near the beginning of day 3 in the worst possible light and got quite rude over it. I still see what I read then, now; however, it's possible that it was more incredulous and less scorn. Since the Internet is a lousy vehicle of communication for such things, I'm willing to accept the misread is likely on my end.
Jesus fucking Christ! How the hell did this come to pass? "Oh, that ploy never works. Those who try it are always quickly lynched and end up town!"
Yeah, better update that scoreboard, there, cause JR just pulled a fast one and ESCAPED HIS RIGHTFUL LYNCHING.
Okay. Okay. I can't get tunnel vision, I can't get tunnel vision, I have to at least look at other people in case they are FAR SCUMMIER than the SCUMMY JR.
First, though, thoughts on Meeple's flip. Well, then. I recall musing that one of the Meeple/Shale pair flipping as scum would be informative. With Meeple's flip, I can at least now dismiss such a link as accidental. And what irony, too. While I was blasting the more passive and feel-good players for playing like survivors and not as town, I had no idea we had an actual survivor in our midst.
You have also managed to bitch that we didn't lynch him (oh so obvious!) last game day (because it was so clear that he is {according to you} scum that clearly no one else could have had a case)! And you rant, despite putting forth the case after that day is over, and pretty much saying beforehand "I feel this is suspicious and I doubt this is feasible!"
Right. Um. Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. Right or not that pisses me off to no end, as it's pretty much the same blatant level of dismissal of everyone else's abilities and analysis that would have lead people to the conclusion they reached (Meeple).
Your statement, my response. I hope that clears that up. Again, apologies, but I hope the reason for my vitriol is at least slightly clearer.
My only other comment is that Carthrat's actions this game remind me distinctly of Touhou Mafia, but metagaming is hardly always accurate. This was what occurred to me when I was on my walk to Tiananmen, however, and I felt it notable enough to point out. I'll try to post at least once more with comments before the replacement/modkill.
-
I got home from work at about 1:15 AM EDT. That should give you an idea of the day I've had.
I don't think re-evaluating one's original opinion and shifting from it after a guaranteed town presents a theory isn't all that scummish.
This sums up the problem with Bardiche's play in late day 2 rather nicely. Just because confirmed town says something doesn't make it right, or even valid. We know the argument is being made in good faith but that doesn't excuse accepting it uncritically! This is no different from reacting to a mislynch by going into the archives, picking apart the victim's posts, and treating them as unassailable (what was the phrase Alex used before? Holy Word Of Dead Townies?) just because we know they weren't lying through their teeth. You still have to examine it and see if the evidence supports it, instead of using "well, a townie said it" as a reason to substitute his thinking for your own. Basically echoing Carthrat's last comment of the day, but it's true. You're conflating trusting the person and trusting his judgment. And while you do move away from saying "trust Tom!", you still follow that logic, viz.
I grouped the two of them together because QR said, explicitly, that we should narrow down the list of suspects and... IDK, but to me, Corwin really seems to be sniping people and being generally rather aggressive in play. Being aggressive is a good way of shifting points on people that make some ambiguous statements, thus clearing the stage for aggression on a few choice targets and allowing QR to close the train by getting the town to eventually zone in on two. Obviously you can disagree with this, but that's why I put the link between the two of them.
First off, your chain of logic that starts with aggressive play and ends up with narrowing down the field to a predetermined target is...uh, funky. It's a possible outcome of the style, yes, but one of many. More fundamentally, though, at some point you have to get down to lynching, which necessarily involves narrowing down the list of suspects. This is the motivation behind moves like Ashdla's on Day 1 - "I think X is scummier than Y, but X just isn't a viable target anymore so I'm throwing my weight against Y." Yeah, it would be better if everyone discussed everyone else at all times, but it's just not pragmatically possible and seems a very arbitrary reason to make cases on people.
-
EDIT: Okay, I think I found the quote in question you picked out.
For them to pass up on a nightkill (unless someone got hit last night and survived, obviously correct me, I forgot that this may in fact BE role madness despite mod lies blarg arghle) and then assume our MYSTERY KILLER acted...
Okay, I see what you mean by trying to speculate being a little meaningless. Still think it's worth thinkin' scum was behind this, more likely, than not.
And once again, this are serious Mafia attacks. Ifffff you saw that as subtle way to draw out someone to claim/explain, uh yeah, I got nothin'. I thought that came across fairly clearly as a joke, moreso when my second line basically says it's pointless to pursue. >_>
(Back to original post)
Well, one good thing came out from being called on; might as well try to collect my thoughts and bring them up to date with the thread.
First off, Shale. Glad to see you're back and trying to contribute, although I'm sure I don't need to repeat the mantra of "you better provide content, you were gone a freaking long time and it's hard to read you outside of massive lurkerdom".
Snow... I really don't need to repeat the case on him at this point. Corwin could very damn well be perfectly right and Snow's just milking this for all its worth, and Snow's explanations so far have been somewhat spotty at best; plus the fact that he seems to have barely paid close attention to the game is alarming. Still, though, it just seems to be such honestly bad play that I have trouble getting over my gut screaming that Snow is such a ridiculously easy target and what he's done has not exactly been out of character for him (that's getting metagamey though, which makes me even more reluctant to pursue that train of thought further).
Suffice to say that I would agree to a lynch on him if it boils down to that but am not really approving of sending him straight to the gallows right here right now, and would instead rather look at other cases more thoroughly for the time being. (This, however, does not mean we should drag the goddamn day over the rocks like we did on Day 2. That was ridiculous.)
Bardiche, however, now bothers me. A lot. First off, I'm now convinced that, indeed, mod lied and the game not being some form of role madness can be heartily 'lol'd' out of the window (so screw "too many third parties", it can happen). I STILL think Bardiche is playing cautiously to the point of looking scummy by never willing to jump strongly on cases (or start them for that matter). The fact that he himself acknowledges this and fails to change is further cause for worry.
Hell, if anything, for all that Andy is calling me out for supposedly subtly nudging town to inaction (I guess?), Bard is basically admitting that said inaction or at least extreme worry about taking strong action is fine. To boot, he has barely any sort of vote record (yeah yeah I know I and others told him not to vote but he said he'd at least follow this up with FoS, which he hasn't to any appreciable degree.) He still has not really posted anything that wasn't directly defensive or vague attacks on minor points (on QR/Corwin in particular) that he quickly drops and says he expects people not to ever really follow up on even if he died. Uh. Okay.
Also, he's promised to post something of substance in his last post and hasn't. Think that's where my vote will go for now.
##Unvote: Shale
##Vote: Bardiche
Ninja'd by Shale, who apparenty has some thoughts of Bardiche himself.
-
I was wrong about Jo'ou attacking Andrew, yes, apologies. That was something I hit Meeple for, got mixed up.
Nonetheless, that wasn't the only thing, and there is yet more. I find it utterly hilarious that Jo'ou complains that Corwin is pushing for his lynch too hard when the man deliberately went through other suspects at the start of the day. Frankly, saying "He's TRYING TOO HARD" is a pretty terrible defence, and the e-penis crap is moving right past terrible and into the bounds of laughable. At this point, the only real reason not to lynch Jo'ou that's been presented is that.. he's playing so badly, it's somehow wrapped around back into townie play. I can't buy this, ever.
This 'we're getting trapped in tunnel vision' sentimentality, I feel it is ridiculous simply because we're, um, not quicklynching Jo'ou, and it's hardly the only place discussion has gone, even at the very start of the day. I can only see that as weird panicmongering, although QR voted for Jo'ou too, which is weird. Frankly, I think it's strange that Cor got all theatric about avoiding early today, too.
<->
I can't see Andrew going after Laggy for anything but minor things. I feel that *most* roles that are actually useful are very common sense about how to use them effectively and aren't going to be deflected by some offhand comment like that, and nor would anyone realistically expect that to happen. Thus I don't get your angle here.
<->
As for Bardiche... no, I've got to say, being openly confident in your cases is better than anything. The more I can trust someone to stick to their word and have thought things through the first time around, the better. The confusion he claims to evidence is, to me, just a way of backing away from the game and trying to get away without contributing overmuch.
I don't really like what he says about being concerned with image. It's true that you need to watch yourself and not do really dumb things that scream 'scum here' (whether you are or not), but that's not done by being timid in general. :/
-
Alright, water heater issue is mostly dealt with now. Unfortunatly, still don't have time to scour everything to make a deep in-depth post. I have read everything over, and I agree with Corwin that not only is there something that looks fishy about the early pile on on Shale today, but that of the three who were a part of that, Snow looks the worse. His reasoning for his use of his power doesn't feel quite right with his choice of roleblock target vs. who he's claimed to be suspicious of also looks fairly bad.
No real time to comment on anyone else as my thoughts on them are less defined, but I will leave you with a vote to cement the one concrete opinion I have at present.
##Vote: Joe Rambo
-
Current votecount:
Bardiche (1): Laggy
Laggy (1): AndrewRogue
Shale (0): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (4): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain, Excal
With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.
-
Posting to apologise for not posting yesterday; got intimidated by the hueg wall of texts and did not feel like wading through them. Have since been doing some catchup this morning, and I'll contribute once I return from work in a few hours.
-
Mrf. Okay, I'm not going to try to defend myself. I think my fate is sealed as of now and I think it's fine by now. If nothing else, the flip will prove that I at least wasn't lying through my teeth.
Now, as for Bard, I don't think I have anything else to say about him that wasn't said better by other people. The concerns on him feel pretty justified, if nothing else, although I still feel he's more likely to be third-party than outright scum. I also wonder if he was targetted by anyone during the night, but that's pointless speculation. He's been eerily silent as well.
Now, for Andrew... um. I think it is worth to consider that he not only attacked Laggy for very minor points, but he twisted Laggy's words into meaning something he wants them to mean instead of what he said. This set off my alarms because that kind of meaning mangling is dangerously close to deliberately lying. Being put off by Laggy for not attracting suspicion at all is one thing and fairly justifiable from a paranoid point of view (although I'm guessing this is just what good play is all about: managing to be productive without setting off alarms. Which, of course, could hide scum, see Yakko in FFT Mafia and El Cid in Brawl Mafia, they were excellent at concealing their true intentions), but was it really necessary to twist his words around into something he didn't say? And then, there's the fact that he's accusing Laggy of leading town into inaction when we have... Bardiche going into the inaction train. I dunno, this feels like a deliberate, malicious sniping action with poor timing and it's highly suspicious.
-
Was too busy at work, today, to even catch up fully (and how sad is that, there are like ten posts or something total in twenty-four hours). And then for some reason I couldn't connect to the forum while continuing to receive post confirmations by email.
Anyway, just a note here to say I'm still alive, and will post with actual thoughts within a few hours.
-
Notice beforehand: I'm in a somewhat bad mood, apologize if I come off as rude.
Hrm, I guess I should've specified that meaning to post something of substance later on doesn't necessarily mean "later on today" but could well mean "tomorrow when I feel like it". I'm going to ignore the accusations against me for now and proceed with posting my review of the past day etc. I'll address those accusations later, for as much that I have anything to say to them. HINT: It won't be much.
----------->
So first and foremost, I'm going to start talking about someone who's been mostly ignored this entire game. Lurking at its best, everyone failed to recognize this individual promised content several times without providing any. When he does, the content is... Pretty small.
I'm talking of Excal, of course. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24732#msg24732)
That's the first post on Day 2 that has actual content, though it lacks the promise of "looking back at Day 1" and tunnel visions into Snow. This is the next post containing some content. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24855#msg24855)
Then for a few pages, there's nothing, followed by this beautiful response:
Blargleargleargleargle...
I don't know whether to be more upset by the fact that there's so many posts to wade through, or that with all the time I've been away there's been so few. Head hurts, somewhat groggy, and trying to get thoughts together, but I will get something substantive for you guys before I go to sleep tonight.
One thing I can comment on right now though is my agreement with QR. We need to start focussing on lynching soon. The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak. That said, QR, I'm thinking Andy may be a worthwhile addition to the list of folks to consider. I'll give more concrete reasoning why in my next post.
Now here's something interesting. Two things, rather.
1) The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak.
What an amusing thing to say for someone whose only contributed two posts all day to cases, and then moves on to agree with QR that, "Hey, we should start focusing and draw in the people who haven't yet spoken!" even though he knows damn well he belongs to that category of people.
2) He promises to provide more concrete reasoning in his next post. He does not. Instead, promises us content the next day. Sure fine! (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25061#msg25061)
That's all dandy but if you look at the next page following that, he really doesn't provide concrete reasoning (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25076#msg25076), and actually backs off the Andrew case.
His next post here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25092#msg25092) talks of giving his thoughts into a "hopeful Day 2 end game", even though his presence was negligable during the start and middle of the day. This is worrying because scum typically like to pad numbers and a sense of being here by posting frequently to start, and then hoping to coast on that. However, part of that is to avoid having to get involved in exchanges where their faulty logic can be exposed. In Shale's case, whenever he does post, he usually comes along with some decently detailed thoughts and attempts to be helpful.
I can't help but read IRONY in this because that's exactly what he's been doing. The one time he really arguments for a case, Excal just has to pad on what others have said since he comes late to the entire day.
The next post he makes is right over here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25300#msg25300), where he just blends into the conversation. Nothing about the previous day. Nothing about the discussion at hand aside from, "Don't lynch QR, she's been useful to town".
And now his latest gem of a post is to lynch Jo'ou based on "his usage of power doesn't feel right" with the promise he'll post more concrete thoughts later. Well gee, you promised the same with Andrew. Sure thing, I'll believe you this time.
Except, you know. Not.
##FoS: Excal for this reasoning. Being generally lurkish while pretending to be here, every so often posting some excuse for not delivering while never really delivering information that hasn't been said before. Skillfully remained under everyone's radar.
----------->
Further suspicions will come later, not feeling it at the moment and I want to respond to the accusations against me before my battery runs out.
----------->
Okay, so the idea that I'm a third party: Obviously I'll deny that, but you can have fun and continue speculating about it if you want. I reeeeaaally don't care, because frankly I don't believe I have anything I can say that will make you go all ZWHOAMG BARDICHE IS ON OUR SIDE! I gave out my role, it's up to you whether or not a Multivoter works for himself, for town or for scum. HINT: It's the second one.
Now, as far as it goes that I want to come off as town and am careful with what I say. Well, that's just my paranoia about getting lynched for all the wrong reasons speaking, and clearly that paranoia is working against me and making me more suspicious. I can only argue that what speaks in my advantage is the fact that I haven't tried to hide this and that I haven't further had much reservations towards speaking out other than, "Hey, I don't have shit on QR, and I don't think there's any merit in pursuing a QR Lynch when most seem to agree we need to narrow choices".
About my "inaction" as some call it. (Hi Jo'ou) Well, yeah, it takes time reading through the thread, surprise surprise. Likewise, it takes time writing this wall of text, and I also happen to have some other interests that don't really coincide with Mafia. I find it amusing people are racking up suspicions on me based on my current post being somewhat delayed because I went to bed and just found some time to sit down and give this a good ol' write down. See my above arguments about who is a much more worrying case of lurking and pretending to be here.
Now, Laggy. Hi.
"Be careful" is a scumtell, now?
Next post:
I STILL think Bardiche is playing cautiously to the point of looking scummy by never willing to jump strongly on cases (or start them for that matter).
Yeah, something doesn't connect. Uses the same argument he uses in his own defense to incriminate me.
says he expects people not to ever really follow up on even if he died.
What. I think I said I threw out the QR possibility in case I die and people backtrack my posts. Or maybe I meant to and didn't post it for whatever reason, since many times I've composed a post without submitting it.
And then Shale assumes I took EvilTom's words at face value with no reservations of my own and immediately jumping on his words. Uh, yeah, okay, except that I just reviewed QR's posts based on Tom's theory, and had withdrawn support for a Meeple train before that.
Seriously people, I feel your case on me is extremely shoddy and doesn't connect. "Hey, Bard is being careful." "Hey, Bard, like some others that I am conveniently not naming hasn't voted much in Day 2." and "Hey, Bard has a Multivoter role, I can't believe that's town" don't add up to "Hey, Bard is scum and should be lynched."
Hell, even if I was a TP, then there's no reason to lynch me because I think you should be gunning for scum at this point to avoid a scumwin because of a lack of townies. I stand by my earlier statement that I am pro-town, and not ITP. If I missed any arguments for why I am scum, feel free to point me to them in your next posts.
-
Now, Laggy. Hi.
"Be careful" is a scumtell, now?
Next post:
I STILL think Bardiche is playing cautiously to the point of looking scummy by never willing to jump strongly on cases (or start them for that matter).
Yeah, something doesn't connect. Uses the same argument he uses in his own defense to incriminate me.
Context, it is your friend. Or maybe not, apparently.
There is such a thing as playing cautiously and playing ridiculously paranoid about your own image. There is also a (big) difference between "caution on using your role's powers since it is obviously double-edged" and "caution about making posts or any arguments whatsoever". They are very different things and the fact that you missed something as obvious as that bothers the heck out of me as your defense.
What. I think I said I threw out the QR possibility in case I die and people backtrack my posts. Or maybe I meant to and didn't post it for whatever reason, since many times I've composed a post without submitting it.
Re-read your exact line. Yeah, misread it, thought you were implying that no one would look at it after you died (you were actually saying no one would look at it now and would later after you died). My bad.
Regardless, I really recommend not using your mood as an excuse to have a blithering tone. If you don't feel like posting because of it then say so and (actually post) later on when you are more coherent rather than giving yourself another backup reason to excuse this or that. It's perfectly possible and not even all that hard to defend yourself without having to treat everyone like an idiot for even considering the oh-so improbability that you are not town! That's the game, saying you are fed up because you have to defend yourself, uh, yeah. That's not going to go far.
-
Reading Bardiche's reply more closely (yeah, I have a bad habit of posting my immediate thoughts first and then being more thorough in a followup post right away.) I am not really at all convinced by your reply. Your response to your questionable alignment is "well yeah, I said everything, deal", which while I can understand the sentiment, doesn't actually add anything to your defense one way or the other (you still look viable for TP, comes with the role). Your reply to your overparanoia is that you've been lynched for wrong reasons in the past - problem with that is that technically happens to every townie ever who got lynched could use that (again, part of the game) and you've been told a lot this game to drop with the paranoia-ness and well-maybe-x-is-scum-but-I'm-afraid-to-push-it. I wasn't actually even attacking so much your behavior in that aspect but the fact that you've apparently made no real effort to change it despite full of Day 1 and 2 posts advising you do so. And finally, your defense against your lack of voting record is "well other people haven't been doing it either!". No, no that's not a defense at all. Other people will/do get flak for it too; it doesn't excuse you, specifically after you had agreed to FoS assertively to give yourself a record, and you didn't.
Anyhow, in reply to Bardiche's actual presented case on Excal, which is a nice change of pace.
I feel that it does have plenty of valid points in that Excal's escaped the radar seemingly the entire game and just popped in enough for some votes. However, I also know that he's had valid real life reasons to not be present, so I take both with a grain of salt. (The fact that you, Bardiche, yourself use this reason, aka "I have other stuff aside Mafia, can't spend all my time reading and posting" lends weight to that.) I don't disagree that he, like Shale, should ramp up on the effort to produce some original content when he gets the opportunity to do so, and as is he looks questionable.
Speaking of people escaping radar, I don't think we've heard from Strago for a while, either. Two early posts near start of Day 3 and nothing else. Nudge, etc.
-
I was actually trying not to make my mood affect the game. But I did, so my bad.
I'm actually not that fed up with defending myself because I don't think you really had much on me until now. Which is perfectly plausible because I did offer damn little to the discussion on Day 2. However, others have contributed equally little, and accusing me of "voting too little" is a bit silly because others haven't voted that much either.
Now, I understand the point behind "construing cases" etc when voting, and I admit my FoSes were just, "Hey, that guy's acting suspicious, but I can't put my finger on it" for Meeple, and for Shale was because he was lurking. EDIT: I don't recall saying I'd FoS assertively, but only FoS if I would otherwise place a vote on someone. I'm not that aggressive a player that I toss out a lot of votes in a day.
This doesn't excuse me, at all, but I don't think it looks terribly bad given that the conversation quickly narrowed on two, three people and never really left much open for other interpretation other than looking where someone went wrong in argumentation.
Well, we can only do that afterwards, so now's the only time we can. Or the next day. Whatever.
That said, I am still reading posts, but am going from person to person now. Yes, I will post more than just Excal, because if it's Day 3 and only Excal pops up weird to me, there's something horribly wrong.
//More edits:
Okay, Laggy. Um, I can always provide a theory on how my role works in favor of Town, but yeah, I can't dispel much thoughts about how I can be a Third Party role without making a full, complete and utterly complete role- and nameclaim. Even then, there's always the issue with that I already provided the most important details regarding my role.
Yeah, I can understand that somehow racking up x amount of posts is a win condition for me. On the other hand I can see it as a good town weapon if I were actually an individual that people believed in, at which point I could overpower any scum objections to lynches. If we end up with equal numbers town and scum, normally we lose. I'm somehow thinking that if I am alive by then, and manage to skew the odds in town favor in that we have more vote power than scum and can outvote scum... Yeah, that we'll manage to stick around still. That is a theory, I have nothing precise on it.
Anyhow, my case on Excal is not that there are other things beside Mafia and that he's 'neglected' Mafia. My point is that he promised, various times, to provide content while failing to do so, and has generally acted as if he's not one of the lurkers with "Yeah, people that haven't spoken up yet need to do so".
-
Yeah, I can understand that somehow racking up x amount of posts is a win condition for me. On the other hand I can see it as a good town weapon if I were actually an individual that people believed in, at which point I could overpower any scum objections to lynches. If we end up with equal numbers town and scum, normally we lose. I'm somehow thinking that if I am alive by then, and manage to skew the odds in town favor in that we have more vote power than scum and can outvote scum... Yeah, that we'll manage to stick around still. That is a theory, I have nothing precise on it.
This is all true if you assume that it is indeed a town weapon, yes. That would be the main stickling point - there's no guarantee on that, so you're going to not be surprised when people voice some reluctance to letting you empower it. One thing does bother me: you did not reveal the role's mechanics until Day 2 when you could demonstrate it and explained that it grew on every successful lynch (correct me if I'm misremembering here). If you already aware of how it operated on Day 1, then, you simply did not call attention to it and knowingly got on the lynch knowing that it'd increase your vote weight; yes, you sort of explain this later by your assumption that "roles are meant to be used", and you probably didn't expect others to disagree and have a lashback against you increasing your vote weight, but it obscures it a lot more whether you were innocuous town or stealthy third party.
Anyhow, my case on Excal is not that there are other things beside Mafia and that he's 'neglected' Mafia. My point is that he promised, various times, to provide content while failing to do so, and has generally acted as if he's not one of the lurkers with "Yeah, people that haven't spoken up yet need to do so".
Nor was I trying to paint it that way, as I started off saying you had valid points about his content; I was simply voicing that he's had valid reasons to look like a lurker, as far as I can tell, unlike say Shale who kinda disappeared without a word 'till now. I am very much in agreement that what he's posted seems strikingly sideline-ish and not all that good on original content.
-
JR:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25339#msg25339
Well, he talks about how he'll refute my case. I... guess he tries, but I wasn't too convinced even before the massive e-penis part.
JR is also mistaken on the purpose of responding. I cannot lynch alone, so even if I am not convinced, other people might be if he presents viable counter-arguments. I'm not seeing any unvotes, so I figure I'm not the only one who's not buying his defense.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25341#msg25341
But I'm not willing to give up the fight anymore.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25434#msg25434
One vote for JR later, merely the fourth out of seven necessary, and when Laggy actually votes Bardiche and not JR:
Mrf. Okay, I'm not going to try to defend myself. I think my fate is sealed as of now and I think it's fine by now.
Now, it's true that 4 votes are more threatening than 3 votes. But, uh, what's up with such a sudden change of heart? And it totally looks familiar, so I get the feeling JR's trying to do what worked the day before. Please don't let him get away with it twice, guys.
QR:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25368#msg25368
First, my post to you was totally not long, certainly not by my standards. Just needed to point that out. On quoting people, I... don't actually know how to edit in the name. I just manually type the quote/unquote bbcode. I also have no idea how to make certain words linkable to avoid dumping all the long links amidst the text. If anyone knows how to do either of those, let me know.
I'm not sure where you're getting that I am saying your poking at me is *gaspevil*.
I didn't say that. If, by chance, my words could have been construed to mean that (please back it up with quote, if so), then it was not what I meant. What I said was that other players jumped at me when I named you as someone I would look at. To have such a reaction to another player whom they had no right to trust filled me with instant suspicion for reasons I hope are obvious.
C - I am not disputing the fact that Snow looks the scummiest so far (hence my vote), but as he has as much as admitted that he's not going to be able to change anyone's mind with his sudden loss of suicidal tendancies, where exactly is the harm in not Quick Lynching him and instead opening up discussion? We're barely a day into the new Day and it's a little early for KILLLLLLL HIIIIIM. Right now the only ones that helps is scum who get to have a day phase where we don't get much new input but they get to go ahead and make another kill.
I think Rat said it best, so yeah, go read the first section of his post on this (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25427#msg25427).
Anyway, JR's flip will surely implicate further scum. Depending on what exactly he lied about, it could cast a shadow on some of the players here. By catching one of the scum red-handed, we'll get the whole team by association. Plus, suffer scum to live, etc, he already evaded it once.
1 - If I'm reading your analysis of my Day 1 views on Tom correctly, you don't find anything hideously scummy there so I don't thing there's anything to respond to in that regard.
5 - Why would I look forward to Tom's post? Because while I don't think he's any more or less likely to be right than anyone else, he is the ONLY one of you bunch whose words I can trust are exactly what he thinks. He may be wrong, but he has NO reason to lie or mislead. I weigh what he says with my own anaylsis and thoughts, but I do like having a voice that gives an honest thought. Everyone here pushes for a lynch off an agenda. For some, that agenda is to help town, for some it's to survive and for others it's to kill the townies. I have no way of knowing who has what agenda except Tom here. Doesn't mean I believe his anaylsis more than others, just means I believe he means what he says.
These two should really go together. While yes, you were less instrumental in Tom's lynch than I remembered (but still key enough), you expressed a view that you don't trust him, that he lies, etc. All in all, a pretty low opinion of his mafia skills and truthfulness. Now, I can see how him being a zombie with one post per day could change some people's minds about that, but I just don't see you do it. You truly think Tom has no agenda? Tom, who is famous for his OMGUS implosions? For all I know Tom could now suddenly see me as scummy for saying all this, and you're looking forward to more of that? I just have a hard time buying this.
I'm... as satisfied as I can be with your acknowledgment of 2 and explanation for 4, though, and I suppose 3 could've been a misreading of mine. I'm willing to accept that, barring evidence to the contrary.
DHE:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25431#msg25431
An essential oneliner to apologize for not posting. Ie lurking. This is not the first time and 'oh noez walls of text' is not an excuse (especially with no Meeple posts to wade through). Even saying 'Corwin is mean and posts a lot, I'll comment on other people and ignore him for the next year' would have looked better to me because then you would at least be participating and getting out there and letting us see your thoughts and stuff.
I am slowly growing more and more suspicious of you.
And since people are apparently using my post sizes as excuses for lurking/not reading them, I'll endeavor to spread out my opinions across several posts. Laggy/Andrew/Bardiche post will happen tonight/early tomorrow my time. (And I forgot about Strago until Laggy's latest post called him out, so yes, suspicion there; dispel it with delicious participation.)
-
On quoting people, I... don't actually know how to edit in the name. I just manually type the quote/unquote bbcode. I also have no idea how to make certain words linkable to avoid dumping all the long links amidst the text. If anyone knows how to do either of those, let me know.
It's quote="name" on the first tag, with the brackets obviously.
Anyhow. Bardiche's last response comes off much better to me in terms of defending himself (honestly, the response and attempting to pry him to build a case of his own were things I was really looking for), and I cannot help but agree more and more that Snow's resignation only makes me want to get the lynch on him done and over with. I don't think I need to rehash everything Corwin et al's said about why he's scummy and largely agree with it all, the only thing having really stayed my hand is aforementioned gut bad-townie-play feeling, but like it's been said, that can't be an excuse forever.
##Unvote: Bardiche
##Vote: Jo'ou Ranbu
This puts him at -2 to hammer, if I am not mistaken.
-
First off, well, I appreciate the trust, Laggy. Still, no intent from me to drop the hammer.
Moving on with further of the promised analysis.
-------->
One thing confuses me, but it's WIFOM. Why didn't scum kill Jo'ou? Either Jo'ou is scum, or they expected to get Jo'ou lynched today, because a roleblocker could be darn annoying to scum (that is, if Jo'ou pegs the right person). Right now, I do agree he looks pretty darn bad, especially given that I can't understand the roleblock of Carthrat. I mean... Yeah, what? You nary had any suspicion of Rat at all (or at least, hardly made it known), and instead of roleblocking someone suspicious that could work in league with scum, you aim for the Rat.
Doesn't connect.
-------->
I just realize Excal's defending QR in this post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25300#msg25300). Meeple ramped up suspicion, for me, by doing a similar thing for Shale. Where, upon re-read, he was more-so attacking the logic behind a Shale train, and less defending someone's particular actions. On the other hand, Excal has no such reservations and flat out says calling out QR for narrowing is a bad thing because it's been our choice all along. Definitely no reason to lynch by itself, but coupled with my earlier case, I think everyone should give Excal a very good look.
------->
Corwin's pretty zealous. Ignoring him for now because I can't get a clear read out of it, although I am skewed to "questionable townie" at best. Either he's just the sort of person that has natural charismatic leadership, or he's scum taking the reins from town and leading everyone on his lynch trains. Interesting to note is that he seems rather adamant about leading our trains.
------->
Meeple's analysis... Tossing it out of the window for now. I have no reason to believe he is pro-town. If I was a survivor, I'd try to get just about anyone lynched, and preferably not build strong cases on scum. I'd bet on the off chance that scum would try not to get rid of someone that's hardly got a read on 'em.
------->
the Elf: His Day 3 contributions are worthless. Arguing Meeple isn't necessarily pro-town (a sentiment I agree with)... Seconding Rat's suspicions about me. Well, that's cool, but seconding someone else's opinion is silly unless you're aware of their alignment. So far, hasn't yet made an actual stand against someone.
Going against chronology here.
Day 2, naturally I'm not too fond of the mockery with the ;_; ;_;, but eh. That's by no means something scummy. Here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25074#msg25074) says he has a couple of people to review himself, but doesn't do any of that. In the next posts, he's been mostly passive. Defending himself, making a few remarks about Andrew off the side, post mainly centered about a defense towards Corwin...
This has some questionable content, (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25059#msg25059) in that he says Andrew is his third lynch target... But he hasn't really read Andrew's posts since his post before that one. Yeah, not really paying attention there, are we? Doesn't help that the post I quoted above has him dropping all suspicion of Andrew, apparently. Of interesting note is the last paragraph, where he's not comfortable with a Meeple lynch. Later on, on this day, he expresses dislike for defending against a dead third party; Consequently, doesn't do so, only pulls Meeple's support of town in question.
Hm, odd. In this summary post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24808#msg24808), Elf doesn't really express much concern for Andrew. And I'm... I'm not seeing how he could suddenly grow to 3rd on the lynch list. Something doesn't add up here. Moreover, Meeple looks the worst so far he says... But later says he isn't too confident in a Meeple lynch. Scum trying to add credibility because he knows it won't be scum we'll lynch?
Yes, I just checked. Between the summary and his post saying Andrew is third on the list... He hasn't expressed much concern for Andrew before. There were far more scummier people than Andrew at that moment.
Actually, re-reading everything again... The entire summary post is basically, "Hey, everyone looks good and has plus points. Well, except Meeple. You're tagged!" and later on "Yeah, I'm not comfortable with Meeple's lynch".
##UNFoS: Excal, ##FoS: Elfboy. Excal's suspicious, but I certainly want to see just what he has to say to this. This stuff doesn't add up... At all.
-------->
-
Scum probably didn't kill me because my actions would certainly be good enough general smokescreening for another day to keep people from pegging actual scum and letting them advance the score towards their goal. Seems simple enough for me.
And alright, I guess I'll just put the cards on the table one last time. I said before I didn't mind getting lynched anymore, and that's because I mostly achieved what I was setting to do ever since day 2 ended: get at least one of the zealous players to sink the foot into the mud (particularly Corwin, because goddamn that kind of zeal screams "scum" to me). I'll be frank and blunt: I know my own alignment, well damned enough to know that Corwin will end up having to do a lot of explaining once my flip turns out, and I can't stress enough how much he deserves it. And, as for me blocking Rat instead of 'diche, I think it's safe enough to say that I went by pure gut. No real logic involved, just "gut" from the way he played so far and how often his current style sets off my radar for being great scum behavior here. I'm metagaming horribly? Yes, I am. But honestly metagaming says much more in the DL than trying to follow cold hard logic, since most of us (me included) are horribly transparent. Same reason why I decided to take advantage of Corwin's wondrous zeal. Terrible strategy in hindsight, I'm sure I'll realize, but I botched things for my side so horribly I might as well go all out in a ridiculous blaze.
Not to mention that, at this point, suffering me to live will only make things worse, yes? The wonder on whether I'm town or scum can't stay up forever, and I'd rather just end things right here and right now. I want town to win, not to end up perfected by scum because I still set off all kinds of radars, although, at this point, we're probably going to end up in LYLO and hilarity will ensue.
Also, a last little reminder: please take a good, hard look at Andrew, 'kay? I can't believe how easily his Laggy baiting is slipping past the radar, and I'd take a nice, long look on the people overlooking it as well. That probably sums up my thoughts.
-
Just to drive the point home:
##VOTE: AndrewRogue
Because, while Corwin's attitude sets me off on levels I can't even begin to fathom (and Rat doesn't really look much better, and feels like working in tandem with Cor), Andrew's Laggy snippet throws me off even more.
-
Laggy: To run down you post point by point...
1. I didn't advocate ignoring his statements either. My main issue is that you originally assumed a stance that did, indeed, assume a shockingly positive view on Meeple when it seemed fairly obvious that he definitely should not be considered in a pro-town stance, and tried to push it. It seems really off to me that you'd start off on such a strange foot.
2. The exact quotes are indeed...
Bardiche - as for your anonyvote power... first off, no, as a matter of fact, not every role has to be exercised and its power used, especially double-edged ones like anonyvoting.
One of the most important things to realize about all of those roles is that they all have the choice not to exercise their power, and often times this is the wise thing to do.
(In reference, indeed, to Vigs/Governors/Nonny Voters)[/quote]
I really am not trying to twist your words here. There is obviously some good advice in there. But, at the same time, there is enough discouragement in there to... concern me? It could well just be a difference in game theory (I tend to feel that, unless there is a good reason not to, powers should be used). "Be careful" can indeed be a scum tell when caution and hesitation lets the other side get the upper hand.
3. You did indeed get the quote I was referring to (specifically the parenthetical section). That being humor doesn't really fix any of my ill-ease with that particular line, since, in this case, someone taking the joke seriously could be pretty disasterous. I still have problems seeing the parenthetical as being part of the joke, so, yeah.
4. To clarify for the umpteenth time, my movement on Snow on Day 2 was based ENTIRELY on game theory. Given his melt down, I worked out a theory and ran with it, because I really am tired of lynching town thanks to those melt downs. To sum up: we've only caught town with those self-pity meltdowns, to my recollection there has never been a case where scum tried that sort of ploy, we've always lynched in response to that sort of self-pity meltdown. As such, I saw it (and, admittedly, still see it to some degree) as highly unlikely that Snow was scum.
My main issue is, honestly yes, nitpicky and possibly just a result of reading too deeply. What I'm seeing is a very subtle undertone to your posts that is encouraging certain lines of thinking or certain actions that could easily go to the wrong places.
Snow: I did indeed attack Laggy for minor points... which is something I admitted to. Furthermore, I find it hard to call what I'm doing "twisting his words," given I pretty fairly represented his actual posts. They are nitpicky, yes, but that doesn't invalidate them. Furthermore... uh. I... didn't attack Laggy because he wasn't suspicious. I'm also... not really happy with your claim that I'm baiting Laggy, nor am I very happy with that vote of yours.
For the moment... ##Unvote: Laggy. Some of what you said did indeed clear up a bit (for example, I realized one of the more blatent problems I had was based on a personal misreading). I'm not really convinced, but I don't feel I'm ready to really press the case on you at this point.
-
Current votecount:
AndrewRogue (1): Jo'ou Ranbu
Bardiche (0): Laggy
Laggy (0): AndrewRogue
Shale (0): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (5): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain, Excal, Laggy
With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.
-
Andrew, my kneejerk reaction to all of that, honestly, is that you're trying paint me as some sort of subliminal covert operative who sends thought waves to people in the way I phrase things. Now, I know scum can easily gain on being subtle, but don't you think that's... just ridiculously too subtle? To the point that no one has read what you've read, and when you do bring it up, the kneejerk reaction from both Rat and Snow is that they're minor points? I don't really take that well, and it is my belief that you're drawing a lot of what you feel ticks you the wrong way as to provide some sort of seemingly objective reason to back up your innate discomfort with me, which I would hazard more or less stems from how I've drawn little fire so far. Far from trying to be subtle, I tend to be as straightforward as possible in what I'm trying to say, and while I have no issue clarifying or explaining my words further, I can't really say a lot to what you're accusing me of besides "Yeah, your gut says I look scummy somehow, here are some words that if you read really deeply into them could possibly carry generic anti-town sentiment". That just feels reaaaally stretching it.
-
This has some questionable content, in that he says Andrew is his third lynch target... But he hasn't really read Andrew's posts since his post before that one.
Okay, I'll forgive you for making the mistake in my meaning there, because Andrew did too. However it's clear you didn't read my response to Andrew, where I believe I clearly stated he was #3 in a list that includes him, Meeple, and Snow. This does not mean he is #3 overall. Had Excal not posted just before I wouldn't even have mentioned Andrew, or at least, no more than I mentioned Ashdla.
The rest of your accusations spanning the next few paragraphs all stem from this misunderstanding and thus, thankfully, I have no need to defend myself from them.
-
I don't see how the misunderstanding about Andrew (I'll cede to that point) has anything to do whatsoever of your summary post painting Meeple as being scummiest, and then later on your supposed unwillingness to lynch Meeple because you "are not comfortable with a Meeple train" and your further lack of content posted.
-
Rat:
1) Me having a vote is nothing special. Only I should be terribly excited by this. That DHE says it's the best use for a friendly roleblocker is weird, because it's.. not really, the best use for a friendly roleblocker is to pay one mana, tap target scum. At least, not until you think we're hitting LYLO and my vote could indeed spell the difference between life and death. But that's not here and I doubt anyone really thought it could be.
Tapping target scum? For what gain? I can see two reasons to do so.
1. Stop the Nightkill. Awesome. Except, y'know, we just did that last night, it seems, since only we only lost one instead of two. And nobody's jumping on it. Suffice to say, as long as we don't know the nature of the vig/SK/whatever the hell you think is responsible for the second death between Delta and OK, even successfully roleblocking the killer doesn't seem too useful. It does buy us a bit more time, granted.
2. Stop a scum role. Unfortunately scum roles are weaker than town roles, what with them needing information much less badly than town and all. And there are more town, as well. No, if your goal is to stop roles, you're much more likely to hamper town.
I've never been impressed with the town roleblocker in general, though I acknowledge it can win games pretty decisively with a lategame kill-block (i.e. once we can be pretty confident that a roleblock + no kill = yay, scum!). Otherwise, it's very scrubby, and giving it a use in giving you a vote IS handy.
In regards to hitting LYLO... If you're town (since I'm wasting my breath if you're not, obviously) and we mislynch today, and there are 4 scum (not unreasonable? Admitedly arbitrary) tomorrow could easily be LYLO, and if you can't vote we may well have already lost. A lot of ifs in that statement, yes. But you one way or another this situation could be coming pretty soon.
-
Snow: I did indeed attack Laggy for minor points... which is something I admitted to. Furthermore, I find it hard to call what I'm doing "twisting his words," given I pretty fairly represented his actual posts. They are nitpicky, yes, but that doesn't invalidate them. Furthermore... uh. I... didn't attack Laggy because he wasn't suspicious. I'm also... not really happy with your claim that I'm baiting Laggy, nor am I very happy with that vote of yours.
You are giving to them a meaning that you'd have to finecomb verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry carefully and read under a verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry specific light - more specifically, an accusatory one - to make your case hold water, considering your analysis. The nitpicking is so subtle and directed that I can't help but to think this is trying to put Laggy under the spotlight for a - pardon the metaphor - crime he didn't commit. It's very, very subtle and something I'd have a hard time seeing anyone here doing, let alone Laggy, who is pretty blunt. I still give you the point that it's a good scum tactic, but I'm kneejerking you're looking for it at the wrong place, if you're honestly town, and that kind of nitpicking I don't associate with town, not without a very good backup. Which you failed to provide, since your own content doesn't -have- it. It's too thin an argument for something you finecombed like you did, and it feels too convenient. As such, you may have all the right to not be happy with my statement or my vote, but both stand as they are.
-
Because I'm such a kind soul I'll point out what further accusations I have that you "feel no need to respond to".
Here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25074#msg25074) says he has a couple of people to review himself, but doesn't do any of that. In the next posts, he's been mostly passive. Defending himself, making a few remarks about Andrew off the side, post mainly centered about a defense towards Corwin...
You promised reviewing "a couple of people" but... I'm not seeing it. Unless you mean the post in which you defended yourself from Corwin and wrote a very short piece about Andrew, in which case it feels inadequate.
This has some questionable content, (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25059#msg25059) ... Of interesting note is the last paragraph, where he's not comfortable with a Meeple lynch. Later on, on this day, he expresses dislike for defending against a dead third party; Consequently, doesn't do so, only pulls Meeple's support of town in question.
I re-read Meeple's post, and there's hardly anything to defend against. Yet you express "Hey, I don't want to defend myself from that!" and instead go on a tangent of "Meeple isn't pro-town anyway! I don't need to defend myself against those accusations because he's dead and ITP!" Well for one, maybe Meeple wasn't even aware of his role, because why not roleclaim in full? Leaving that aside (since we won't know till end game), you exhibit a similar stance in defending against my accusations.
"I don't need to because one of the accusations is derived from a misunderstanding!"
The thing is, you say you "aren't comfortable with a Meeple lynch", keep a vote on him regardless (you're listed first on the votecount, can't be arsed to check back if you were the first to vote on Meeple for now) and then when he flips not-scum you go "oh no, I'm not looking forward to defend myself. You know what, I won't, I'll just attack Meeple's credibility!"
Hm, odd. In this summary post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24808#msg24808), ... Moreover, Meeple looks the worst so far he says... But later says he isn't too confident in a Meeple lynch. Scum trying to add credibility because he knows it won't be scum we'll lynch?
Actually, re-reading everything again... The entire summary post is basically, "Hey, everyone looks good and has plus points. Well, except Meeple. You're tagged!" and later on "Yeah, I'm not comfortable with Meeple's lynch".
Also has nothing to do with Andrew. There's sufficient material for you to respond to that is unrelated to Andrew.
-
Bard: Unwillingness to lynch Meeple? What? I don't have a role that disallows unvoting; I deliberately kept my vote on him, therefore I was willing to lynch him (and commented as such!). I was wondering what you were getting at, but I think it's this?
Vote, for now at least, stays on Meeple. I'm not wholly comfortable with lynching him, nor Snow, but I feel a jump to someone else this late in the day would be to grasp at straws.
I said I wasn't wholly comfortable with the lynch, i.e. I had some doubts. Forgive me for not having Corwin's level of confidence, but yeah, I wasn't sure he was scum, and was saying so!
Ninja'd by Bard himself. Sec.
-
You promised reviewing "a couple of people" but... I'm not seeing it. Unless you mean the post in which you defended yourself from Corwin and wrote a very short piece about Andrew, in which case it feels inadequate.
Unshockingly, one of the people I was referring to was Andrew. don't go for the style of picking apart dozens of posts, and the short summary of my thoughts is what you have to live with. I believe the other was Shale, in which case, yeah, my bad for not really getting around to him. Mea culpa, but it doesn't substantiate your other arguments.
Finally, my annoyance at defending myself from Meeple. You're right, there wasn't too much in there about me. However, look at the posts from early day 3. Laggy was clearly examining Meeple's comments against me as if they could form the basis of some kind of argument. I'd find that annoying even if Meeple were town (Holy Word of Dead Townies fails, see Shale and others). As he was Third Party, that led to some frustration, and the back-and-forth you saw that is my early Day 3 contribution.
-
Still care to explain why you make a summary post with positive stuff about everyone but Meeple (at least, that's what I got out of it), voting on him, keeping your vote on him while professing you aren't "wholly comfortable" with the lynch train that you, in effect, were the first on?
-
I voted on him because he seemed the most suspicious. I kept my vote on him for the same reason. I said positive things about some other people because I had gone over their posts and felt they were not especially scum-like. I said I wasn't wholly comfortable because while Meeple was the most suspicious, that doesn't mean I was super-confident he was scum. I'm really not sure how I can be more clear about this.
-
I had to wring every last bit of answer out of you that I could possibly get. Those suspicions were profound at the time (at least to me), and I wouldn't feel satisfied unless you'd responded to everything.
Now that you've adequately defended yourself, I still feel strongly about Excal for the reasons I posted earlier.
##UNFoS: Jo'ou, ##FoS: Excal.
-
Finally, Corwin!
"If scum is talkative, this is bad for town because..."
I didn't say "talkative". I said "aggressive". Aggressive scum is bad for town because they can end up seizing us by the nose and leading us into mislynches. Additionally, a highly aggressive tone gets people emotional and off-balance, and I don't think that's the mood people hunt scum best in.
The wall-of-text (talkative) part I only find a downside simply because it makes me less likely to actually read every single post closely. Is this a weakness in me as a mafia player? Likely. But it's also a fact. There's only so much time I generally want to spend on mafia per day (let's say around two hours). The best way to play mafia would be to read and memorise everyone's posts and be able to ace the Suicide Squad Mafia 101 final exam the next day, but as I have other demands on my time, you'll have to live with my "lurkerish" playstyle. (Because I am totally the biggest lurker this game.)
I do, ultimately, agree that I haven't posted enough anyway. Obviously these last few posts have been an attempt to remedy this, although I still haven't gotten around to really examining lynch candidates yet.
-
So, I was looking back over stuff to see who's lounging back without making real comments/votes today and was a bit shocked by something. Strago's at nearly 24 hours since his last post. I don't have a second vote to lay down on him for lurking horribly, but if I did he'd be wearing it right now. Are we getting close to a modkill situation, mods? That's an awfully long time to be gone.
-
Sorry, nearly 48, not 24.
-
Current votecount:
Bardiche (0): Laggy
Laggy (0): AndrewRogue
Shale (0): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (5): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain, Excal, Laggy
Andrew (1): Jo'ou
With twelve alive, it takes seven to lynch.
I am itching to modkill people and only holding off because it's Cid's game. At the present time it seems like Tai's going to go, and Strago as well if he doesn't show up right quick. Also, the angry flamewars that have occurred between certain people are unacceptable and make the game unfun for everyone. Use common sense, any more of that past this point WILL be instant modkill.
-
So I finally get my act together after a day of job-hunting (a successful one, finally) and I guess I'm about to get modkilled? Apologies, I honestly hadn't realized I'd been away for such a disruptive amount of time. I'm catching up right now.
Before I get a larger post in order, however, I do want to second what Alex has said about the flame wars. Corwin and Carthrat seem to have been particularly bad offenders in this regard; Tai was involved too, but it seemed to me that he was more of a target than an original instigator. I'm not saying all this in order to tattle to the mods, but rather because the blatant and overwhelming incivility shown by some people strikes me as massively anti-town. Yes, being aggressive in our pursuit of scum is a good thing, but to be rude and antagonistic towards other players is divisive in a way that is hardly in the best interest of the town. Cor and Rat had been rubbing me the wrong way, and (role meta-gaming RE: Carthrat's votelessness aside) they both look more scummy to me for it. I'd have mentioned it earlier had I gotten my bidness together to make a post.
Now, catsup.
-
Okay. Final post, no replacement was found.
Be-leaf it or knot, but I was Poison Ivy, Town's Lie Detector. Every night, a roleclaim made in game was chosen and the post it was in, given to Cid. I was then told if it was completely true (the role is precisely as the person stated it), partially true (what was said was true, but there is more) or false (the post was a lie). THIS DOES NOT CATCH ALIGNMENTS. So the two targets could be whatever, it doesn't catch win conditions or alignments, just abilities.
Night 1, Rat's claim. Returned completely true, so if my role is not messed up somehow, he is truely simply voteless ( ).
Night 2, Snow's claim. Returned completely true.
I had hoped to use this again Night 3 on Bardiche or, preferably, someone else's roleclaim, as we've seen enough that I'd get either Partially True or True on his role, I suspect.
Basic breakdown of impressions:
Corwin: On the edge regarding him; as I presented in my case, some of his points against Snow seemed to be pushing it, but I'm not convinced he is scum here. Still high on my list.
Carthrat: No comment.
Elfboy: Has seemed reasonable and logical the entire game; perhaps one of the lower ones on my list.
Laggy: See Elfboy.
Snow: On the other side of Cor, his other points re: Snow's actions are worth noting, and I would not be objecting to a lynch if I were staying in. Since I'm not, well.
Strago: Lurkerish. Does do decent commentary when he is here, but lurkerish.
Excal: Slightly more lurkerish than Strago at this point. These two need cattle prods. >_>
Shale: And add a third. More on the Strago spectrum than the Excal one, but somewhere in between's where he falls.
QR: ...Something's rubbing me as off about QR right now; my inclination is to say that she's missing a fair bit more content than she usually provides? This could just be how life works, but it'd make her worth paying attention to.
Andrew: See what Laggy and Snow have said. I've really nothing to add to this.
Bardiche: I'm... not seeing much of the issue here, on the other hand. Bardiche just seems like the paranoid sort of townie these games engender, and his actions have been reasonable enough.
Now, time to make like a tree and leaf.
Requesting modkill.
-
Okay, I've said my piece about Carth/Corwin. I honestly wish I had more to add to it, but their content has been very solid for the most part. It's just the way in which they've approached their arguments that looks deucedly bad to me, for reasons I've mentioned.
I generally get a town read from Bardiche. Where others see him as too "worried about his image," I honestly just see helpful -- if overly cautious -- town. Part of my reaction to him is a matter of gut feeling; having just played with him in SSB:B Mafia, something about the way he's acting seems to click with how he played there. That's hardly an airtight defense, obviously, but especially now that he's comported himself pretty well in discussion with Laggy I just don't read scum.
The Snow situation is three-and-a-half-WIFOM-headaches at this point, and I basically have no idea what to do with it anymore. I wish I did. I'd say the thing that makes me suspect him the most right now is indeed the apparent discordance between those he suspected and those he roleblocked, but... hmm. Actually, the more I consider it, the less I grok it. Bears more thought on my part.
Elsewhere, there's Excal. Who reads strongly as scum to me when I look back over the game. Day 1's obviously Day 1, but he had a way of summing up the major arguments in a vaguely florid style that made him seem to be contributing more than he actually was. I also felt hints of the unproductive aggression thing I've seen in other players, specifically against Delta and OK. I don't recall any particularly groundbreaking original contributions from him during Day 2, and now? He's been effectively absent for... mrff, about as long as I have. Here are his Day 3 posts with content:
I would also disagree on calling QR out. While she was instrumental in culling targets, we've by no means been limited to the folks she has suggested, nor has she just unilaterally decided who it is we should focus on. In both cases, she came in near the end of the day, said we should start looking at a lynch, and then picked out the two people with the most votes and best cases. This is highlighting what we've done, not taking charge and deciding for us.
Alright, water heater issue is mostly dealt with now. Unfortunatly, still don't have time to scour everything to make a deep in-depth post. I have read everything over, and I agree with Corwin that not only is there something that looks fishy about the early pile on on Shale today, but that of the three who were a part of that, Snow looks the worse. His reasoning for his use of his power doesn't feel quite right with his choice of roleblock target vs. who he's claimed to be suspicious of also looks fairly bad.
No real time to comment on anyone else as my thoughts on them are less defined, but I will leave you with a vote to cement the one concrete opinion I have at present.
##Vote: Joe Rambo
Maybe just a tinge of irony/meaning in the fact that Excal's defending someone who defends lurkers? Other than that, Snow's just a really easy, inoffensive train to jump upon right now, for obvious reasons. And maybe it's just me, but for all that I'm glad we didn't rush to lynch Shale before he could speak, I don't find the aborted mini-train against him particularly "fishy." Especially after the endlessness of Day 2 I can well understand the impulse to just up and dispose of someone who had been so markedly useless.
Finally? QuietRain. Look, I'm the last person who's going to defend my lurking. I suck, etc. But I'm a bit perplexed, now. You were very strongly against Shale's lynch when LAL was invoked against him. Hell, you had a sizeable post-and-a-half or so yesterday defending that position you took, saying that lurkers weren't the first thing you looked for when hunting scum and talking about how you understood people's RL issues. And now you pop up for the first time today only to ask about a potential modkill for me in a way that struck me as a pretty blatantly leading question. Uh. Interesting one-eighty, QR.
And maybe now my paranoia's working overtime, but suddenly I can't help connecting the two of them. Despite thinking QR does look bad for that, though, I'm going to set my vote on somehow who has generally looked bad to me for longer.
##VOTE: Excal
-
Aaaaaand Ninja'd. Okay, as bed as role-metagaming is, Tai's read of Carthrat's roleclaim does make the latter look pretty clean in my book. Simply because... well, Voteless Scum with... no other role? Then again, El Cid did advertise this game as a head-scratcher. Yar.
-
Strago, I think you're looking at a very different situation here. My statements at the time (and my feelings right now) where that a lynch is better used on someone you think is scum than for someone that might very well just have had RL issues come up. There is a big difference between modkill and lynch unless I missed a part where Cid said this game gets a Day End at modkill. If someone has RL issues come up that drive them off for days at a time, I don't see a problem with modkilling them. Town still gets our chance to lynch that way.
-
Yeah. 'Tis indeed a fair enough point, and I suppose that I likely reacted hastily given that it was my own head being submitted for the block. The fact that I recall you brushing over Shale and suggesting neither modkill nor lynch does still ping my radar a bit, but... yes, you're right in isolating the important functional difference to us between a lynch and a modkill.
-
Strago, I'd like to suggest that it isn't the frequency with which someone posts but rather the content they put into their post that counts. Shale, while he has been somewhat erratic in his posting, has been consistantly insightful when he does post. As such, I have few issues with arguing against his lynch.
As for the one post of any content I've made in Day 3, perhaps a bit of context for why it's so poorly worded. I've basically been running off of 4/5 hours of sleep for the last two nights, and when I made that post I was already half an hour late for work. Needless to say, it was a teensy bit rushed.
Now, moving on to Bard and his case. Given the seriousness of his claims, I'll just go ahead and quote it.
So first and foremost, I'm going to start talking about someone who's been mostly ignored this entire game. Lurking at its best, everyone failed to recognize this individual promised content several times without providing any. When he does, the content is... Pretty small.
Eh, except for days where people start calling for my blood on day 1, that's always the way it goes. But thank you, you've made it so any points I have will matter now!
I'm talking of Excal, of course. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24732#msg24732)
That's the first post on Day 2 that has actual content, though it lacks the promise of "looking back at Day 1" and tunnel visions into Snow. This is the next post containing some content. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24855#msg24855)
I must admit, I am curious about the tunnel visioning. I'll admit my posting style is fire and forget, but I don't recall overly focusing on Snow much before that point. Snow actually coming to my attention due to his actions near the end of Day 1. Also, I switched my vote from Snow to Meeple near the end of Day 2, which doesn't suggest that I've been keeping my eye and attention only on Snow.
Then for a few pages, there's nothing, followed by this beautiful response:
Blargleargleargleargle...
I don't know whether to be more upset by the fact that there's so many posts to wade through, or that with all the time I've been away there's been so few. Head hurts, somewhat groggy, and trying to get thoughts together, but I will get something substantive for you guys before I go to sleep tonight.
One thing I can comment on right now though is my agreement with QR. We need to start focussing on lynching soon. The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak. That said, QR, I'm thinking Andy may be a worthwhile addition to the list of folks to consider. I'll give more concrete reasoning why in my next post.
Now here's something interesting. Two things, rather.
1) The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak.
What an amusing thing to say for someone whose only contributed two posts all day to cases, and then moves on to agree with QR that, "Hey, we should start focusing and draw in the people who haven't yet spoken!" even though he knows damn well he belongs to that category of people.
2) He promises to provide more concrete reasoning in his next post. He does not. Instead, promises us content the next day. Sure fine! (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25061#msg25061)
Right, let's kill two birds with one stone here. If you read what I said in the last post before this long span where nothing happened, I opened by saying I would not be home. Specifically, between Friday morning and Saturday night, I was home for roughly six hours in a 34 hour span of time. These six hours were also the time I had to sleep in. I hope you forgive me for not wanting to give over a third of that time in order to produce a worthwhile response. As for the failure to provide a post that night? Honestly, I was tired, and wasn't able to think clearly enough to post anything.
That's all dandy but if you look at the next page following that, he really doesn't provide concrete reasoning (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25076#msg25076), and actually backs off the Andrew case.
Are you saying you want me to fake cases that I don't think are worth making? Are you saying that if I state that I think someone is suspicious and I'm going to look at why, then I am not allowed to come up with the answer "I was wrong"?
His next post here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25092#msg25092) talks of giving his thoughts into a "hopeful Day 2 end game", even though his presence was negligable during the start and middle of the day. This is worrying because scum typically like to pad numbers and a sense of being here by posting frequently to start, and then hoping to coast on that. However, part of that is to avoid having to get involved in exchanges where their faulty logic can be exposed. In Shale's case, whenever he does post, he usually comes along with some decently detailed thoughts and attempts to be helpful.
I can't help but read IRONY in this because that's exactly what he's been doing. The one time he really arguments for a case, Excal just has to pad on what others have said since he comes late to the entire day.
Bard, this section comes across more as an argument that if you don't happen to have free time when the day starts, then don't even bother trying to participate when it ends. What am I supposed to do if the night is when I'm free, and the day starts when I'm horribly busy? Tell my boss that I can't come into work because I'm playing a game? Tell my friends that I cannot honour my commitments because I'm playing a game? Hell, you even used the same justification yourself by saying you have interests which preceed Mafia in importance. So why is it alright for you, but not for others?
The next post he makes is right over here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25300#msg25300), where he just blends into the conversation. Nothing about the previous day. Nothing about the discussion at hand aside from, "Don't lynch QR, she's been useful to town".
Why be superfluous if you don't have anything more to add?
And now his latest gem of a post is to lynch Jo'ou based on "his usage of power doesn't feel right" with the promise he'll post more concrete thoughts later. Well gee, you promised the same with Andrew. Sure thing, I'll believe you this time.
Except, you know. Not.
##FoS: Excal for this reasoning. Being generally lurkish while pretending to be here, every so often posting some excuse for not delivering while never really delivering information that hasn't been said before. Skillfully remained under everyone's radar.
See my answer to Strago above as to why that post is the way it is.
-
Okay, Excal's defense is solid enough. Life is busy. That's cool. Of course, life can be just as busy just as easily for scum as for town, and frankly Excal's been pinging for me -- as I've said -- since Day 1, when he was posting fairly frequently. Other peeps, talk about Excal a bit. What are people's thoughts? We all seem to be burnt out on this game for some reason and sick of walls o' text, so I'm just asking straight-up. Is there any agreement to be had on Excal?
If not, I'm getting close to ready to change my vote to Snow; his recent return to fatalist resignation strikes me as disingenuous and manipulative, somehow, and something needs to inject some life into this game once more. Anything, because we all suck.
-
I'm talking of Excal, of course. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24732#msg24732)
That's the first post on Day 2 that has actual content, though it lacks the promise of "looking back at Day 1" and tunnel visions into Snow. This is the next post containing some content. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24855#msg24855)
I must admit, I am curious about the tunnel visioning. I'll admit my posting style is fire and forget, but I don't recall overly focusing on Snow much before that point. Snow actually coming to my attention due to his actions near the end of Day 1. Also, I switched my vote from Snow to Meeple near the end of Day 2, which doesn't suggest that I've been keeping my eye and attention only on Snow.
You know, you're absolutely right. Well, at least the tunnel vision, because at the time I read it, I was all, "Oh man, he's focusing on Snow already..." while it's more, "He's throwing out a suspicion during a discussion with few solid candidates". My apologies.
Then for a few pages, there's nothing, followed by this beautiful response:
Blargleargleargleargle...
I don't know whether to be more upset by the fact that there's so many posts to wade through, or that with all the time I've been away there's been so few. Head hurts, somewhat groggy, and trying to get thoughts together, but I will get something substantive for you guys before I go to sleep tonight.
One thing I can comment on right now though is my agreement with QR. We need to start focussing on lynching soon. The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak. That said, QR, I'm thinking Andy may be a worthwhile addition to the list of folks to consider. I'll give more concrete reasoning why in my next post.
Now here's something interesting. Two things, rather.
1) The day feels like it's miring, and focussing on getting a lynch down is just what we need to revitalise the arguments and draw in those people who haven't seen fit to speak.
What an amusing thing to say for someone whose only contributed two posts all day to cases, and then moves on to agree with QR that, "Hey, we should start focusing and draw in the people who haven't yet spoken!" even though he knows damn well he belongs to that category of people.
2) He promises to provide more concrete reasoning in his next post. He does not. Instead, promises us content the next day. Sure fine! (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25061#msg25061)
Right, let's kill two birds with one stone here. If you read what I said in the last post before this long span where nothing happened, I opened by saying I would not be home. Specifically, between Friday morning and Saturday night, I was home for roughly six hours in a 34 hour span of time. These six hours were also the time I had to sleep in. I hope you forgive me for not wanting to give over a third of that time in order to produce a worthwhile response. As for the failure to provide a post that night? Honestly, I was tired, and wasn't able to think clearly enough to post anything.
My point still stands. You're saying we should start focusing, and prod the people who haven't seen fit to talk yet, even though you've hardly talked at all. You're coming in, and talking in a way as if you do not at all belong to that category. During the second day, posts like these made it feel as if you were actually present, and in the heat of the discussion, combined with your attitude, I honestly overlooked that you were lurking. You'll have to forgive me for being paranoid of others.
That's all dandy but if you look at the next page following that, he really doesn't provide concrete reasoning (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25076#msg25076), and actually backs off the Andrew case.
Are you saying you want me to fake cases that I don't think are worth making? Are you saying that if I state that I think someone is suspicious and I'm going to look at why, then I am not allowed to come up with the answer "I was wrong"?
Well it sounds equally shoddy to me, to first say, "I think this guy should be considered for lynch" and only then start looking for the arguments to justify that. This may simply be a playstyle issue, though, so I'm not willing to pursue it as "scumtell".
His next post here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25092#msg25092) talks of giving his thoughts into a "hopeful Day 2 end game", even though his presence was negligable during the start and middle of the day. This is worrying because scum typically like to pad numbers and a sense of being here by posting frequently to start, and then hoping to coast on that. However, part of that is to avoid having to get involved in exchanges where their faulty logic can be exposed. In Shale's case, whenever he does post, he usually comes along with some decently detailed thoughts and attempts to be helpful.
I can't help but read IRONY in this because that's exactly what he's been doing. The one time he really arguments for a case, Excal just has to pad on what others have said since he comes late to the entire day.
Bard, this section comes across more as an argument that if you don't happen to have free time when the day starts, then don't even bother trying to participate when it ends. What am I supposed to do if the night is when I'm free, and the day starts when I'm horribly busy? Tell my boss that I can't come into work because I'm playing a game? Tell my friends that I cannot honour my commitments because I'm playing a game? Hell, you even used the same justification yourself by saying you have interests which preceed Mafia in importance. So why is it alright for you, but not for others?
You're not seeing the point I tried to make. The point I was trying to make is that you aren't really active, but at the same time hold an attitude and compose yourself as though you always have been, related to your "scum will attempt to blend in and hope to give off the vibe of being there. That's what I get from you.
The next post he makes is right over here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25300#msg25300), where he just blends into the conversation. Nothing about the previous day. Nothing about the discussion at hand aside from, "Don't lynch QR, she's been useful to town".
Why be superfluous if you don't have anything more to add?
Because you haven't really added anything during neither Day 2 nor now Day 3. You weren't there for most of Day 2, and when you posted it was vague and lacking any original content, save for such ample amounts it's negligable, to me. You've been riding on other's trains for that day, and now in day 3, you jump on the Snow train with ample justification, place a vote regardless (trying to get an early hammer on him so you won't need to justify it? idk) and consequently still haven't backed that vote up. The least you could do is at least provide sound reasoning for day 3 cases and start contributing to that day.
Again, this may be playstyle differences, but it comes off as suspicious to me. I don't think it wrong of me to want to ask you for some justification and give you a good look.
And now his latest gem of a post is to lynch Jo'ou based on "his usage of power doesn't feel right" with the promise he'll post more concrete thoughts later. Well gee, you promised the same with Andrew. Sure thing, I'll believe you this time.
Except, you know. Not.
##FoS: Excal for this reasoning. Being generally lurkish while pretending to be here, every so often posting some excuse for not delivering while never really delivering information that hasn't been said before. Skillfully remained under everyone's radar.
See my answer to Strago above as to why that post is the way it is.
Yes, but you'll have to forgive me for my cynicism, because so far it holds true.
-
Agh, damnit. Without thinking I hit the edit button when I saw that the BB coding was wrong. I'll fully admit to this. I only placed an extra [/quote], but uh, yeah. I don't have an excuse.
-
Another post before bed, this one looking at Bardiche, since the two of us have had enough back-and-forth that he's been in my thoughts regardless, not to mention the fact that he started Day 2 as one of the more concerning players.
Bardiche:
Okay. Day 1, two things he does that stand out to me. One, and admittedly this probably only stands out to me because it was in conversation with me, but he apparently misses where Rat says he can't vote, since he suggests maybe Rat can only vote to hammer. Secondly, speaking of hammers, he hurls one down "accidentally", possibly to ensure he can buff his vote total.
Day 2, his defence of his claim and explanation is in fact pretty reasonable. So is his vote on Meeple and the reasoning behind it. He doesn't really start raising my eyebrows at all until the bottom of page 12. In particular, when he implicates QuietRain as paranoia-inciting and narrowing lynch candidates... and throws in Corwin for good measure. There's never a reason given for this besides
I grouped the two of them together because QR said, explicitly, that we should narrow down the list of suspects and... IDK, but to me, Corwin really seems to be sniping people and being generally rather aggressive in play.
Which is fair enough, but it still didn't change the fact that the previous post felt like an attempt to heap suspicion. And in general, I don't like the fact that he uses the words of a Dead Townie to lend weight to this sudden tactic.
Day 3... better. Laggy calls him out, he defends himself. He makes cases. So let's look at those.
His case on Excal basically boils down to Excal being a lurker. I'm not going to pick it apart because it's certainly not my place to do so; I'm as curious as Excal's ongoing defence as anyone. The one thing I take exception to is that he harps too much on irony, as if Excal's thoughts on how issues like lurking are lessened because he himself has been doing it. Personally I think it looks much scummier if a lurker just tries to brush the whole issue under the rug.
His case on me is largely based around a misconception, which... well, isn't great, since it is the second time he has conveniently missed something like that. The other concerns are valid enough, for all that it feels like he picked me because I'd annoyed him previously. Which... I should really take some of the blame for. The ;_; was probably uncalled for, and as I've chastised Corwin already for getting people off-balance, I should apologise for possibly doing the same myself.
Overall? Yeah, there's a few unsettling things about him to me. But this review of his posts has convinced me there is not enough for him to earn my vote.
Very brief summary of others, since I won't be doing more tonight.
Snow: Do I need to explain why he's a big lynch candidate? Probably not. That said, I badly want to go over his posts myself before throwing a vote on him, especially as near to hammer as we are. Told the truth about his role, but there's nothing especially town-like about a roleblocker, so what good does that do? Slight credit for the 50% failure thing being truth; if it had been partial truth there would be a vote in this space for sure.
Shale, Strago, and Excal are all guilty of not posting enough. Yeah, I know they all have reasons (and believe every one of 'em). None have been... horrid about content when they have posted, is my general feeling, but all deserve looks for how much they've posted. General feeling is that Shale's posts have had the most solid content of the three, so despite those early votes he accrued he feels the most town-like. Strago has skirted modkill the entire game, Excal's somewhere in the middle.
Corwin certainly doesn't have that problem. He's posted a lot (after a slow start). He does however feel very aggressive, and has been unsettling me the entire game because of it. Honest playstyle difference? Good chance! But it could also be masking a scum taking control of townie discussion and making sure the targets we lynch are scum-approved.
Andrew's clearly above the lurker level, and has generally done well enough in his own defence. Hasn't made much of an impression on me in Day 3, though.
Tai: Bye, dude. Thanks for the info. Still, bleh. The loss erodes the little ground we made by preventing (however it happened...) a kill last night.
Rat generally pings to me as town, as the arguments he has made have been solid enough. He HAS, however, been fading a bit in my impression of him recently... despite today being voting day for him. Told the truth about his role (probably) but could easily have done that as town or scum.
If Laggy and/or QR are scum, they are damn good at it.
-
DHE: You can't attack people for being aggressive, not really. You can't substitute that in for actual suspicions or attacks on their arguments. It reads to me like 'your argument is so good, it must be scummy', which just doesn't work for me.
On the side, I'll agree that town roleblocker is something of a difficult role, but you're still best off trying to block scumkills with it. Your odds might suck if you pick people out randomly- but you shouldn't be doing that, and I like to think finding scum isn't completely impossible.
<->
Strago asked about Excal, so... here we go.
In general he has a somewhat moderate frivolity index, which is the fun name I'm giving to people who talk about trivial things with little effect on the game, including but not limited to asking people to configure sigs/avatars, saying "It's time to look over people!", and random role speculation. And, yes, I find this talk slightly scummy. I won't go through his posts and mention every time he acts like this, check his record if you must.
-Early case on Snow day 2, so not faulting him there...
-...but later in the day, after I'd dropped some stuff on Snow for his words on Bardiche, he made absolutely no mention of it in a much larger post, although I think this would've been worthy of mention. He doesn't really talk about Snow at all right up until he unvotes him. He admits that he tossed the vote there in the first place just to get attention- well, attention was got! Snow's silly mistakes were in plain view! And yet he doesn't even discuss them? Excal didn't follow up on his own prod, here; I find this to be quite bad.
-Slamming Meeple at the time he did for jumping off Andy and then jumping on again, I do not get it. Somehow Meeple's second vote for Andrew becomes more suspicious because he left a jokevote and then returned. That's.. not really reasoning, not given the usual importance granted to jokevotes (i.e. virtually none.) Meeple's third-partiness has no bearing on this, just to mention. Given that this was mentioned very late in day 2, I can't see it in a positive light.
-Cheerily jumps back on Snow today, despite very little mention of suspicions on him the previous day beyond a prodvote that he doesn't seem to care much about. And do my eyes deceive me, or has he not posted anything at all on Snow today beyond that simple vote for him? Not even a comment on the present arguments for him? I would feel that should be a prerequisite to the vote.
I have what I see as fairly textbook lurking along with jumping onto convenient cases, both Meeple and Snow. This does not look good, not at all, and Excal has rapidly been propelled to the guy I'd like to lynch after Snow, and can completely understand Strago's thoughts on him at this point.
I can take Excal not posting much, but his posts just don't cover material that he badly needed to talk about. I, too, wish to have people talk about this, because while Jo'ou needs to hang, Excal is virtually on the same level. Much like Strago, I am now interested in hearing what other people think about this. My problems with Snow - early talk with Bardiche, general flailing after that, misused roleblockerness and his recent silly attacks on Corwin for 'pushing my lynch too hard' - are not that far in front.
-
"I know alllll your secrets," Poison Ivy crooned, temporarily drawing the attention of the bickering crowd. "Well, okay, only some of them. But I can tell you that...Carthrat and Joe Rambo are filthy liars! No, wait, that's wrong, let me focus here for a moment...yes, I can see that they were telling the truth about their stated abilities (or lack thereof). Good to know, eh?"
Suddenly, there was a break in the roiling clouds above Belle Reve and a ray of light shone down upon the mad botanist, blinding in the gloom, and an entity spoke from above, its voice like a peal of thunder.
"Poison Ivy! In the name of all that is good and just, ye are hereby condemned for taking part in Batman and Robin. Contemplate thy shame in the hell of Weed-B-Gone!"
And with that, a giant foot shot down from the heavens and crushed her.
Taishyr--Poison Ivy, AKA Pamela Lillian Isley (Town Lie Detector)--was smote by the gods of good taste!
Updated votecount forthcoming.
-
Current votecount:
Bardiche (0): Laggy
Laggy (0): AndrewRogue
Excal (1): Strago
Shale (0): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (5): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain, Excal, Laggy
Andrew (1): Jo'ou
With eleven alive, it takes six to lynch.
Mod's note: Snow is now -1 to hammer on account of the vote threshold lowering.
-
Yeah, okay. I'm trying to lynch people who act the scummiest of the lot, and I lead town on scum-approved kills. When we inevitably hit scum with my methods, which have been proven time and time again, I will doubtlessly be accused of bussing.
Fine, I get that I can't win. Even though my track record has been one successful lynch train (which resulted in a mislynch, but day 1, people!) and one unsuccessful attempt to get a person I think is scummiest lynched day 2. For all my awesome mind control powers over everyone, I don't seem to be all that effective with my master puppeteer act.
And if I sound a bit upset here, it's possibly because I am. I try to post more to make up for not being there when most of you are awake, and it's aggressive and verbose and walls of texty. I decide to cut down on it a bit due to lots of recent work and these complaints, and I already see the murmurs of a slow start, no doubt laying the ground for when people say that me not posting as much now is scummy.
Onto my thoughts. I doubt Tai would request a modkill and not be truthful in that post about his role/investigations, because yeah, we'll find out soon enough so why bother? [EDIT: Mmm, Cid's post just confirms Tai's role and alignment] Hearing that JR hasn't lied about his role, at least, takes me somewhat aback. He still looks the scummiest to me, in large part due to trying to go all apathetic and bouncing back once the danger has passed. If we unvote him now, he is quite likely to do this again, and I see it as a ploy to survive on the part of scum. And the most convincing evidence is his claimed choice of night targets, which is inconsistent and follows a logic I don't find viable (or JR could be lying about that, I feel it is a distinct possibility, for all we know scripted events gave Rat his vote).
Since Excal seems to be getting the most focus, I'll take a look at him here.
I think that laying a vote on JR the way he did day 3 is better than just skirting on account of RL issues. How many people here just went 'I have a busy life, mafia is not my top priority, no one is so scummy-looking I'll actually vote'? Voting happens to leave a trail, and it's important to show what you believe in.
That said, I would certainly want to see more (a lot more) now that RL seems to have been dealt with.
And, uh, I don't actually have anything to add to what's been said, really, without combing his posts from the beginning of day 1. And that would give me... day 1 posts. I hope I'll form a better opinion as Excal participates more. Rat's concerns over convenient cases could easily be dispelled or strengthened as we look at what Excal does next day (if he is town and he isn't NK'd, or the rest of us don't decide to lynch-switch to him today; I don't think we should since JR must be lynched).
-
Corwin: It's an attitude thing. There's a fine line between aggressive and hostile, and especially with Taishyr -- and somewhat Snow -- thing I really thought you were landing on the hostile side in a way that was unproductive. That said...
Yeah, okay. I'm trying to lynch people who act the scummiest of the lot, and I lead town on scum-approved kills.
Could you perhaps reword this? I'm... not at all sure what you meant by it, and I'm trying to get out of the habit of twisting people's slips/weird phrasing over in my mind until they become scumtells. Scum-approved kills?
Can we please not modkill Bard for his error. Arrrrrgh.
Other than that, I still truly think that Excal looks more like Snow, and I'm torn between hammering Snow to potentially reinvigorate this game with a flip and new info, and sticking to my guns because of how close we might be to LYLO. The latter seems to be a better course of action for now.
-
Excal looks more like Snow? Excal looks more like scum. Durrr. It's early.
-
And, then again, there's the fact that I don't see... much of anything Snow could do to clear his name at this point. He simply looks too dirty to too many people. Which means that even if I do get the necessary teeth pulled to switch our lynch-track to Excal, tomorrow's still gonna be All Snow All The Time, likely enough. Grarghle.
-
Corwin: It's an attitude thing. There's a fine line between aggressive and hostile, and especially with Taishyr -- and somewhat Snow -- thing I really thought you were landing on the hostile side in a way that was unproductive. That said...
Yeah, okay. I'm trying to lynch people who act the scummiest of the lot, and I lead town on scum-approved kills.
Could you perhaps reword this? I'm... not at all sure what you meant by it, and I'm trying to get out of the habit of twisting people's slips/weird phrasing over in my mind until they become scumtells. Scum-approved kills?
DHE: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25522#msg25522 (emphasis mine)
Corwin certainly doesn't have that problem. He's posted a lot (after a slow start). He does however feel very aggressive, and has been unsettling me the entire game because of it. Honest playstyle difference? Good chance! But it could also be masking a scum taking control of townie discussion and making sure the targets we lynch are scum-approved.
Strago, could you really miss this? Scum-approved being the same expression, and the post is question is only five above yours (two of which are mod posts). Need I also point out my tone in said post, which was a direct reaction to the linked post by DHE, first and foremost?
Then, there's also you going 'I could hammer but I think we should debate more. Except I'm not providing new targets or arguments.' Please explain that attitude.
-
Can we please not modkill Bard for his error. Arrrrrgh.
Mod's note: We already had one modkill today and I doubt another would improve anyone's attitude. I'll let it slide, but for the love of god, man, don't do it again (Bard or anyone else) or it will be an instakill.
-
Okay, I wanted to put more breadth into my discussions, but it's very obviously time for a WOT (or at least wall of quotes) assessment on Snow. Humbly requesting no hammer while I put that together.
-
Corwin: It's an attitude thing. There's a fine line between aggressive and hostile, and especially with Taishyr -- and somewhat Snow -- thing I really thought you were landing on the hostile side in a way that was unproductive. That said...
Yeah, okay. I'm trying to lynch people who act the scummiest of the lot, and I lead town on scum-approved kills.
Could you perhaps reword this? I'm... not at all sure what you meant by it, and I'm trying to get out of the habit of twisting people's slips/weird phrasing over in my mind until they become scumtells. Scum-approved kills?
DHE: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25522#msg25522 (emphasis mine)
Corwin certainly doesn't have that problem. He's posted a lot (after a slow start). He does however feel very aggressive, and has been unsettling me the entire game because of it. Honest playstyle difference? Good chance! But it could also be masking a scum taking control of townie discussion and making sure the targets we lynch are scum-approved.
Strago, could you really miss this? Scum-approved being the same expression, and the post is question is only five above yours (two of which are mod posts). Need I also point out my tone in said post, which was a direct reaction to the linked post by DHE, first and foremost?
Apparently I could. My bad.
Then, there's also you going 'I could hammer but I think we should debate more. Except I'm not providing new targets or arguments.' Please explain that attitude.
Uh, I'm still thinking over the case against Snow myself? And I... have been presenting Excal as a target, and while he may not be "new" or exciting enough for you whatnot, I did pretty clearly ask other players if they would weigh in on him. Since it's rather necessary for others to vote for him also if he's going to get lynched.
-
You have been presenting him, Strago, yes. It was more the way you phrased things that rubbed me the wrong way. You sound both resigned to a JR lynch today (and is this actually a bad thing? I don't see anyone scummier) and unwilling to move on. You say 'Excal looks more like Snow', and I realize you said it was meant to be scum, but it's quite telling. Doesn't it mean you think both are very scummy? In that case, wouldn't it do more than 'invigorate the game' for us to lynch JR?
-
Heh. And now my own tendency to nail people for slips in typing comes back to bite me in the ass. Yay karma. I don't know what to tell you other than the fact that it was a typo. *shrugs*
And... yeah, I thought I made it clear that one of the reasons I was considering hammering Snow was to give the game a kick in the pants, despite the fact that I think Excal looks worse. I really thought I'd conveyed that. As far as trying to twist my typo into my thinking they both look scummy but wanting to lynch Excal instead for some reason... no. Something about the case against Snow doesn't sit right with me, and I wish I could back that up objectively.
-
Okay, Snow on Day 1: Makes all of one substantial post on anything, and it's mainly a summary of what's happening. I know he had a good real-life reason for the absence, but "Tom is distracting, OK is crazy, and Delta is new to the forum) isn't exactly the heights of analysis I'd want from my only post of the day.
Day 2: Snow vs. Bardiche, round 1, fight! My feeling on that call-out hasn't changed since it happened; I don't like it at all.
Then, there's the fact that, while you can't hide the existence of Anonyvotes, there's no reason to go "oh I cannot hide that" and deliberately blow your cover for the sake of blowing it (which is what you did).
This is bad, bad logic; basically, it translates to "I know you can't hide anonyvotes, but you should have tried to hide the anonyvotes." I know he's since backed off, but that doesn't mean he wasn't trying to advance the argument, and it very much feels like he's throwing suspicion on Bard for the sake of throwing suspicion on Bard. Also, in light of later events, this rings hollow:
Regardless, you will excuse me for being uncomfortable with role-claiming without an immediate, life-threatening reason
Says the guy who roleclaimed at -4 to hammer on a slow-moving day. I know, suicidal tendencies etc., but it seems to belie the idea that he's got a gut aversion to roleclaims.
I've already talked about Snow's last post of Day 2, but to reiterate: lots of words, little said, no textual analysis. Although reviewing it makes me notice something else - he spends all of a nonspecific paragraph talking about Meeple, which...given that Meep was pretty clearly on the chopping block, is a strange thing to do. He just says he disagrees with the case and moves on, finally placing a "stop lurking" vote on me, instead of looking at the people who are training somebody for what he thinks are bad reasons.
Also, there's a pattern to his Day 2 cases. He goes after Bardiche, then pulls off quickly when people yell at him for it, then goes into suicide mode and pulls out of that pretty speedily, then goes after Corwin and pulls off that. And the end of the day the only person he's said he's suspicious of is me, and like I said before there's not much analysis required there.
In short? I wouldn't complain about a Snow lynch. "Throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" is not a town-friendly way to play, and the ease with which he abandons cases definitely rubs me the wrong way even independent of the problems with those cases. I'd vote him, but what with -1 to hammer I'm loath to cut off active discussion. Other things I need to consider if I get another chance to post this game day: Excal, Strago, Carthrat (who doesn't look suspicious to me offhand, but when someone is roleblocked and a kill disappears on the same day, this should require deeper analysis by default).
-
Corwin, for the record, the main thing that bothers me about you is not your argument or your aggressiveness but your absolute zeal and conviction that Snow will flip scum and all the cards will fall into place when we lynch him. Are you so confident that you're willing to stake the odds and write posts that basically say "yeah, when he flips, we'll know what he's lied about and make scum connections, etc" (if I recall from your first Day 1 post) without... at all considering other possibilities, aside from the most basic one (what if he DOESN'T flip scum?).
Now, I never disagreed with the case on him (obviously not, I was on it initially on Day 2 and on it now) but, unlike yourself, I am not absolutely sure in it. I certainly think it's enough to push a case and lynch because there's a good chance that Snow is scum (and, for that matter, the fact that Snow's resignation makes me cement my wants to lynch him today), but every single time the subject's come up you've pretty much already treated him as confirmed scum and it makes me really wonder how you will react and respond should the flip be town. You can't go and complain, with that kind of mentality in your posts, that everyone's going to at least look at the possibility of you as scum leading a lynch train if Snow flips town (and saying you're busing... that possibility hadn't really even occurred to me, the single-mindedness in which you've pursued Snow makes me look at it as unlikely, at the least.) In short, I suspect that you'll get the vindication you want if you do indeed turn out to be correct, but given you've shown basically no inclination if any OTHER possibility, expect glaring looks of suspicion from myself (if not others) if Snow indeed does turn out to be town. It's not so much the logic behind your argument, which is sound, than the attitude you've portrayed while pressing it, which bothers me.
Excal is definitely number 2 on my list of other suspects, while we're discussing it - I said as much when Bardiche brought it up, and I think it was a fairly good case. Rat said it best when he said that he didn't have an issue so much with post count as he did with post content, and while Excal's had valid reasons to be around when there wasn't all that much original discussion to be inserted, it... well, feels too convenient as a scum shield. However, I can't say the case on him is anywhere near as strong as the case on Snow today, so I doubt that will be changing my vote.
-
*first Day 3 post, argh. Day 1 is a memory I wish not to go back to.
-
Other random thoughts:
- Tai confirming roles is nice if nothing else.
- I would preferably not like to drag this day out much longer. It's already fast approaching the length of Day 2, and I think it's time for everyone to get their last thoughts in before proceeding with the lynch, barring extraordinary circumstances.
- Dread Thomas still hasn't posted. Despite several people doubting the value of his word, I would still like to hear from him.
-
Other things I need to consider if I get another chance to post this game day: Excal, Strago, Carthrat (who doesn't look suspicious to me offhand, but when someone is roleblocked and a kill disappears on the same day, this should require deeper analysis by default).
I actually need to stomp on this now, since Tai already mentioned it and some people (although evidently not all) didn't notice; I am voteless and have no redeeming powers that I know of.
I am pretty much disregarding most posts since my last one, as they seem to be mostly boring back-and-forth sniping over how aggressive people are and people agreeing that Snow is scummy without voting for him. I just have nothing to say to that, and these posts don't do anything for me. Eventually someone will make up their mind and hammer, so... yeah. If anyone has something really enlightening to say, they should frankly have said it already. :/
-
Hey, I voted, dammit. =p
-
Alright. I will admit, grudgingly, that my 99% certainty from the beginning of day 3 has dropped slightly BUT I am still very much confident that JR is scum and he is certainly the scummiest person around. The whole giving up thing again today is yet more proof. Attack, feign giving up, recover, attack again. I don't trust it as a pattern, because it feels extremely fake.
Why have I lost a bit of the certainty? Well, because we had Tai confirm JR's role, and had Tai flip to confirm his role and alignment. I now know that JR hasn't lied about everything, for one. But I hate being played and I had the certainty he would hang day 2 like he should have. Meeple did, instead, and while he was ITP and it's not a total loss for us and all the caveats, I would have preferred the one I consider scummiest to die straight away to deny them the chance of using any power roles they might have. I feel that if I let up on him even a little JR would find a way to wring enough sympathy to coast by another day, and that is just unacceptable to me.
-
Other things I need to consider if I get another chance to post this game day: Excal, Strago, Carthrat (who doesn't look suspicious to me offhand, but when someone is roleblocked and a kill disappears on the same day, this should require deeper analysis by default).
I actually need to stomp on this now, since Tai already mentioned it and some people (although evidently not all) didn't notice; I am voteless and have no redeeming powers that I know of.
Which doesn't rule out powerless scum's ability to make nightkills. Considering all the options, here.
-
I'm seconding Laggy's request for EvilTom to post before we drop the hammer. He only has one post a Day, we should at least let him use it.
-
I'm just going to drop the aggressive vs. not debate, since it feels more and more like a playstyle concern. If there's a part of the argument you think is relevant to this game itself I will respond, but otherwise yeah.
Excal... has defended himself, at least. Reading those posts eases my suspicions of him a little. But looking over his posts again, the fact of the matter is he has indeed been very lurkerish, his vote on Snow with very little discussion on him today. Well, I expect he'll live to Day 4 (being realistic here, I don't see the train on Snow suddenly collapsing to allow one on him, and I wouldn't lead such a train anyway), so he'll get a chance to brave town's scrutiny and hopefully contribute some real content. Works for me.
On Snow: Getting around to him last of the suspects. What is there to say? I haven't said much on him today myself, since I've not really given him a good review until now. Suffice to say the breakdown stuff does still lolok bad. And to add to that, there's his choice of roleblock targets. In his defence of blocking Rat, he says he does it because Rat is most likely to have a role. Not because Rat is most likely to be scum, which as a town roleblocker is surely what you should do. The problem here is that Snow's choice for roleblock makes very good sense as scum. Truthful he may be about his power, but I wouldn't be surprised if he'd intended to just lie about his roleblocks and pretend he was failing at them, and only owned up on Rat when he thought he could get townie cred by giving Rat his vote back.
I'm willing to vote for Snow, obviously holding off due to hammer though. Waiting on Shale analyses if he wants to post those, and Tom's post if he decides to actually show up. Would rather not drag things out toooo long, though.
Requisite Ninja Edit:
Rat, I was under the impression you never specifically claimed you had no other powers? Unless Tai's power means that "Partial Truth" is returned even for unrelated powers you don't claim. If I'm wrong... well, see Shale. The main reason you might incur some suspicion is that there was one less kill last night, and we know you were roleblocked.
-
At work, no time for a full post, but a request of the mod:
With the modkill, is there any way for the game to end before tomorrow morning (i.e. are we in potential LYLO)?
-
I have a sneaking suspicion this is one of those we-won't-be-informed-of-LYLO games (vote-affecting roles and all), but I suppose it doesn't hurt to ask.
-
Well, I sure hope we will.
- LYLO and/or potential LYLO will be announced.
-
Me read good. <_< Thanks.
-
Still no sign of Tom? I'm half-ready to hammer Snow simply because this game's never going to get anywhere if someone doesn't.
-
I think it's night there. Looking in Tom's post history he usualy gets to post around 5pmPST-8amPST (which starts about 6 hours from now). We may be in for a wait if we want to stick it out. I do want to hear from Tom, but frankly not at the cost of dragging this day out to heck and back. I really wish he would have posted last night. I leave it up to those with unused votes whether it's that important to you. Frankly, I'm all for ending the day at this point.
-
Hearing words from someone who is confirmed town and thus, is guaranteed to say what he does in favor of town takes precende, to me, over ending the day quickly.
-
Shale, are you still planning to make another post today? I'm willing to wait for that, or for anyone else who wants to contribute; dragging the day out just for Tom, less so. Pretty much the opposite opinion of Bard. (My reasoning is that we can try to glean scumitude from in-game players' posts, as well as getting their thoughts; with Tom, we only get the latter.)
Also stating once more for the record that I am very willing to hammer Snow, and I really hope whoever ends up not doing so between Strago or I doesn't get victimised by "wah you didn't vote!" tomorrow.
-
My point still stands. You're saying we should start focusing, and prod the people who haven't seen fit to talk yet, even though you've hardly talked at all. You're coming in, and talking in a way as if you do not at all belong to that category. During the second day, posts like these made it feel as if you were actually present, and in the heat of the discussion, combined with your attitude, I honestly overlooked that you were lurking. You'll have to forgive me for being paranoid of others.
Yeah, can't blame you for that one. I have a bad habit of a) not realising when I'm not posting much, and b) getting hung up really easily in a preference for contemplation over actual posting, which means that most of my time spent on the game never actually gets shown here. Not to mention, when I'm legitimatly busy, I do not feel like I'm lurking because there are not large chunks of time where I could be posting but I am not.
You're not seeing the point I tried to make. The point I was trying to make is that you aren't really active, but at the same time hold an attitude and compose yourself as though you always have been, related to your "scum will attempt to blend in and hope to give off the vibe of being there. That's what I get from you.
Yeah, see above. I don't usually notice that my post count has gone down when I'm busy until someone points it out.
Because you haven't really added anything during neither Day 2 nor now Day 3. You weren't there for most of Day 2, and when you posted it was vague and lacking any original content, save for such ample amounts it's negligable, to me. You've been riding on other's trains for that day, and now in day 3, you jump on the Snow train with ample justification, place a vote regardless (trying to get an early hammer on him so you won't need to justify it? idk) and consequently still haven't backed that vote up. The least you could do is at least provide sound reasoning for day 3 cases and start contributing to that day.
Again, this may be playstyle differences, but it comes off as suspicious to me. I don't think it wrong of me to want to ask you for some justification and give you a good look.
These points I give you. I have been bad at noticing things others have not, it's a large part of why I haven't been posting that much when I do have free time. Because most of the things I have to say have already been said. (I'd also like to point out that when it came to Snow I was the first vote on him, so that's hardly riding a train. Though Meeple I give you) I also wasn't expecting an early lynch, not with the way this game is going, but I wouldn't mind it given the way people seem to have a pathological fear of lynching around here. I'd also like to point out that the only way that post, with that little meat on it, wouldn't have gotten me flak come day 4 is if Snow is actually scum.
Second point, since I do recall there being an issue brought up later in regards to my views on Andy. That is in fact how I play the game. I have everyone at a background level of whether or not I think they're scummy. And when I post regarding my thoughts, I will occasionally make reference to that. However, if I cannot back it up with posts or evidence, then I will back off for the time being or revise my thoughts.
Finally, I don't mind you calling me out. That's part of the game and something that happens eventually. Honestly, you look a good sight less suspicious now that you're calling for my head than you did before.
-
Extra post for greater emphasis!
Mind giving me some time to whip up some real thoughts on why I voted for snow?
-
Posting to say that given the lack of Tom seeming to be around I really don't care if hammer drops now or later at this point. Day's gone long enough, etc. seconding people's sentiments.
-
Shale, are you still planning to make another post today? I'm willing to wait for that, or for anyone else who wants to contribute; dragging the day out just for Tom, less so. Pretty much the opposite opinion of Bard. (My reasoning is that we can try to glean scumitude from in-game players' posts, as well as getting their thoughts; with Tom, we only get the latter.)
I am, yeah, it's just the whole "doing work" part of work interfering. I had an hour-and-a-half staff meeting after my last post, and I've got another one coming up shortly. I've been working on it in-between those.
-
Still calling for hammer to stay its hand... We've got a Shale post, an Excal post (who also has to defend against Rat) and a Tom post pending. Shale and Excal should at least be able to post something meaningful for the game forsofar as concluding their alignment goes.
-
Yep, definitely. There's enough to stay it for now.
-
Yeah, I see the Rat post, but unless I suddenly end up replacing Snow as the lynchee of note, that's not a terribly pressing matter at present. Now, as for Snow.
He's good at seeming reasonable when he actually talks, but that's fairly neutral. Now, looking at what he's talked about. His one Day 1 post basically was an attempt to toss out names without actually participating, making him the only person without a vote who I actually find suspicious. All the more so since both of the other folks without votes made a note of who they intended to vote for first.
Then, on Day 2 he follows up with his now infamous attack on Bard coupled with his suicide plea. I'll skip all of the jumping around he did after the fact, seeing as I didn't notice that until Shale was kind enough to point that out on the last page.
Now, Day 3 is the interesting bit. Let's start with the lesser of the two evils, which would be the return of his fatalistic tendancies. He's not only playing the pity card again now that he's back in trouble, but he seems to be revelling in causing grief for his detractors, as well as focussing most of his vitriol against them. This is mildly troublesome, however, it isn't the main thing that concerns me.
The main thing that concerns me is his role blocking of Rat, and the fact that what he's said about it does not add up.
Now, let's be fair. Day 3 isn't the only time Snow's shown a good deal of suspicion of the Rat, and then gone after Shale with little to no other reason than "he's not here". Let's take a look at this Day 2 quote.
Now, the one person that still consistently bothers me for the general sum is the rodent. I can't shake off the feeling that he is hiding something under his sleeve with the no-voting issue, and I can't help but feel he's getting too comfortable with the sudden freedom he seems to get with it. Call it metagaming, but his situation is pretty oddball in and out of itself, and the idea of a role only having this sudden, crippling drawback and no sort of compensation, either on alignment or underlying power, doesn't seem right. Coupled with his usual aggroness -and- the knowledge on how poorly it works for town in the DL Mafia environment, this sets me off particularly badly.
But this is just food for thought. I guess that I'll just go with what seems more immediately worrying now. Since unwanted roles have managed to get under the radar for excess lurking time and again, and I think his absence has reached the point of insufferable by now...
##VOTE: Shale
So, that's prior confirmation that Snow not only thought Rat was scummy, but also that seeming scummy but present is worth less than seeming scummy by being unable to be present. Now, I'm sure you're all wondering, but doesn't this provide the case against Rat that makes the roleblock on him make sense?
Hells no.
It highlights that Snow's main concern with Shale is that he's a scum with a valuable power role to make up for the fact that he isn't being misleading. If anything, if he was being honest in that post, then his target should have been Shale. But let's assume that Snow thought that any scum power Rat had had to be better than what Shale could possibly have. I mean, he does have to give up his vote for it, right? Well, that's still a bad reason, because, hey. One of the possible boons he listed for Rat is simply that he is, in fact, scum. And there was the chance that his power might well give the scum an extra vote on the table. So, odds were that gunning for Rat might not just provide the scum a benefit, but also do so while not doing anything detrimental to them to balance that out in any way, shape, or form. And this is what we're comparing to Shale, the person Snow voted for twice because he suspected the guy was a scum power role.
It does not add up, does not compute, and makes him look the worst of the candidates we have at the moment.
-
Okay, we've heard from Excal. I'm leaving for work in a few minutes, will be back around 6:30 PST / 9:30 in Shale-land, which should certainly give him enough time to say his piece. I'll drop the hammer then unless the day has already ended or I see a very compelling reason not to.
-
Works for me.
-
Okay, so. Excal I tend to agree with on Snow, and in general he's been low-presence but not terrible, with good RL reasons for lowish post count assuming he's not lying through his teeth.
Day 1: Not much content.
Day 2: Takes some stands and defends them, but in general pretty briefly.
Also, I'd like to take a moment and focus suspicion on Snow. Looking back at Day 1, he not only has the benefit of being one of the three people who didn't vote, but in one post he lays down a finger of suspicion on both OK and Tom. This is at the point in the day when they were both viable lynch targets and the OK train hadn't jumped over to Tom. The especially telling thing is that the third person he considers in his post is Deltaflyer, but dismisses him and then when it comes time to consider posting he names Rat as the third leg in the tripod, despite the fact that Rat was his joke vote which he dropped going into that post, and that he does not make any mention of Rat before that in the post.
Later, this:
Snow comes next. My original vote on him was as much a mark to get attention tossed his way as anything else, and as he continued to look bad, I felt better and better about leaving that vote there. However, to be honest, by the time I left on Friday, I was getting iffy about leaving that vote there, and the only thing that's kept it there so far is his explosion. Given that that has resolved in a way I can accept, I'm happy with moving away from him for the time being.
........
##Unvote: Snow, ##Vote: Meeple
So, in the same breath you say he continued to get worse over time, and that resolving an issue that only flared up after that point was enough for you to take your vote off of him. This doesn't add up to me. Not enough to say you look worse than Snow, but it's in the same vein as his vote-jumping.
Carthrat: I still cringe at the "rolefishing" comment from Day 1 every time I reread his posts, but as I've said before I can't begrudge him being a bit testy about his role. His Day 1 arguments against OK and Tom and for leaving Delta alone all make sense to me and are well fleshed-out. After that, his play has been solid, and I don't really see anything to call out. If he's scum, he's playing a very good game. The one exception is his antagonism of Taishyr, which is....eeuuuuuuurgh, understandable I guess, but at minimum it didn't help us any.
Strago: Hardcore lurkage on Day 1, but makes up for it later on. Put some thought into the cases he made on Day 2 and 3, in general not a lot I can smack him with other than spotty presence.
The only one of those I'm really feeling as a case is Excal, and even then Snow looks worse. I'm prepared to drop the hammer if nobody else has anything to say soon.
-
Sorry, just woke up. Didn't want to post too early, left it to too late.
Today has been a bit weird to get clear reads.
To those at the end of yesterday re: me being confirmed town: no I wasn't being arrogant, I was emphasising that I'm speaking honestly, not saying that I'm always right.
Rat seems to be cleared as not having a vote and no other powers. He might be the unnacounted NK. Keep it in mind for later.
There's still people flying heavily under the radar, which is annoying. Shale has talked more which is good. I was calling him and Strago out earlier, they're both talking.
Bard is giving me town vibes.
Elf is still unreadable to me, 'cos I don't know him.
Juon Rambo - see above, but there's more reason to axe him I guess. I'd support it.
Excal: Some people have been gunning for his lynch, possible to divert suspicion from themselves. I'd look at them after an excal flip. Excal himself? His flip would be revealing.
Let people claim before they get lynched!
Laggy: Don't like his snarkyness. Makes him hard to read & is unhelpful.
Andrew: Unusually quiet for the Rogue
Corwin: fairly town-ish. Not solid though.
---
Forgive me if any of these are odd, I just woke up & haven't had time to review. I want to get this out there in case a hammer happens.
Sorry there's not much there, I didn't get much out of today with the modkills etc.
GL!
PS: Just in case - ##Vote: Andrew - just testing
-
Okay. As I don't see any chance that today is going to end with anything but a Snow lynch, it's time to get this out of the way. Discussion of all non-Snow targets can and will continue tomorrow. Tom even got his bit in, so I no longer see any reason to hold back. Day has certainly been long enough.
##Vote: Snow
I hit weakness on armoured units, especially those with lances. No more talking.
-
Final votecount:
Bardiche (0): Laggy
Laggy (0): AndrewRogue
Excal (1): Strago
Shale (0): Laggy, Jo'ou Ranbu, Carthrat
JR (6): Corwin, Carthrat, QuietRain, Excal, Laggy, Elfboy
Andrew (1): Jo'ou
---
"Go ahead and kill me already. Just get it over with!" Count Vertigo howled. This earned him mostly sidelong glances. A few people stepped away, discreetly. Even for a team called Suicide Squad, this kind of deathwish was pushing it.
Someone in the crowd spoke up: "That's what you said yesterday, man, and then you changed your mind. Are you -absolutely sure- that you want us to kill you this time?"
The count stopped and considered this for a moment. "You know," Vertigo began, "I think I've actually--"
He didn't get to finish the sentence. Supremely irritated, one of his comrades pulled a gun and put an end to Vertigo's existential crisis at long last. When it was over, the crowd rifled through his possessions, then went to his cell and searched it thoroughly. They found a cross on a silver chain, a variety of behavior-modifying drugs Vertigo clearly hadn't been taking, and a surprising number of Sylvia Plath collections...but no evidence that he was in on the conspiracy.
A strange one he might have been, but he was not their enemy.
Jo'ou Ranbu--Count Vertigo, AKA Werner Vertigo (Town Roleblocker)--was lynched!
---
It is now night three. Get those night actions in, people!
-
Something curious happened on the third night. Sometime past 1AM, the lights flickered briefly, as though something had temporarily monopolized the prison's electricity. The following morning, a thorough investigation determined that someone had wiped the prison's computer banks, though whether this had any practical effect on the team's chances for survival was not apparent.
The search also determined that two more team members had been killed:
The one known as Excal was found mysteriously crushed beneath the wreckage of a 1974 Dodge Monaco. There was no indication of how the car got inside his cell, or what its disagreement was with the anonymous German athlete.
The other victim was an outsider, though one that, judging by her scrawled journal, had apparently been trying to help the team (if for her own reasons). The fact that her efforts hadn't turned up any of the conspirators suggested that her efforts had been less than successful...
Excal--Javelin, AKA Real Name Unknown (Town Illinois Nazi)--was killed overnight!
AndrewRogue--Black Thorn, AKA Elizabeth Thorne (Town Lyncher/Vigilante)--was killed overnight!
---
It is now day four...and LYLO.
With eight alive, it takes five to lynch. There is no deadline.
-
Arghleaaaaaaaargh.
Okay, cards on the table, such as they are. I am Oracle, AKA post-Batgirl Barbara Gordon. Not a villain, but one of DC's premier hackers and occasionally hired on as part of the Suicide Squad. Last night I used my only power, which is to hit the "Delete" button on Belle Reve's databases. I have no idea what effect this may have, but I was hoping it might undo one of our many cockups over the past two and a half days. Doesn't look like it, sadly.
-
Er, three and a half. I think I wiped Day 1 from my memory as a defense mechanism.
Anyway. My suspects list is now everyone who isn't me, and I'm going to need more time than I've got at work to look them over. I'll post when I can.
-
NOTE - all of the below speculation is for the pure purpose of mathing things out. As of right now I'm not comfortable pointing fingers at either Rat or Bardiche in terms of their alignment; however, since both of their powers directly affect LYLO and scumhammer margin, I want to see how this works out. Again, this is not presuming either are scum, just seeing how the math works out -if- either/both are.
If Rat is scum and Bardiche is not:
* Scum can't scumhammer unless at least two townies target another townie or Bardiche votes on a townie. There's 8 alive and 5 to lynch, which would mean there's 4 scum, including Rat. (Scum still wins if we mislynch a townie, since it goes down to 7 alive and 4 scum and the NK makes up for Rat.) Or, possibly, there's 5 scum total (w/ Rat) and it works out to be the standard instant scumhammer situation, but if of the eight alive five are scum, I'm going to facepalm a lot when this is over.
If Bardiche is scum and Rat is not:
* We've already lost, unless LYLO is taking into account the extra voteweight (which means there'd only be 3 scum, Bardiche + 2 others for a total of 4 votes). Which... it must be, since the game isn't over. So if for some reason you're convinced Bardiche is scum, there can only be two other scumbuddies with him.
If BOTH are scum:
* Rat and Bardiche cancel each other. Same basic situation where if any townie votes on a townie, though.
That got a whole lotta nowhere.
As to my own role, I am Nightshade, aka Eve Eden. I am a Shadow; I have the ability to vanish from the game during the night phase, which will cause me to disappear for the entirety of the next day with no explanation. The only real advantage to this is that I can avoid being targeted by night actions on the night I disappear; drawbacks are obvious, moreso in that my disappearance changes the number of votes needed for a lynch, and thus LYLO/scum victory. I did not see this role as useful throughout the entire game and so have not bothered using it. (Probably beats Rat's role though. Voteless with no other perks!!)
Now on to speculation. LYLO, no scum caught yet, everyone is suspicious, etc.
Andy's suspicions of me on "being cautious" of power roles suddenly makes more sense when he was in fact the town vig. (And lyncher? Isn't that... a third party role?)
Re: Corwin, as I said yesterday, I was going to expect a good deal of explanation from you if Snow's flip turned out not to be scum.
Right now rather than relying on my hunches I am going to thoroughly spend some time looking at the vote record and trying to draw analysis from there. Given that town's train of thoughts (and my own) have lead to nary a scum net yet, I am a little apprehensive about going on current impressions and would prefer a more thorough overview.
-
We're in LYLO, are we?
Due to that and my mistake in going after the scummy-seeming JR, I'll claim as well.
I am Amanda Waller, affectionately known as The Wall. I'm apparently ruling over you guys with an iron fist, the whole nine yards. All I know is what my PM and wiki tell me, but I apparently hate the lot of you guys and it is mutual, and I don't tolerate disagreements from all you criminals under my command. I suppose it might seem that my playing style has been slightly affected by my role as well, but there was actually another, much better reason for it.
I'm effectively bullet-proof. That is my role, and I hoped to draw a NK as a result of being so in-your-face that the scum would panic. Sadly, there were no takers (I asked the mods if I'd be told of a failed NK attempt on me, and none happened) so clearly either our vig decided not to kill one night or his/the scum's hit was blocked in some way.
My theories for who would have been scum had JR flipped scum? Well, they're pretty much useless, now, but to give an example: I believed it would implicate Rat due to the way they seemed to have played off each other, and then the way Rat jumped on the train. Had JR been scum, it seemed like a move designed to gain town cred. Plus I'm naturally suspicious of people who appear to talk too much like me, it has always been the case.
My suspects for now, at the start of the day? DHE, pretty much. He feels off with his defensiveness whenever I would ask him something, and the wait pre-hammer was just strange. I'll do it! I will! I really will! Just seemed weird.
Andrew was to be my other suspect due to mainly going about game logic, lurking and the jump on Laggy I didn't truly agree with. He also had lots of votes/unvotes for reasons I didn't truly buy but, erm, he's now gone and stuff.
Who else? I don't subscribe to the Excal push, content really does matter and he's not the worst offender at this lurking thing. Don't think there's anything too scummy about Bardiche, aside from his confrontational attitude, and I don't really care about that (if he were all giving up, that'd be a different thing).
Shale and Laggy's posted with claims, and their powers do feel strange enough to have that note of the genuine. I would like to have everyone claim. Scum hide behind lies, and getting things out into the open leaves them with little space to do so. There is absolutely no reason to abstain; even if some would think I had a way of drawing a scum hit tonight if we mislynched today, relying on that sort of luck is pretty stupid, and if scum can manage to drive a train on me, I can't well get NK'd afterwards and we lose right there.
So yeah, there'll be more from me. More detailed thoughts on others once I compare their claims with their previous posts/behavior are a given. And Laggy, if there is anything is particular you would like to know, ask away. I've accepted that in the very unlikely chance I was wrong, I would get in trouble, and I still took the chance since I was very sure. It's not something I intend to run away from or brush away.
-
It would come as little surprise that the part of the previous post dealing with my suspects was written in advance, post-day 3 flip. I adjusted it for Andrew to use past tense as I posted, but didn't do it for Excal for some reason. I have no excuse.
-
I'm Ravan, member of the cult. I consider each and every lynch a tribute to my God, and with each lynch I grow stronger. I am a Conditional Multivoter: Each succesful lynch train I am on grants me one extra vote. I side with the Suicide Squad, aka Town.
I have no analysis to provide at this time. Laggy's theory is a good one, though of course I reject the idea that I am scum. Mrf.
This will be the most annoying day. LYLO is always aggravating because the lynch has to count. Re-reading the thread until either my mind succumbs or... idk.
-
Oh, and I failed to note the possibility that, of course, neither of you could be scum. This would result in you basically being a shoe-in for Rat's vote, and make either three or four scum. If there's only three scum AND for some inane reason the casualties end up being Rat + another townie that isn't Bardiche, next day would be six people alive and three scum votes versus two townie votes and Bard's double vote (with four to lynch). Given the extreme unlikelihood of this, I am inclined to say there are four scum minimum viewing this scenario.
-
*hate for Laggy* I was so hoping to get that char since I'm a fangirl. Ah well. The Hatbot cares not for such things. What I did get was Boomerang. Aussie villain and all around flake. Oh, and I'm a Mad Pieman. I throw pies. These pies do...nada. But they're amusing to throw and so I do.
On Snow's flip: Gah. So far we've managed to hit everything but the kitchen sink and scum. The first I don't mind, but the latter is upsetting.
And trying to do the math for LYLO to pick out how many scum we're talking about hurts my head considering we have roles with odd vote weights that we're not certain of their alignment. I can follow Laggy's logic, though, and 3-4 scum does seem to be the best bet here. This is my first time being in LYLO, so it'll be a bit different experience for me.
-------------
Thoughts on people in whole coming at the end of the work day. I've spent the entire morning between Mafia (LYLO-math, role reveals, brainstorming) and DL Con stuff so I really do need to go back to work and earn a couple of bucks.
-
Four scum's impossible. I only have two votes, Rat has none. We cancel eachother out, given that we're both town. (Can't vouch for Rat, though)
8 people 'round, with LYLO would imply there's three scum. If you think on it: 7 in nightphase, 6 in next dayphase. 3 vs 3 = scum victory.
Carthrat with no vote, and me with two votes cancels that out. There's eight votes to be given.
Sucks a little our dear Vig hasn't specified his targets.
We're going to have to make this lynch count. Scum like being ironic, taking out the most suspicious targets.
-
Four scum's impossible. I only have two votes, Rat has none. We cancel eachother out, given that we're both town. (Can't vouch for Rat, though)
8 people 'round, with LYLO would imply there's three scum. If you think on it: 7 in nightphase, 6 in next dayphase. 3 vs 3 = scum victory.
Carthrat with no vote, and me with two votes cancels that out. There's eight votes to be given.
Sucks a little our dear Vig hasn't specified his targets.
We're going to have to make this lynch count. Scum like being ironic, taking out the most suspicious targets.
Uh, presuming that you're town and Rat is also town? (If Rat is scum, three scum only supports -more- what I'm about to say) If there's only three scum, we can't be in LYLO. Let's say two townies die from mislynch and NK, which leaves 6 the next day and 4 to lynch... scum only have 3 votes, and since -you are town-, you have 2 votes and the 2 remaining townies also have 2 votes, which equate to 4 town votes vs 3 scum votes.
In other words, the only way we can have three scum + today being LYLO if and only if YOU are scum. >_>
As for Andy's targets, I found them rather obvious. He gunned for Delta night 1 (he makes a pretty obvious post about how he thought Delta was hurting town more than anything on Day 2), he didn't gun/was blocked on night 2, and on night 3 he gunned for Excal unless you think he killed himself, since he himself also died. S'yeah.
-
Okay, and a math correction to the above. If both you and Rat are both town, it is possible there is only three scum assuming you are one of the casualties. It is possible, and says nothing to "four scum is impossible", because even if you were town four scum is very possible. Four scum is only impossible if you are scum (because you would have won already).
Why am I spending all this time on math? Cue from QR, we have 3-4 scum running around.
-
*hate for Laggy* I was so hoping to get that char since I'm a fangirl. Ah well. The Hatbot cares not for such things. What I did get was Boomerang. Aussie villain and all around flake. Oh, and I'm a Mad Pieman. I throw pies. These pies do...nada. But they're amusing to throw and so I do.
YOU got Captain Boomerang. Damn you! Best freaking character ever.
-
Well, I guess we can theorize about the numbers but what's important is that we need to hit scum now. I'm not going to assume we're only in LYLO because of my Multivote ability, because game mechanics are too wacky sometimes that considering them is no good.
That said, before really thorough analysis...
Shale's still a bit under radar.
DHE, I said enough about the previous day.
Laggy... Has been rather helpful and friendly. Not sure if I need to try to get lynchtrains on people for being helpful. idk, really.
Corwin, led two town lynchtrains, and one failed lynchtrain. Not sure what that says about him, just that he likes leading the lynchtrains. Conviction that Snow was a scum doesn't look right to me... Nor his certainty that we'll be able to hit scum due to lynching Snow.
Carthrat, lurker galore.
QR, mrf. She pinged my senses earlier. I'm still wary of her.
Strago, I forgot he played. Lurker galore as well.
More detailed thoughts forthcoming. I hate LYLO.
-
SCENARIO 1 (Bard is scum, Rat is scum)
Bard and Rat being scum cancel each other out. On a mislynch, we go to 6 alive, so there's three townies left standing; thus 3 scum is possible. 4 scum is also possible, since it takes 5 to lynch today and the game isn't over. Summary: 3-4 scum.
SCENARIO 2 (Bard is scum, Rat is town)
Worst possible scenario. Instant-win is at 5 votes, so Bard can have up to two scumbuddies (resulting in 4 votes total) which means 3 scum, 5 townies. One of those townies, however, is Rat, reducing town to 4 votes. This means town cannot achieve lynch majority under this scenario; in other words, we've already lost. If instead Bard only has ONE scumbuddy for a total of 3 votes, and town actually has 5 today, we'd... lose two votes, bringing it down to 3 townies + Rat, vs Bard + scumbuddy, which is win for scum. Summary: 2 scum.
SCENARIO 3 (Bard is town, Rat is scum)
Let's assume Rat has two scumbuddies in this case (total 3 scum), and they kill Bard over the night to deprive town of the extra vote. This... leads to 6 people next day, and scum has only 2 votes. Nope, impossible. So Rat needs at least three scumbuddies (total 4 scum) to make this LYLO. He can't have four scumbuddies, because that means there'd only be four townies left (unable to reach majority, instant loss). Summary: 4 scum.
SCENARIO 4 (Bard is town, Rat is town)
Town has at least 5 votes today, so that means three more townies with these two (who cancel each other out), which leads five townies, three scum. The only way scum don't win next day is if Bardiche lives and Rat doesn't (yeah right). HOWEVER, there can be two scum, since if Bard and a townie dies, next day becomes 6 people, 2 scum, 4 town, one of which is Rat - town's 3 votes vs scum's 2, with a majority of 4 to lynch, is a loss to town. Man, Rat's role sucks. Summary: 2-3 scum.
I'm not sure it was worth the time mathing this all out and I hope NEB or someone can confirm this logic. At this point, though... I'm willing to look at the math of things like this for every clue we can get.
-
Bard and Rat being scum cancel each other out. On a mislynch, we go to 6 alive, so there's three townies left standing; thus 3 scum is possible. 4 scum is also possible, since it takes 5 to lynch today and the game isn't over. Summary: 3-4 scum.
Correction, 4 scum is not possible since that would mean 4 townies which would be inability to reach majority -_- So only 3 scum in that scenario.
In short, we're looking at 2-3 scum, unless we've got the best possible scenario where Bard is town and Rat is scum, in which case we're looking at 4.
-
Mrfff. Looks like we're down to the wire. I'm honestly pretty thankful for how the NKs played out. I was obviously wrong about Excal, but at least that forces me to re-think my suspicions today. [Side note: anyone have any inkling of what "Illinois Nazi" means, aside from the Blues Brothers reference?] Andrew's death is also good for us in a weird way, since I feel like his playstyle would have made him a good potential lynchee today.
And since it's time for roleclaims, I'm Duchess, a.k.a. Lashina, the super-strong warrior woman from Apokolips (as a side note, place-names like that are one of the reasons I never got into comic books >_>). Unfortunately, since the entirety of my skillset is comprised of bashing the crap out of things (with... long flexible ribbons of steel, a cursory Google search has told me), I'm not much good at all this cloak and dagger tomfoolery, making me a stupid Vanilla Townie. I guess it's possible that I've got some other conditionally-triggered power, but if so then El Cid hasn't said crap to me about it.
We're still waiting on Elfboy's claim, but that's it, yes? Hrmm. You know, aside from Bard and Carthrat, every single one of these claims is... completely impossible to prove/disprove, isn't it? Joy.
Re: Laggy's mathematical breakdown. I've got to say that it makes Bard look good to me simply because two scum seems like a very low number, even with the two self-aligned players we've seen go down so far. Conversely, four scum plus two self-aligned seems fairly high, which makes me think that Scenario 3 as provided by Laggy is relatively unlikely. Which means either that Bardiche and Carthrat are both town, or both scum.
Since Bardiche has looked pretty townie to me all game, I tend to believe the former. Carthrat's been antagonistic at times, and recently a tad lurky... but, hell, I don't think the quality of his posts has ever been questionable, only the quantity. And that isn't too important. As far as his attitude goes? Eh. Voteless role in a game that's dragged itself out more than it probably needed to. I understand frustrations.
Now this is all very meta-gamey, but since Laggy went to the trouble to lay out his analysis there I thought I might as well respond to it and draw conclusions as well as I could. More to follow shortly.
-
Oof. Okay. Heading out to dinner soon with a friend I haven't seen in ages. I don't have any massive theories cooked up, but here are my basic reactions to the folk left in the game.
Carthat & Bardiche: Both generally seem like town to me, I pretty much outlined my reasons in the previous pose.
Laggy: He's been helpful and reasonable all game, as far as I can see. If he's scum, then I'm shocked and awed.
Shale: I can't really fault him for anything he's done since his intial period of absence. Looks clean.
Okay, so these people look good to me. But there are only just so many people left who could be scum. Which means that, looking it over, I feel like there's a good chance that the scum faction is comprised of Elfboy, Corwin and QR. Corwin's mild-to-moderate antagonism (which I distinguish from aggressiveness) has rubbed me the wrong way for a while, and his dogged pursuit of the Snow mislynch clearly doesn't look great, whereas Elfboy and QR seem like they're playing scummy in the opposite direction by playing things very safe. Elfboy in particular seems like he's done far more posting in self-defense than actually leveraging cases against anyone. Even though he was early on the Meeple train, he wasn't a strong proponent of the lynch. His connection to it honestly feels almost coincidental. Then there's the constant affirmation of his willingness to take out Snow but acting on it very slowly.
Now this all seems like it might work, and I'd be about to go back and look at the three of them in some sort of conjunction... except for the fact that Corwin, quite recently, proposed Elfboy as his main suspect. Since there's very little reason to try for a scumbus during LYLO, this throws a... pretty massive wrench in my thinking. Crap. It doesn't do much to lessen my suspicions of QR, but she's honestly the one I've got the least read on to begin with. I need to look at her hard.
Alright, it's suppertime. Don't feel ready to put down a vote yet. Mrff. I'll be back later this evening.
-
YOU got Captain Boomerang. Damn you! Best freaking character ever.
Therapy for you. That’s just wacked. There are only 2 things cool about him. His nickname (c’mon, who wouldn’t like a guy called Digger!) and his accent. Enough bashing myself, though.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Allrighty then, posting thoughts on people.
Bard: I am not getting anything but townie vibes. The only reason I haven’t thrown ITP off the table is that the role still bothers me, but how he’s used it goes a long way to mitigating that for me. So I’m still torn between the two, although it seems I’m moving more and more towards town and away from ITP. In EITHER case, the last thing we should go after today is anything but scum so frankly he’s fine in my book today.
Carth: Suck role is confirmed by Tai. He’s being acerbic, but that’s Carth, frankly. Nothing new no matter what he’s playing and given the circumstances of this game (no vote and all), I’d be a bit of a curmudgeon as well. As far as content, he’s been putting it out there. I’m not seeing him hanging back or anything. He’s been firm with suspicions and made valid point. I can’t see anything scummy in it as he’s been picking out people that have been acting in ways that really do raise some eyebrows. Thinking townie.
Using Laggy’s guide on the number of scum out there then with my thoughts above, that leaves me thinking there are 2-3 scum.
Laggy: Frankly, I doubt I could get anything closer to a townie feel from him at the moment. He’s been right in the mix of things laying out thoughts. I haven’t always agreed with him, but his cases have been pretty thought out and I’ve been able to see his points even if I disagreed a time or two on their severity.
Shale, Elf & Strago: This bunch really gets grouped together in my mind far too easily. They have a tendency to fade into the background to me. I think this really highlights one of the ways I’m rather deficient in the game. Unless there’s a compelling case or else I notice something that tags my attention, I really do tend to forget people are playing who aren’t center stage. It’s way too good of a breeding ground for scum to sneak by under my radar. I’ll go back and do a complete read through of all 3 of their post histories and see what comes up because one or more of them have to be scum, frankly.
Corwin: Cor’s attitude about Snow really set off warning bells for me. I thought Snow was more likely scum than town, too, but the lack of room for doubt from him looks very bad to me. The push to kill him really felt towards the end like an engineered assault that took advantage of a real situation (Snow’s own messing up) and ran with it for all it was worth. I’m not sure how much of my reading of him is colored by my own very admitted problems playing with overly aggressive players, though. That’s why I stopped playing here and it really is hard for me to separate the two. I think I’ll go back and do a thorough re-read of Cor’s posts and see what pops out. I’ll also re-examine the others I’m getting a neutral feel for. At this point that needs to be resolved one way or the other, really.
No post for me until tomorrow most likely, though, as it’s going to take awhile to go back through all that and be sure of my stances. It’s LYLO and I can’t really give myself any leeway for uncertainty.
Ninj’d by a few posts because this one took me forever to type, but I can’t read them atm. I will include them when I go through and do my re-readings, though.
-
Okay.
I am Mark Shaw, aka Manhunter, sometimes contracted by the Suicide Squad. I am the town tracker. I see who people visit at night. I wish I had any useful information, but I don't.
Night 1, targetted OK. He did nothing.
Night 2, targetted Snow. He visited Rat, just as he says.
Night 3, targetted Excal. He did nothing.
I pretty much targetted folks I was most suspicious of, my logic being that tracking scum means I either might see the kill, or they might do something they later deny / try to weasel out of. Obviously hasn't worked out that way.
I was feeling vaguely underwhelmed by this power for most of the game, but now I see most everyone else has a worse one! Well, uh. At least mine is still of some help, especially if we can get down to one scum. Not that I expect to live that long now, since I have at most one more night to survive. No doc + I can't see anyone beating me for priority as a NK except Bard, if Bard is town.
Laggy's updated math seems entirely correct to me. I had a post explaining why his Scenario 1 was wrong but then he caught himself.
Okay. Prime suspect: Rat. Logic is simple. No second NK night 2. Apparently our only BP is Cor, and Cor says he wasn't targetted. It's possible Andrew hit an unclaimed (scum) BP on night 2. It's also possible he stayed his hand. I don't find either exceptionally likely. There is no roleblocker besides Snow. We know who Snow hit. Scum loses kill, Andrew kills Ash. Andrew even voiced suspicions on Ash in Day 2!
Yeah. That's pretty solid evidence there. I'm willing to put aside the fact that Rat didn't feel the scummiest to me, and look at the cold, hard facts. Need to think over the math of lynching him, though.
Naturally, Shale is still correct in that everyone is suspicious now, so I'll have to look over other cases. But Rat is definitely one I'll be combing over closely.
-
Oh, just found a flaw in Scenario 3, Laggy. If Rat is scum and Bard is town, and there are three scum...
Let's say we lynch wrong. Scum kills Bard. It's now 6 left, 4 to lynch. Scum only has 2 votes, true. But town only has 3. No deadline means game stalls until night, correct? Scum has won.
Additionally, there can't be 4 scum. Suppose there are, and we lynch one (non-Rat) today. Tomorrow, same situation. Three scum, dead Bard, three town. Scum wins, and since this is our best outcome, has already won.
-
Point. So essentially, there can't be 4 scum at all. 3 scum is the maximum we can have, 2 minimum. That... makes sense, and of course 3 is much more likely all things considered, so I'm going to hedge my bets on that.
-
YOU got Captain Boomerang. Damn you! Best freaking character ever.
Therapy for you. That’s just wacked. There are only 2 things cool about him. His nickname (c’mon, who wouldn’t like a guy called Digger!) and his accent. Enough bashing myself, though.
He's just a hilarious national stereotype. Come on, a heavily-accented Australian supervillain named CAPTAIN BOOMERANG? I can't not love that.
Anyway. I haven't had a lot of time to reread yet, but looking at this logically, my top suspect is Carthrat. Not for textual-analysis reasons, mind, I've already said he checks out pretty well on those. But I've been wrong about that on everybody but Delta and OK, so I'm not trusting my powers of analysis very far. However, I have to look at him funny because the only objective evidence in this entire game points at him: there was no kill on the night he was roleblocked by a townie, and the only other kill-stopping power that's been claimed has not triggered. Hence, the options for Night 2 are: Andrew chose not to kill (unlikely, given how trigger-happy he seems to have been); Andrew and scum targeted the same person (possible, I guess?); Andrew was roleblocked and didn't say anything because it would have drawn attention to his vigness (possible); and the person who used a potential kill-stopping power did in fact stop the kill.
Got company now, will talk more when I can.
Ninja edit: Was waiting for NEB to claim before posting this, and he posts the same thing I was going to. Still, I support it!
-
Okay. Beware, BIG POST COMING. An overall analysis of the game.
Day 1. Evil Tom is lynched. No shock, most people who were active (and most people here, for that matter) were on that train. Tells, unfortunately, very little.
Night 1. Scum kill OK and Andrew kill Delta. I'm 99% sure on this, as there's no reason scum would want to do town a favor and remove Delta after his Day 1 behavior plus Andy spoke rather harshly of Delta the following day when speaking of the ramifications of his demise.
Day 2. Meeple is lynched, after an initial Snow train got moved slowly over to a Meeple train. NEB threw the initial vote on Meeple, but I don't actually think he was crucial to getting people to switch to the train; Meeple more or less buried himself, in that case.
Night 2. Rat is blocked. Ashdla dies; I have issues seeing a second roleblocker so I don't think Andy was blocked. Either Andy and scum both targeted her or just Andy did, and given the air of suspicion/lack of presence Ashdla was kind of generating I... can see why he would. On hindsight, it makes more sense as a vig kill than a scum kill.
Day 3. Snow is lynched; the train is pretty much set in stone as people look at Bardiche, Strago, etc. others before moving back to Snow, and is pressed very hard by Corwin.
Night 3. Andy vigs Excal, and is himself killed by scum. -This- is pretty much 100%.
The more and more I think about it, NEB's analysis makes sense - whether you believe his claim as a tracker or not. First off, Andy's behavior, and incidentally his reasons detailed for gunning me, makes me really believe he wouldn't give up a night kill as vig if he could help it. We know Snow roleblocked Rat on Night 2 - that's pretty much cemented, since Rat was able to vote that day as well. Metagaming things even further, if you were on the scum team, who would you send out to do a nightkill, given the existence of roles LIKE Tracker? The dead weight guy with no vote. It's somewhat a minor point, but makes me think it's even more likely Snow just bloody lucked out with his block there. This also presumes Andrew, in fact, did target Ashdla during that night - and as I read back through Day 2 and his posts in particular,
As of right now, I am leaning towards a Rat/Corwin/mystery scumteam (scenario 3).
Things that bother me about Corwin:
- He has admitted, essentially, that he was gunning so hard for Snow because he did not want him to "escape his rightful lynching" from the past day and pretty much took his case as rock hard solid. He claims that on such a flip he would have implicated Rat (how convenient it did not) and gives him a nice opportunity to turn to NEB instead.
- He agrees that Meeple was probably trying his best to help contribute to town on his last post. Now, I look ridiculous for calling this point since I am guilty of the same thing, but two important things. First, it's Corwin. I find it incredibly hard to believe that he would give this much leniency to ANYONE with the one-track ferocity in which he went after Snow and the general fact that he's never even so much said anyone comes off as "pro-town" to him. Secondly, looking back at Meeple's actual last post, his proposed scum team includes Andy, Ashdla and NEB. We now know two of these were townies, and the last person is now someone who I am inclined to agree with and building a case on a potential scummate? (Speaking of which if Rat gets lynched and is scum I am all for seeing NEB as about as strongly town as you can get, for all that he'll probably be dead next morning anyhow if we get that far.) Oh, and he's gunning for NEB *right now*. Not that I think Meeple was genuinely trying to throw us off, but it's a very silly thing to base on (I realized this myself) and I found it completely out of character of him.
- He and Rat have had enough spark and argument and "I don't trust you fully" to put on enough of a show, yet if you actually look at their FoS and voting records they never conflict. This, of course, naturally synergizes with both of them preferring aggro playstyle no doubt, but something about their interaction makes me tick.
- His roleclaim is totally mundane. If you look at the list of roles that's been shown so far... Zombie. Messenger. Jester. Power Detector. Miller Survivor. Lie Detector. 50% Roleblocker (...). Illinois Nazi (I don't even know.) Town Lyncher AND Vig. To boot, my own half-arsed powers, Shale's seemingly useless one that seems to have hit the flavor anyway, and QR's pie throwing? And furthermore, he's using this as the reason as to why he was so over-the-top-in-your-face aggro that scum would try to NK him? Ehhhhhhhh. Metagaming this is, yes, notable, it still is.
Mysterious third person? At this point, I don't know, but I am less and less convinced that Bardiche is scum. I think the only reason he has not been NKed yet was because his play was questionable enough (and called upon, several times) up to this point that scum could finagle a mislynch on him - his power role is obvious, otherwise, but given we've had Bardiche stay his hand and the general caution people have viewed him (ITP is still possible), I just don't see it anymore.
This leaves Strago, QR, and Shale, and probably in that order of suspicion.
Shale has just chipped in basically saying the exact same theory NEB has offered, and seemingly independently at that. I don't think a scumbus this late and so close to winning is plausibly likely (especially this early on in the day) so that goes a ways to make me feel better about his alignment.
QR, ironically, suspects the other two in this group and NEB himself. The way she's come in at the end, just conveniently enough to organize and nudge us to move on to the end of the day (fair enough sentiment, but the fact that we've mislynched three times and all on cases that ended up not being scum is enough to raise eyebrows), but... at the same time, she's posted and had fair RL reason for the timing on all of these. HOWEVER, I also can't see why she would target Rat with her pie throwing in the night phase if they were scumbuds, esp. even more so when Rat specifically says it did nothing (could've seen it be used as a smokecover for Snow's roleblock, but no, it didn't end up that way). Seemingly minor point, but enough to sway me to not put her on top of the suspect list.
This leaves Strago as the guy that, although he HAS posted a lot more lately, still has giant gaps of not being present to make it difficult to read him, and apparently is claiming Vanilla Townie when literally up to this point we have not had a single vanilla flip yet (even some useless trinket ability would be something). Metagaming like mad, yes, but that still also makes me alarmed. His votes have also been pretty much all over the freaking place, and such a record (as I look it over) raises my hackles.
Speaking of roleclaims today: Mine is not provable, nor Corwin's. If you take both QR and Rat's word, hers is believable. Strago's is also not provable. Shale has the flavor to back his up unless he made it up on the spot, but given the nature of how it was written in, I'm not seeing it, so I'm inclined to believe him. This means that both Corwin and Strago have dubious roleclaims, to me. NEB's is also unprovable, but the targets are believable enough.
Whew. Yes, that's a lot. Reply at will, etc.
-
Oh, and Corwin's latest post just hit me:
It would come as little surprise that the part of the previous post dealing with my suspects was written in advance, post-day 3 flip. I adjusted it for Andrew to use past tense as I posted, but didn't do it for Excal for some reason. I have no excuse.
Well, I could go forever in a circle about whether that was an honest slipup or a "oh shit, my scummates went over my post and it looks like I knew about Andy's demise in advance but not Excal's, better change it before someone calls me", it really does not make me feel any better about my growing suspicions in this regard. And while I would normally be pretty lenient about these sort of mistakes... yeah, LYLO, paranoia high, and so forth.
-
Unnngf. Okay. I'm going to be honest and say that I'm not nearly awake or sober enough to make a solid follow-up post to earlier, and would much prefer taking my time to coming up with something semi-lucid right now.
Goddammit, yeah, my eyes are barely staying open. I'll be back with intelligent words in the morning.
-
Alrighty then. Housework done for the night and I went to start going back through the analysis of the 3 that I was getting too much of a neutral read on and Corwin, but the last few interchanges brought up a few things as well. I have to admit, I am massively burnt out on the game at this point with the walls of text and atmosphere. Sadly, I am about to contribute to the WoT problem because tomorrow I will be able to make 2 posts at most if I'm lucky (it's Saturday which we spend with my family so I can make a post before I leave and one when I get back) and then Tai flies in on Sunday so we still have massive housework to do. I don't want the day to drag out to Monday, though, so I'm going to get as much in tonight as I can when I can devote the most time to it.
------------------
Cor: Looking back, I think it may be impossible for me to separate my distaste for the playstyle and my impression of him. The only thing I really have is his too aggressive play and his push on Snow, who frankly was very suspicious.
------------------
Elf: After going back, Elf's posts are very detailed in laying out cases. The only thing I have to raise my eyebrow on is the fact that if he's telling the truth about his powers, he has bananas luck with picking the people he wants to track. ^_^ When he's made points on people, they've been new points (or at least new angles on points) and his questions of people to clarify have been prodding a lot of the lurkers mainly. All in all, I came out of the reading with him far closer to townie than to scum. If I'm wrong and you're scum, I wanna be like you when I grow up because you're good.
-------------------
Shale: It's hard to get out of neutral when he's been so lurkerish. Not saying that I don't believe the why's of it, just that it really hampers my ability to get a good read on him. And it definitely keeps him in the top half of my list as I don't like not being able to form definitive impressions at this stage of the game.
-------------------
Strago: After reading back over Strago's posts, he falls into the same category as Shale, but manages to fall a bit more on the scummy side of the equation. He goes back and forth between lurking massively and pushing cases on others for lurking. It's a very safe position for scum to fall into, I think. His case on Excal was based more on lurking circumstance than anything solid, for example.
-------------------
Also, caught up on the ninja'd posts from when I made my last one and all of the posts since. This rather confirms my feel for Elf. I don't see anything that rings alarm bells from him, and his case on Carth along with the points that Shale and Laggy brought up are definitely enough to make me give my own impression of him a re-checking. I don't have time tonight to do so, but I will before leaving for Family Time tomorrow morning. Plus, long post is QUITE long enough already.
-
I did not want the situation where the scummiest person on the block well on the way to be lynched when I go to bed turns out to have avoided the lynch due to tugging at our sympathy by the time I wake up, without a chance to even counter the move to a new target. To push the lynch I believed in very much at the time through I clearly had to present the case further and remind people that JR escaped a lynch by the exact same methods he was pulling once more, when he drew attention again.
I know some people feel it was off, but to actually go 'Corwin got JR lynched, who was town despite looking the scummiest, Corwin is thus scummy' boggles me. Are we revisiting my mindpowers? Just because I'm leading the Squad, flavor-wise, doesn't mean I get people to vote as I wish. Enough people have gone 'he is scummy/I find him a viable target/I will hammer him' when JR's time was up, so the actual amount of people ostensibly agreeing with the lynch was even higher than the voting record might suggest.
QR's theory of me 'taking advantage of a bad situation' with JR makes sense because...? Yeah, I'm not seeing it. How is sticking in your neck all the way because you believe your case is right and want to show it somehow a scumtell? Are you suggesting I was running some infamous Xanathos gambit?
Laggy: I found DHE suspicious even before, and as the rest of my suspects drop like flies he remains the scummiest-looking of all those who still live. The waiting on the hammer, making sure we know just how much he's with town and willing to do it but not just yet, the endless discussions of essentially metagaming issues which contribute to a sense of presence but not so much to viable content... even his attitude puts me off, laughable as it is to hear me say that. Incidentally, Meeple's analysis of the scum team does not play a particularly important role for me, here.
Me showing leniency to Meeple? Only in the sense that, as Shale said, scum wouldn't know Meeple wasn't one of them, and thus analysis of the push on Meeple would be useful in locating scum.
On the subject of my roleclaim. The role of throwing pies, does it do anything? If you believe QR, then she's effectively vanilla. 'Miller Survivor'? Make that Self-Aligned Miller Survivor, and wording aside, a self-aligned survivor doesn't feel like a strangely, unique role to me. You are twisting flavor with actual role mechanics in an attempt to isolate mine, which... doesn't look right to me.
On my correction: that's what I get for editing and posting while gaming, as I've said I have no excuse.
-
I'm hedging my own bet on Scum and Andy both targeting Ash day 2. You're all mostly saying "Well Rat looks fine, apart from something unrelated to his posting," essentially, I like to think that speaks for itself. >_>
The only relatively unique and textual point brought against me was by Laggy, and the only thing he said was 'well he looks like he's faking a fight with Cor. Only... there were like no sparks or arguments between us, only some relatively minor disagreements. I was basically on his cases all the way, with no holding back. There were, I agree, virtually no major differences, but I disagree that there was an attempt made to obfuscate that at all, which is what you seem to be implying.
I will admit that, on reading, Cor himself does seem to point a shaky finger at me, but for my part I was pretty non-suspicious of him most of the game. That's changing now (how couldn't it?) but not so much that I support the case on him for the moment.
Never mind that Laggy's theory seems to be premediated on Corwin being scum, given the content of the rest of his post. But I guess it's LYLO and thinking of scumteams is how things are gonna go anyway.
<->
Shale is guilty of essentially textbook lurking. His early meaningful post on day 2 had nothing-
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24813#msg24813 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24813#msg24813)
All he does here is talk about Bard's claim a lot and sort of comes down on Snow for it; no vote, doesn't appear for the rest of the day, his only contribution here doesn't look special.
On day 3, again, he has hardly any posts of note. Those he does have include the following...
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25287#msg25287 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25287#msg25287) The quotes he have make this look bigger than it is, but it's basically a not-really invalid shot at Snow for talking too much and saying too little.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25318#msg25318 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25318#msg25318) Purely defensive.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.demsg25413#msg25413 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.demsg25413#msg25413) A minor shot at Bardiche which isn't really followed on, with regards to following Tom. The second quote and reponse.. I don't really get it, it seems to be about the merits or lack thereof of aggressive play.. on the scum side? Yeah, no idea here.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25547#msg25547 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25547#msg25547) And finally the completion of his case on Snow. Nothing too suss here, actually.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25599#msg25599 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25599#msg25599) But here's part of the kicker, it's talking about Excal after Strago and myself already have, yet he still claims to be sold enough on Snow regardless. This is a bit late, and despite saying he's not feeling a case on me and Strago, it does seem like he's having suspicious thoughts; I find it a wonder he went into this much detail. With that said, I did too, but this wouldn't be the first time someone's 'thought' the way I have and turned out scum later. I want to emphasize that the case on Excal materialized towards the end of the day, seemed fairly legitimate, and he was the last person to speak heavily on it, yet he himself never hammered, voted, or otherwise backed up a position with action.
Couple things stand out to me in general, too- he was apparently leaning heavily towards Snow early day 3, but a good deal of time passed and no vote came out, despite evidence of other posts and shopping around. Towards the end it would be somewhat forgivable that he didn't want to hammer early, but it's not like he didn't have plenty of time. In general he seems to be happy enough to present a case, but sort of pulls back from it and waits to see what others do before following through at all.
Today he just hasn't said much apart from being suspicious of the roleblockiness on me. The fact that that and MATH seem to have been the only topics of discussion doesn't sit right with me, because these things ultimately lead to WIFOM and that we're playing that game at LYLO does not sit right with me.
If it's not clear, I'm hoping Shale gets lynched today.
-
Just because I'm leading the Squad, flavor-wise, doesn't mean I get people to vote as I wish.
The irony is that your attitude this entire game has very much led people to more or less follow your lead. :P
Jokes aside... Yeah, all these roleclaims tell barely little. The entire 'pie' stuff... Who'd you toss it at the last night and the first night, QR?
It's such a damn shame none of our investigative roles could shed much information before biting the dust. Means right now, scum's at the advantage that they know all of their number, and we have no idea who to trust and who not. Mrf.
Well, we have EvilTom. If all else fails we can fall back to his word, which is a certain Town attempt to push us into Town Victory.
-
Well, we have EvilTom. If all else fails we can fall back to his word, which is a certain Town attempt to push us into Town Victory.
I strongly object to this, and note that Bardiche has clearly not been paying attention if he didn't notice the extreme flak he copped for this before. Why do you seem to leap upon this chance? Do you not care to actually play?
This is LYLO, final destination, whatever you call it. This is the point where you start trying harder, not give up and leave it to someone else. I don't care if he's confirmed town, since he's not infallible or a genius, and I will surely slam a case he presents if I do not like it. I may be wrong, or I may turn out to agree with him! But this is basically giving up to me and I hate that from you. I appreciate this is difficult but you haven't even tried. Make your own damn case. It might be convincing. I don't know.
I would say Bardiche looks scummy for this, except it would, from scum-bardiche perspective, be just as likely to backfire, and he's already thought like this to much disgruntlement, so... argh. I just don't know. Still leaning towards Shale in the end. The fact that I think 3 scum is more likely than 2 matters as well.
-
If I were a scum, I'd have slammed the hammer the previous day and nothing you could do to stop scum from voting you then, eh? Assuming the 2-3 scum scenario, that's still a netto of 5 votes in case of 3 scum, or 4 votes in case of 2 scum.
And uh, Rat, I think you misunderstood me. Lemme rephrase.
We can use EvilTom's words as a starting lead on where to commence the investigation. Anyone could offer strong cases, and everything, but there's no saying whether that strong case is one forged by scum or by town. Scum could just as well manipulate the town's thoughts and skillfully use misplaced distrust as a method of getting us to lynch town this day.
EvilTom's words are guaranteed to be town, so it means that we will have words that are guaranteed to be in our favor. I did not mean to say that we need to wait for EvilTom to post and then lynch whoever he designates. Posting near the end of the day is dandy, but in this case I rather not he comes out again LOL DON'T LYNCH THIS PERSON like the last times, where second-guessing ourselves could occur and we'd get into shit. I rather he put out his suspicions from the start.
I'll admit I'm none too happy with this result, if only because I disagreed with both Day 2 and Day 3 lynches, made this vocal, and here we are. LYLO and not a scum down yet. I'm also rather annoyed that all people I suspected beside DHE are all dead. Beh.
----->
Short inquiry, are there any objections if I were to vote now, or do you all still prefer I stay my hand?
----->
I have my three main suspects, who are QR, DHE and Corwin, in that order, but I'm definitely taking a close look at everyone's full post and voting history in this entire game. I don't want to mislynch here, that'd suck.
-
Okay, so Laggy wrote:
This leaves Strago as the guy that, although he HAS posted a lot more lately, still has giant gaps of not being present to make it difficult to read him, and apparently is claiming Vanilla Townie when literally up to this point we have not had a single vanilla flip yet (even some useless trinket ability would be something). Metagaming like mad, yes, but that still also makes me alarmed. His votes have also been pretty much all over the freaking place, and such a record (as I look it over) raises my hackles.
Speaking of roleclaims today: Mine is not provable, nor Corwin's. If you take both QR and Rat's word, hers is believable. Strago's is also not provable. Shale has the flavor to back his up unless he made it up on the spot, but given the nature of how it was written in, I'm not seeing it, so I'm inclined to believe him. This means that both Corwin and Strago have dubious roleclaims, to me. NEB's is also unprovable, but the targets are believable enough.
Your thinking definitely has some gaps in it, here. First of all -- as I believe Corwin has said -- QR's roleclaim is only confirmable inasmuch as we know that she does have the ability to do something completely worthless. There could easily be another passive role, or simply the scum ability to make nightkills, attached to it. Second, Elfboy's claim of Tracker conveniently gives us no actual information... and also happens to be a very typical investigative townie role in a game where the mod has said these will be rare. This puts me, Corwin and Elfboy all at a wash in terms of roles that seem like they would fit well in this kooky game, I'd say. Finally, I think putting in one or two vanilla townies is -- in terms of game design -- an excellently cruel choice in any role-heavy or role-madness game, because of the confusion and paranoia they engender by the simple fact of their being unable to do anything interesting. -_-
Finally, my votes have been "all over the place"? I don't follow. You mean in that I voted for Ash on Day 2 and Excal on Day 3 (the latter of which I was hardly alone in suspecting; hell, our vig seems to have taken the guy out), instead of buying into the larger and more popular trains (Meeple and Snow, respectively)? First of all, and I don't generally like to invoke this sort of defense, but trying to find alternatives to the day's obvious lynchtrains is typical behavior for me almost any time I play. Second, what would be wrong with it, even if it weren't true? Obviously I haven't been present enough this game, but I'd like you to explain what it is about my voting record that rubs you the wrong way.
Now that I'm awake, it's time for breakfast followed by an examination of my suspects.
-
Bardiche raises a good point not to lynch him, Math is friendly after all. I also see what you mean, yeah, using him as a starting point is decent enough.. though I think enough cases have been tossed out there already.
LYLO it is better to take your time slightly before voting and see what people say due to threat of scumhammer. But, conversly, once it seems conversation is going in circles, you might as well lock in your opinion and throw the vote out, or we'll be here forever.
Regardless, I'd appreciate it if you dropped your case on whoever before voting and gave us time to look at it.
-
I'm hedging my own bet on Scum and Andy both targeting Ash day 2. You're all mostly saying "Well Rat looks fine, apart from something unrelated to his posting," essentially, I like to think that speaks for itself. >_>
Yeah well, not to sound overly snarky here but that gets a "no shit" response from me. It's true that I (and most others) have found very little issue with your post content, but hey we've mislynched three times mostly on the basis of bad town play and so-called scummy behavior, and right now I'm looking for something more cold and concrete than that. When it boils down to it, "Rat got roleblocked night 2 and no kill happened" looks awful suspicious and I can't believe I just glossed over it on Day 3 and watched it somehow turn into another Dogpile on Snow case. Yes, you even brought it up yourself to him at the bewilderment of his targetting you and lack of dropping a case on you, but the fact that it conveniently got turned into Snow's so scummy, let's lynch him now... yeah.
It's LYLO, thinking of scumteams is basically the way to go. I am still suspicious of everyone and if presented with a case where there's irrefutable evidence of something fishy going on as compared to just how I simply plain feel about people, I am going to angle for the former. From that I THEN can make conclusions based on who I think is scummy in relation to that person and theorize who else I think is potential scum. My case is actually premediated a lot more on Rat being scum than anything else; if I were to drop a vote on anyone right now it would be Rat. I'm holding off on sheer account of everyone getting their word in and seeing if any other convincing cases build up.
Bard:
Yes. I don't recommend you dropping the first vote, but at this point it's LYLO and in all the scenarios I detailed where you are town you *need* to drop a vote to make the hammer happen, so it's not even much of a choice. (In Scenario 3 we have three scum including Rat, which makes five townies, so we'd only have 4 votes without you. In Scenario 4, we could potentially have six townies, but you and Rat compose of two of them, so again down to 4 votes.) So it's not even a question; you will be on this lynch. If you're scum this reply is pointless anyway due to the nature of scumhammer, so I have no issues revealing it.
Corwin:
Me showing leniency to Meeple? Only in the sense that, as Shale said, scum wouldn't know Meeple wasn't one of them, and thus analysis of the push on Meeple would be useful in locating scum.
Yes and no. Yes and that you do indeed say that; no in that you do, in fact, explicitly say that you believed Meeple was trying to help town. As I said, it's not even that I particularly disagree with this line of thought - it's that I find it so out of character. See below.
Exact quote here:
I'll provide it here along with another reason: a survivor is one of the less harmful TP roles; in this particular case, we even had Meeple post his list of suspects and his reasoning. I happen to believe he was being sincere and trying to help town in that pre-death post, and not spiteful as has been suggested. I believe this further suggests he was trying to survive alongside us, at least to the endgame, which clearly made him a viable target for scum.
Am I saying that you build cases heavily on the suspects he provided or at all cited him as an example? No. Am I saying that it is suspicious that, after NEB and I already had a wrangling about how Meeple's content couldn't be trusted even if you treated it as the word of a dead townie (to date, I have never seen you say ANYONE is trustable/noteworthy of town bar yourself), you still say something like this and it just so happens 2/3 of his suspect list has now been ungrounded and it just so happens the last one is the one you're gunning for now? Yes. Again, this is just massively OOC for you.
I am also kinda curious why you haven't replied to the case on Rat at all. You seem not to have voiced a strong opinion of Rat in general aside from "well I'm suspicious of anyone who plays too much like me" and, now with LYLO ticking and what certainly looks like a viable push against him, you still don't react. This really doesn't help to dispel my unease about the two of you working together.
On roleclaims (this goes particularly to both Corwin and Strago). It was massive metagaming on my part and I disclaimered as such. I'm hardly using either of these as one of my main points of contention; simply that it goes so strongly against the flow of the rest of the game seems odd to me. Yes, both QR and Shale have claimed effectively vanilla-like abilities, but unlike the two of you both have also managed to prove even those useless abilities exist before roleclaim itself. BP and actual Vanilla just seem so starkly in contrast with everyone else; and in particular I have offer a large "harumph" to the way you used it to try to justify your behavior throughout the game, Cor.
Strago: Throwing a voting record that isn't on the main trains (not necessarily the actual lynchtrain, just the major cases in general) and basically on alternative targets that have virtually no chance to be lynched doesn't look to me just like caution or presenting-other-options, it makes your record even more hard to follow and basically unable to pin you down since you keep going for outliers. They would also not bother me so much if you did not typically throw down your votes when a train is already gathering momentum, so it doesn't even look like you're seriously trying to present and build a case, just tossing a vote out there for the sake of... well, tossing a vote out there. This combined with your disappearances in general has made it seriously difficult to get a handle on you, and of QR and Shale, makes you the most unreadable to me.
-
Additionally: I encourage everyone to think of scumteam scenarios. Why? Because you may be dead tomorrow morning, and at this point you need to focusing not just on The One Person You Think Is Scummiest (note, not "don't do it", just "don't do ONLY this") but who the scumteam is as a whole. They work as a team, and tagging down on their interactions with each other tends to yield better results than simply taking aim at who supposedly has been acting lurkerish/scummiest/etc. Furthermore, you may glean some interesting insight by examining said interaction and finding things that may further cement or dispel your suspicions of a particular person, and you want to end up with a case that is cohesive enough that all of your suspects make sense. Yes, scum aren't perfect, scum don't always coordinate precisely with each other, but there are a few telltale signs that can easily be looked for and is hard to avoid by the nature of scum (ironically, Corwin said it best - they lie through their teeth, they have the absolute certainty of knowledge) and there are a few more classic examples - scum try to associate with each other but not overly so. Obviously this is not cast in stone and gambits happen, but for the most heated fights we've had so far this game has all resulted in town lynches. And the simple matter that if you don't voice your suspicions now, you may not get a chance later on, should this game make it past the night.
-
If I were a scum, I'd have slammed the hammer the previous day and nothing you could do to stop scum from voting you then, eh? Assuming the 2-3 scum scenario, that's still a netto of 5 votes in case of 3 scum, or 4 votes in case of 2 scum.
This....is a very good point, to me. If we're in LYLO now with Bardiche at two votes, then ScumBardiche with three votes wins the game, no fuss no muss. WIFOM component is that grabbing that extra vote could attract Andrew's attention before he could use it, but it does make me think better of Bard, at least a bit.
Response to Rat:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24813#msg24813 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24813#msg24813)
All he does here is talk about Bard's claim a lot and sort of comes down on Snow for it; no vote, doesn't appear for the rest of the day, his only contribution here doesn't look special.
Wait, wha? As I've said before, I can't say the absence doesn't make me look bad and won't try to, but the rest of that is just blatant misrepresentation of the content of that post. I talk about Bardiche's roleclaim in the first paragraph....and then go on for four or five times that length talking about other people.
On day 3, again, he has hardly any posts of note. Those he does have include the following...
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25287#msg25287 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25287#msg25287) The quotes he have make this look bigger than it is, but it's basically a not-really invalid shot at Snow for talking too much and saying too little.
"Not-really-invalid shot" meaning "valid argument against, then?
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25318#msg25318 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25318#msg25318) Purely defensive.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.demsg25413#msg25413 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.demsg25413#msg25413) A minor shot at Bardiche which isn't really followed on, with regards to following Tom. The second quote and reponse.. I don't really get it, it seems to be about the merits or lack thereof of aggressive play.. on the scum side? Yeah, no idea here.
Uh...did you miss the entire Day 2 chain of arguments I was reacting to, then? That whole reason Bardiche attacked Corwin? HE went on for a while about how hew was looking at aggressive-enough play as scummy because it would let scum define the main targets of investigation for the day/
[url=http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25599#msg25599]http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25599#msg25599 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25547#msg25547) But here's part of the kicker, it's talking about Excal after Strago and myself already have, yet he still claims to be sold enough on Snow regardless. This is a bit late, and despite saying he's not feeling a case on me and Strago, it does seem like he's having suspicious thoughts; I find it a wonder he went into this much detail. With that said, I did too, but this wouldn't be the first time someone's 'thought' the way I have and turned out scum later. I want to emphasize that the case on Excal materialized towards the end of the day, seemed fairly legitimate, and he was the last person to speak heavily on it, yet he himself never hammered, voted, or otherwise backed up a position with action.
Wait, you're going to have to walk me through that first again. I find some stuff I don't like about Excal, therefore I must be more suspicious of him than an I am of Snow? It's possible to find one person bad and another worse.
I went into that much detail because I said I would - Excal and Strago were raised as potentially suspicious types, and I said I as going to look at them to see what I thought of that. I'd rather actually run through my assessment than just say "I looked at X and didn't see much." You I wanted to look at for the same reason I thing you're the leading suspect now - somebody used a kill-stopping power on you, and a kill didn't happen.
Couple things stand out to me in general, too- he was apparently leaning heavily towards Snow early day 3, but a good deal of time passed and no vote came out, despite evidence of other posts and shopping around. Towards the end it would be somewhat forgivable that he didn't want to hammer early, but it's not like he didn't have plenty of time. In general he seems to be happy enough to present a case, but sort of pulls back from it and waits to see what others do before following through at all.
Even early in the day, "dogpile on Snow" was in full force, and Shale no likey quicklynches without hard evidence. It's not like I've been shy about tying myself to mislynch trains, so I'm not sure what benefit you see for Scum-Me here.
Still got company. Stupid social life.
-
Shale is telling the truth
I got a PM last night that my computer system got wiped; reduced me to 250 words.
Shale = 100% truthful role = confirmed town most likely.
This is fact!!!!
Didn’t post till now to try & catch someone (rat) in trap.
Shale attacks Rat
Rat omgus Shale
Recommended Rat lynch?
Shale is definitely truthful, therefore town (others are lying about roles). Rat intent on discrediting me; his Shale preferred lynch = wrong.
I may be wrong about Rat, but I’m not wrong about Shale.
QR also looks sus, Strago and Laggy follow.
Bardiche still very town.
Shale = telling truth.
Higher probability of scum attacking Shale till now!
Corwin = wildcard for me right now.
I don’t like the way Laggy just stuck the boot into Rat just then (the roleblock case vs Rat was obvious), but I like the rest of his arguments. Beware Otherwise follow him Re: roleclaims (corwin and strago have shitty roleclaims, do not trust).
DHE roleclaim: I am sceptical
Dropping this out here now, Rat is giving the impression of hurrying things along and ignoring my input. :(
If I were alive, I’d probably lynch Rat.
Careful:
With a high proportion of scum right now, they have a large impact on discussion.
Good luck. Lynch scum.
ps. I've given up waiting for Strago's breakfast post
Posting now! Make the most of this info, win it guys!
-
Well, okay. In the middle of my actual post, but I feel the need to say that... while it's good to know that Shale isn't lying, once more I fail to see how the confirmation of that roles existence makes him definitely town. It doesn't! Hell, if the only power the man has results in anti-town results (i.e., shortening the length of Tom's 1/day post), how does that... mrff. I just don't think it can be considered something that fully clears Shale. Unless I'm missing something obvious, in which case someone please correct me because gods know I'd like to have someone completely above suspicion right now.
-
Laggy: I'm sorry my response was the only possible one I could give, it's good of you to rant on it at length. As far as concreteness goes, I fail to see how this is any more concrete than the practically-certain lynches on Jo'ou and such, especially given that this game is clearly role madness and the given possibility of exceptions exists.
Unlikely? Sure, ok. While we're talking about unlikelyness, what's the likelyhood of DHE targeting functionally useless targets each night? Including Jo'ou, who was a claimed roleblocker and would most likely have been revealed the next night regardless, hitchance aside? But no, you pretty much accept his claim as it is virtually without comment (despite then going off at Cor and Strago for claiming standard shit; Tracker is likewise pretty damn standard, y'know.)
Furthermore, you are happy enough to point out to us that 'scum make sure they fence with each other a bit' as a common gambit, but I'll point out the flip side of that for you - 'scum also like to attach themselves to nonscum in the event of their own failure'. WIFOM? Yes, but you started it, I just had to finish it.
<->
Wait, wha? As I've said before, I can't say the absence doesn't make me look bad and won't try to, but the rest of that is just blatant misrepresentation of the content of that post. I talk about Bardiche's roleclaim in the first paragraph....and then go on for four or five times that length talking about other people.
Shale - Right. You talk about things other than Snow and Bardiche, and they're all meaningless; a bunch of vauge 'postmores' and expression of confusion about myself. I saw nothing important there, and thus I disregarded it.
Wait, you're going to have to walk me through that first again. I find some stuff I don't like about Excal, therefore I must be more suspicious of him than an I am of Snow? It's possible to find one person bad and another worse.
That's not entirely what I meant, I was concerned that you took virtually no votey action at all in general, though you seemed comfortable tossing around fairly strong cases on people in general; I did think the one on Jo'ou > Excal (obviously), but you seemed to be fairly heavy on both of 'em. So. Yeah. No vote.
Not liking quicklynch is kinda bleh to me, at the time of your early stuff on Snow on day 3, there was like one vote on him. Where was the pressure? That's what concerns me overall.
<->
So Shale has a role where he pushes a button. Uh. Yes. Must be town 100% gj wait no.
I fail to see why discrediting someone who thinks this is bad. I will admit Shale looks less bad to me in light of his response, but not completely, and this is just a non-reason. I also fail to see this trap, because how is the roleblock case on me not totally convenient? I would expect someone from either side to have a decent chance of jumping on it.
-
Laggy: I'm sorry my response was the only possible one I could give, it's good of you to rant on it at length. As far as concreteness goes, I fail to see how this is any more concrete than the practically-certain lynches on Jo'ou and such, especially given that this game is clearly role madness and the given possibility of exceptions exists.
Unlikely? Sure, ok. While we're talking about unlikelyness, what's the likelyhood of DHE targeting functionally useless targets each night? Including Jo'ou, who was a claimed roleblocker and would most likely have been revealed the next night regardless, hitchance aside? But no, you pretty much accept his claim as it is virtually without comment (despite then going off at Cor and Strago for claiming standard shit; Tracker is likewise pretty damn standard, y'know.)
Furthermore, you are happy enough to point out to us that 'scum make sure they fence with each other a bit' as a common gambit, but I'll point out the flip side of that for you - 'scum also like to attach themselves to nonscum in the event of their own failure'. WIFOM? Yes, but you started it, I just had to finish it.
The more and more I think about it, NEB's analysis makes sense - whether you believe his claim as a tracker or not.
First off, I feel the need to point that I had a line directly relevant to this. Yeah, I haven't really had NEB in my crosshairs - haven't all game - and you bring up a good point in that I probably should. However, whether he's truthful or not has no bearing on your case.
Your comparison to "concreteness" being relevant to Snow's case I would find a good deal of contrast. Snow's lynch may have been inevitable but the case on him was hardly cold and absolute. He had several detractors to the lynch on him (most primarily Andrew, who threw off his vote on Snow after the Day 2 meltdown) and I myself voiced a good deal of unease about going after him after I was the one pressing him immediately post his stunt. It was Corwin more than anyone else who was absolutely, utterly convinced not to suffer Snow to live, and while Snow's questionable scummy behavior led to him going to the gallows, it's a totally different situation than you getting hit by a roleblock and a second kill not happening.
Now, this make a case easy to hop on like Snow's was? Yes, certainly. Except in this case the facts aren't in dispute, and it's a matter of whether you think it was freak occurrence (scum and vig aimed at same target) or not. Incidentally you start Day 3 off by saying that trying to figure out scum NK target is pointless discussion. Mmkay.
"Scum also like to attach themselves to nonscum in the event of their own failure." Well sure they do, would you care to point out whose been attached to who so far this game in such a manner and isn't dead yet? If I recall, damn near everyone who defended person x (Excal on QR, Meeple on Shale, Andrew on Snow, etc.) is dead; I would actually be curious to hear your thoughts on this and your proposed scumteam, given your heavy suspicions of Shale. Also highly fortunate that scum actually hasn't failed to cause a mislynch yet.
Completely ironically, Dread Thomas' post and his assertiveness on how everyone is apparently lying about their roles except Shale makes me more dubious of trying to draw anything from the ambiguous roleclaims. It's nice to know Shale's telling the truth, of course. And I still think Cor's I-acted-like-this-due-to-BPness reeks of on-the-spot justification for having some role.
-
I have to concur with Rat and Strago. Just because Shale was truthful about his role does not at all mean he's 100% town. Besides, according to our Lie Detector, Carth also wasn't lying about his role at all, so does that mean Carth is also 100% town? Then we have two townies fighting!
Suffice to say I am a little disappointed in EvilTom's post. Not sure what to make of it, surely I am going to disregard the part where Shale is supposedly 100% town.
I'll not place the initial vote. With three scum, likelihood of them communicating in IRC and quicklynching someone who I erroneously thought is scum is NOT pleasing. I can see victory if I were to put that vote, then write up an unvote and try to quickly weasle it in if someone suddenly agrees with my post but... Yeah, what a fantastic gambit, Bardiche.
Will really post evaluations later, but taking my sweet time. The day's just begun, and I don't see us quick lynching anything anytime soon.
----
As far as Corwin goes, just a quick say: If he tried to attract scum attention, he should've lynched scum and not town. It does make sense with how he says, "If JR flips, everything falls into place" or something of similar fashion, but... No, I'm just not seeing how his entire playstyle can be attributed to BP. Interesting thought: If he is a Bulletproof, chance could be either Andrew or scum hit Corwin on Day 2 and Rat's a townie.
Whatever we lynch, I propose we not lynch Rat. Lie Detector confirmed he's Voteless, meaning he cannot affect the voting process at all. If we want to get out of LYLO, we need to lynch scum with voting power. Even if Rat does turn up as being most likely scum, I'd rather get a voting scum.
-
Interesting thought: If he is a Bulletproof, chance could be either Andrew or scum hit Corwin on Day 2 and Rat's a townie.
Wait, apparently Corwin would get a notice if he was the target of a killing role at night. Disregard.
-
However, whether he's truthful or not has no bearing on your case.
Well, absolutely nothing has bearing on my case since you're essentially relying on role nonsense. Thus you must, as has been said, either decide, essentialy right now, whether or not you intend to believe this or not. Or you could look back at the overwhelming response that says 'rat is acting very townie' and take that or leave it. Excuse me for trying to argue my way out of this.
Anyway, I was actually OMGUSing you. Sorry if it wasn't clear! Saying 'whether you believe DHE or not' means nothing in terms of your opinion of him (well, actually, it's leaning towarsd believing him in my book, but that's just an implication I took from it). Certainly nothing groundbreaking.
Incidentally you start Day 3 off by saying that trying to figure out scum NK target is pointless discussion.
Yes, and if you check the context, this is because it's impossible to draw conclusions about who is scum based on their target selection. That said, I don't think this is much better.
<->
On the side, I don't believe in searching for scumteams, even if you do. I simply am not capable of hoping to point out a number of people with even a shred of accuracy without tying myself up in my own thoughts and seeing things that aren't there, and I refuse to submit to needing to enquire along these lines.
-
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25847#msg25847
Laggy: Just because I'm not hopping around and praising people as 'pro-town' means I can't look back at someone's last post in the game and consider it an honest attempt on their part to be helpful? The two are not related. If I had to be brutally honest, I'd say that I don't consider Meeple the best mafia player, but that doesn't quite equate to throwing away all his posts as useless or made in bad faith.
I'm sorry if you think me saying I believe someone was trying to help us is OOC. I think Tom's trying to help us, too, but I don't see much of use in his posts. I can acknowledge the sentiment without accepting the arguments presented.
On the subject of my role: I don't really intend to claim that I'm playing the way I am due to a role. I've always played aggressively; what I was trying to say was that it might have affected that a bit. I didn't hold myself back where I otherwise might have. To have it presented as the sole reason for an aggressive playstyle is to pretty much twist what I was saying. I believe I was clear enough and your attempts to paint it the way you do, repeatedly, smack of the disingenuous.
The case on Rat? Well, I believe I was the first who mentioned the possibility of Rat being blocked from making the kill. But it really is the only thing (outside him thinking much like I do, which none of you care about) that I find truly suspicious of him in our current situation.
If anything, you are coming off as more suspicious. The beginning of this day was pretty much occupied with you starting and fanning discussion about Bardiche/Rat, then the number of scum, then you move it to thinking in terms of scum teams. Let's dispense with the caveats and get down to why I find it suspicious. It bogs us down in meta stuff and we don't spend as much as we need staying focused on who is scummy. When 'he is scummy but association seems to rule it out' comes into play, it leads to badness. Scum can and will make connections, and I wouldn't put it past them to think ahead. You make your nice, comfy 'scum' team, bus one of your friends, and seal the game the next day. And I don't see anyone more active than you, while I've been largely discredited due to my mistake wrt JR and can't oppose you properly. Yeah, I'm thinking it feels off to me.
Math and scenarios look very impressive, I'm sure, but your actual cases rely in large part on metagaming (as you admit for part of your case on me) and what essentially comes down to gutfeels (with Rat).
Edit for Bardiche:
Interesting thought: If he is a Bulletproof, chance could be either Andrew or scum hit Corwin on Day 2 and Rat's a townie.
Yeah except I already said I wasn't hit and you don't seem to be following my words closely enough despite apparently finding issue with me. That's pretty lax and, yes, scummy coasting. See above for BP/playstyle, I'm not repeating it.
-
On the side, I don't believe in searching for scumteams, even if you do. I simply am not capable of hoping to point out a number of people with even a shred of accuracy without tying myself up in my own thoughts and seeing things that aren't there, and I refuse to submit to needing to enquire along these lines.
Difference of opinion, etc. I largely disagree and think that, especially by the time LYLO hits, the game's progressed enough and it's time to look a lot harder at association and draw conclusions from it, especially when three lynches have happened on the basis of well-this-guy-is-playing-badly-he-must-be-scum. Put it more simply, it's time to think outside the box some more, because one mislynch and this game is over.
If anything, you are coming off as more suspicious. The beginning of this day was pretty much occupied with you starting and fanning discussion about Bardiche/Rat, then the number of scum, then you move it to thinking in terms of scum teams. Let's dispense with the caveats and get down to why I find it suspicious. It bogs us down in meta stuff and we don't spend as much as we need staying focused on who is scummy. When 'he is scummy but association seems to rule it out' comes into play, it leads to badness. Scum can and will make connections, and I wouldn't put it past them to think ahead. You make your nice, comfy 'scum' team, bus one of your friends, and seal the game the next day. And I don't see anyone more active than you, while I've been largely discredited due to my mistake wrt JR and can't oppose you properly. Yeah, I'm thinking it feels off to me.
Math and scenarios look very impressive, I'm sure, but your actual cases rely in large part on metagaming (as you admit for part of your case on me) and what essentially comes down to gutfeels (with Rat).
First off, I find it hilarious that you think this is somehow a bus scheme when I'm basically accusing three people at once and essentially opening myself up to fire from all about. Throughout this game I have drawn oddly no scrutiny save Andy's attack on me (which few people have discredited) and, frankly, trying to bus and go at this point as a scum move seems outlandish to me when I could theoretically just not get on the offensive and basically avoid playing aggro-style you so endear... that's a stretch more than anything else, in my eyes. It is also good to know that you now consider being active a convenient sign of scummitude when you yourself basically piledrove the JR train (and are now using it as a "well now I can't do anything about it") and you disputed accusations of using said aggression to direct the day.
As to why I believe it's important to think beyond just one target, see above reply to Rat. And if you disagree, well, you do, but I'm frankly unnerved that you wouldn't at the very least draw some suspicions about who's working with who, unless you really think scum all just work independently of each other or coordinate in ways that are impossible to trace.
I don't agree that my cases relied *largely* on metagaming. I may be guilty of making too much out of it and said as much in my previous reply to Rat, but by far and large my other discomfort areas were things unrelated to that.
However, I must point out the fundamental difference in our line of thinking in LYLO. After three days of mislynches, you are still convinced that going sheerly on an individual's post content for signs of scummy behavior is enough to press on, despite the game's track record as so far on this; frankly, I'm not happy with that being the sole basis, and am presenting math/scenarios/etc. in an effort to look at things more objectively. The simple fact is, scum can play well! Really well! They can be totally protown the entire game and evade detection entirely and laugh it to the bank. This doesn't happen often, but it's totally possible and I wouldn't put it past players as good as you and Rat (see El Cid in his latest games as scum, see yourself in Composer, etc.) This thus makes attacking single persons solely on their behavior lax and far from failproof to me, and with endgame coming up and all, I'm much more inclined to look harder for other patterns (above said group interaction, things like Rat's roleblock oddity, etc.)
-
Alright. To begin with, I've been taking a look at Elfboy. This got... very long, in the writing of it. Appy-polly-loggies in advance.
He began Day 1 with some role metagamery, doing a bit of analysis of potential LYLO situations based on Rat's votelessness (sort of amusing, now), and then talking about why he suspected Rat of having some other power. Okay, early Day 1, whatever.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24405#msg24405 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24405#msg24405) Here he lays down a justified anti-lurking vote against me on principle. Otherwise, the post sums up the day's cases thus far against Rat, Tom and OK. He takes no actual position against them aside from saying that he doesn't suspect Rat that much anymore and asking the other two to justify themselves somehow.
Next, there's this on the subject of lynching OK:
I'm less opposed to lynching him compared to you, though, because on average I'd rather operate under the assumption that the lynch (rather than a vig who may not exist) is town's best weapon and should be used against those who are being destructive to town's workings.
So Elfboy is for lynching those who appear to be against town, but of course he never actually makes that vote against OK. Or, you know, anyone at all. Then later...
Posting again to check in with the game, and... hell. Well not much has really changed since earlier today, except that OK has confirmed that he wasn't just taking the joke phase a step too far.
Lynching either of them would be cool with me; Tom's probably a better pick because if he IS telling the truth, reasons Corwin/Laggy have championed will make it not so bad an outcome. For all that I find OK more disruptive to the game.
Gives support for two possible lynches... while not actually supporting either one. Seems like a remarkably good way to contribute to mislynching without dirtying one's hands in the actual votecount. That was his last post during Day 1.
His first post of content during Day 2.
In response to Corwin/Laggy's concerns about my non-voting:
I'll admit I've historically been a bit reluctant to vote as long as I think there is still discussion to be had. Just kinda how I play; if someone wants to convince me I am horribly wrong for doing this, I'll listen and try to change my ways. Until then I'll do what's natural to me. I can still put down a vote to pressure someone, but Tom quickly got that from others anyway, so there was no need for me to jump on the train and push him closer to hammer when I didn't feel it was time for that yet.
Regardless, hopefully I was clear enough about who I was going to vote for if the day had gone on a bit longer (Tom went from 4 votes to lynched pretty quickly, so I didn't really get a chance to get involved with the lateday).
Analysis and such will come tonight, I hope. As mentioned I will be away a lot today.
Now, I understand what Laggy's said about my vote record making me "unreadable" to him, but come on. I tend to go for outliers because I am extremely uneasy with the idea that once somebody's lynch train has gained a certain amount of momentum it's impossible to save them. That way lies madness and easy scumtrains, but there's only a certain amount I can do to convince people that my secondary option is better or at least worth considering seriously. Elfboy, on the other hand, plays things so incredibly safe and "reasonable" that there's no paper trail whatsoever. His behind was thoroughly covered by everything he did, Day 1. And yes, sure, it was Day 1, but at the very least this characterizes an attitude and playstyle that I find pretty troubling when I look back upon it.
This is followed by a post discussing Bard's role and general game theory: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24802#msg24802 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24802#msg24802).
His next post is quite long (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24808#msg24808 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24808#msg24808)) and does the thing I (and he as well, apparently) hate, where one lists every player in the game and gives a couple sentences of pretty surface analysis of each one. Yaaay commitment.
Now, the thing of note here is that he does finally put down a vote; on Meeple, no less, against whom nobody had yet voted. So that's well worth keeping in mind, as it's his first shift in something resembling a townie direction.
In his next big post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25059#msg25059 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25059#msg25059)), quite a bit later, he discusses Meeple and Snow. What I find especially notable, here, is that just as heat is starting to pull back from Snow and be added to Meeple's train instead... Elfboy says this about Meeple:
Meeple stuff:
Yeah, the Shale defence is a bit odd, but not unreasonable. It was also a pretty quick reversal, but I have no idea what that means either. I'm having a pretty hard time pinning Meeple down now, but he definitely still bothers me.
And all this about Snow:
Snow stuff:
The breakdown nonsense had me considering a votechange pretty strongly. For all that there's a decent chance he did it as town, I just... can not give him a pass over it. It's frustrating, as intuitively I don't think he's scum, and lynching town is the worst thing we can do. But that kind of defence can't be accepted. Yeah, I'm well aware others have said this, but it's worth restating. Fortunately, Snow seems to have recovered a bit. Not that this makes me unsuspicious of him, but it means I won't be calling for him to quit the game at least.
One thing I would like to see from Snow is an explanation for the Corwin vote (well it's not a vote yet but it's the thought that counts). He comes up with a conspiracy theory for Meeple/Shale being Corwin's creation. I go back and read his post and I... do not see it. Didn't notice it at the time, don't get it now. Definitely would like to see this elaborated on.
So as popular opinion tends toward one, he starts to seem a lot more suspicious -- at the very least ways he can qualify -- of the other. But then he goes ahead and leaves his vote on Meeple, keeping the vote deadlocked as opposed to being the one to make it shift in either direction. Huh. And then there's this:
Vote, for now at least, stays on Meeple. I'm not wholly comfortable with lynching him, nor Snow, but I feel a jump to someone else this late in the day would be to grasp at straws. I've seen nothing to make anyone else look notably scummy since my big post, today.
Nice example of a philosophy for which I've described my lack of enthusiasm. They were deadlocked at three votes each when it took eight to lynch. That's seriously too far-gone for anything else to happen?
Here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25074#msg25074 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25074#msg25074)) and here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25083#msg25083 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25083#msg25083)) the Elf is mostly going back and forth with Bardiche over a weird issue of his having twisted the latter's words in some fashion. This is harmless -- and unproductive -- enough, I suppose. In the second post, I find this notable:
And Corwin, as for giving you a good look, it may be simply due to the fact that I'm uncomfortable with you. I find the aggressive sniping to put me off balance a bit, and I'm far from the most emotional one in this group. It does feel like you've stirred up trouble today, but whether as town or scum, well... I dunno. People as active and aggressive as you deserve a good look. They can be very helpful as town, but as scum... well, I don't need to finish that thought.
Now, the first three sentences of this I actually rather like. I agree that being antagonistic towards other people is counter to the desires of the town, since it's all about emotional manipulation whereas town only survives on its reason and logic. The part of the quotation I've put in bold, however, is the gateway to Elfboy's later opinions about "aggressiveness" being bad because, well, scum who lead debate might hurt town! Which he seems to see as far outweighing the possibility of town leading debate to hunt scum, for some reason. It just seems like both a specious argument and a tacit defense for his own tendency not to take strong stands.
Then there's my accidental Meeple hammer, and Day 2 is over. -_-
Day 3 starts, he makes this post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25277#msg25277 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25277#msg25277)), pretty much just taking a look at the flips and night actions, not much of note and my own post here is getting too long. This post is on page 15...
... and his next is the very beginning of page 17, here: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25459#msg25459 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25459#msg25459). He reiterates some of his early comments about not actually finding Andy scummy despite having put him third in a lineup with Snow and Meeple. But what really gets me is:
The rest of your accusations spanning the next few paragraphs all stem from this misunderstanding and thus, thankfully, I have no need to defend myself from them.
That combined with his early Day 3 m.o. seeming to be to defend himself constantly against Meeple's parting shots just makes Elfboy seem more defensive and worried about public perception than ever. More of such defending himself in this back-and-forth with Bardiche:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25469#msg25469 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25469#msg25469)
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25471#msg25471 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25471#msg25471)
Aside from that, he also had a post almost entirely about the game mechanics and non-specific worth of Roleblockers to Town (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25465#msg25465 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25465#msg25465)), and then he really starts hitting the debate about "aggressiveness" that I've mentioned previously (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25477#msg25477 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25477#msg25477)).
This post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25522#msg25522 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25522#msg25522)) is another rundown of everyone currently in the game, and to no great surprise Elfboy doesn't feel like voting for the person he apparently suspects the most of being scum. The fact that Bardiche strikes me as a likely town player (for reasons that are, yes, largely metagamey, but they're what I've got) just adds to my distaste for this post.
We're getting so close to the end of this post! Yeah alright!
Next is Elfboy's whole "I'm going to hammer Snow!" song and dance which has been covered by others. He's just playing everything so dang safe it's darn near impossible to peg him with any scummy action either than that of... not taking any action and playing things close to his chest. Maybe if he were a Doc or a Cop this would make slightly more sense to me, but he's apparently got a Tracker role that by his own admission he considered to be vaguely useless all game. It's not as if he was playing carefully to preserve his power role's use to the town, then.
Yeah. Wow. I honestly didn't expect to be this convinced of Elfboy's scumminess, but once I started taking a careful look at him he just struck me as worse and worse. LYLO means that I'm not going to drop a vote until some more discussion of my own post has been had, but this has become a very strong suspicion for me.
Ninja'd by a couple posts, but I just need to get this out there because it is too effing long. -_- I'll read the other stuff and catch up.
-
Okay, about to run out, don't have time to review everything said, but I want to follow up on my prior comment about Bardiche.
If Bardiche is scum, had added another vote to his total yesterday, and then survived the night, this game would be over. If anybody can find a way in which that is not true, please speak up, but I can't think of one. That means that if Bardiche is scum, yesterday would have been potential LYLO. It wasn't. That doesn't make him confirmed town - he could still be third party - but I can't see how the math works out if he's scum.
-
Shale: On inspection, if there were 3 scum, bardiche among them, then... today they'd have 5 votes between them if he got that extra vote. They'd be able to win the game right now. Doesn't work if there are only two. I messed up on this math myself earlier, as well, since if there are only two scum then bardiche could still fit in. I still don't think that's likely.
-
Rat:
Including Jo'ou, who was a claimed roleblocker and would most likely have been revealed the next night regardless, hitchance aside?
Bit confused here. Yes, he was a claimed roleblocker. Which gave me reason to test this. In particular, were he scum, I was suspicious that he would do something, then claim inaction next day due to his alleged 50% fail rate (remember this was before Tai cleared that). I wanted to catch that. And if he were town, I might be able to confirm his actions.
Things that bother me about Rat:
-Day 1... well, I remember finding it odd at the time just how upset he seemed by his role. How he'd snap into anger about it, and out, at the drop of a pin. At first, I thought it was a joke, that he was hamming it up for fun. Now, I think it was an act. Maybe he knew that he'd be angry as town, so pretended to be, and that's why it doesn't look natural?
-Defends Strago as not-lurking Day 2, and attacks Shale instead. Hmm. Defends him from EVILTOM, at that. Why go to the trouble of defending someone who is pretty lurkerish from a confirmed town?
-Feels like he's fanning the flames on Corwin/Tai a bit
Being an aggro whore is the superior playstyle, which should neatly sum up my opinion on most of Tai's posts.
Even setting aside differing playstyle concerns here, that's a rough-handed dismissal if I ever saw one. Trying to get him off-balance and go down in flames?
-As initially active he has been, he has faded. Not the direction you want to go in. Day 3 posts, aside from his "yay I can vote!" opener and a closer about making sure we know he is vanilla, total up at three. In all three, discussion of aggression, Corwin, and Tai figure in. He does have... some other stuff, including a case on Bard that feels token-ish, a lookover of Excal which paints him as "You're next!", while going after Snow (like most everyone else).
In general, the more I look over things, the more Rat and Corwin have generally banded together, shooting down anyone that agrees with their aggressive playstyle and trying to make each other look unassailable.
Corwin I need to look at more closely, but he also bothers me. Extremely aggressive. Feels like he has been trying to get under my skin personally all game, and I know he's done it with others (Tai!). Even now he persists with bitching about my reluctance to hammer, as if both Bard and Shale didn't SPECIFICALLY ASK ME to wait. And this is his only listed reason for my being his top suspect besides the playstyle whining? Okay, apparently, "something about my defences is off". Specifics, please.
So Rat and Corwin are definitely my top two. I'll admit I have no idea who the third is. Strago is the leading suspect due to lurkerdom and Rat's defence of him from Tom, but neither of those are nearly solid by themselves to build a case out of. Shale is probably second. Bard, cleared by math as he says. QR and Laggy... well, I have to take a look at everyone.
Ninja'd a lot, naturally! Getting this up here for now.
-
Wait a tick, does Bard's math check out? Scum Bard + Scum Rat. He buffs his vote count yesterday. Today he has 3, his one scumbuddy has one. Four votes Town has five votes today, in this case, with 5 to lynch. Game is still in play.
Am I missing something? Since both Bard/Shale seem to be figuring otherwise.
Now, it does mean that Scum Bard implies Scum Rat, and therefore Town Rat implies Town Bard. So Bard is cleared... in the mind of Rat. If Rat is town. Which of course I don't think he is. <_<
Guess next is a response to Strago.
-
Editing the first paragraph for clarity:
"Wait a tick, does Bard's math check out? Scum Bard + Scum Rat. He buffs his vote count yesterday. Today he has 3, his one scumbuddy besides Rat has one. Four votes. Town has five votes today, in this case, with 5 to lynch. Game is still in play."
-
Yeah except I already said I wasn't hit and you don't seem to be following my words closely enough despite apparently finding issue with me. That's pretty lax and, yes, scummy coasting.
Insert something about irony, since I corrected myself before that. That's pretty lax of yourself.
Words on Corwin now.
------->
His first post in the game, (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24395#msg24395) where he immediately starts the EvilTom lynchtrain. Since it's Day 1 this is a forgivable act, but I am referencing to this post because I find it noteworthy his Day 1 action is in strong collision with his other actions. Why? Because so far, he's been stressing that Jo'ou is extremely and obviously scummy, and that's the basis for his lynch on him. He acts in that manner pretty much throughout Day 2 and Day 3, but like I said, it collides with his Day 1 behaviour.
Okay. How is this a bad option, then?
-Tom is lying scum. Tom dies.
Ditto!
-Tom is lying town/TP/a muppet. Lynching Tom... eliminates a third party player, a lying town or a muppet.
Day 1 lying town. Day. Freaking. One.[/u] We were at the end of the jokevote phase, Rat had just roleclaimed, OK was doing his jester shit and Tom made a dubious roleclaim and jokevote. And that one, single post of EvilTom is, according to Corwin at the moment, immediate reason to lynch him. It just feels a bit too quick, to me. Because it is Day 1, it is the lesser of my concerns, but I'm putting it out here because even if it is lesser, it is important to keep it in mind, imo. Might be fun to read his entire Day 1 interactions, where he dismisses EvilTom's case on Rat on accounts that, "I usually get a better read on his alignment after a couple of days anyway". Not a great argument.
Here's his next post, actually, (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24412#msg24412) because here he warns Deltaflyer he's a proponent of lynching people based on their writing style. Referencing to this later, it's important when examining his Jo'ou case and justifications.
Day 2 time. Opening post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24687#msg24687). Jo'ou was among the list of three people he lashed out on in his first post on Day 2. More notably, he's attacking the people that disagreed with a freaking Day 1 lynch, especially after EvilTom said scum killing him would empower him. Logically, from my viewpoint, scum would especially want to lynch the one claiming to never lose even if he got lynched, and especially if they claim a scum kill will empower 'em. So why is it so bad those people didn't want him dead?
Second, he rewrites our goal from FINDING SCUM above all else to finding scum AND killing random people who might detract from town's win in some way, a nebulous definition we are not privy to.
Referencing back to his "proponent of lynching people that don't write correctly", as well as his case on EvilTom that, "even if it is a townie, it won't matter because he can give insights". Even if it is a sentiment I can concur with, it contradicts his later words. At least, that's how it feels to me. Feel free to disagree, this isn't exactly something I can say is OMG SO STRONG an argument either.
Referencing to this post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25000#msg25000), I'll quote what struck me:
I believed that the likeliest possibility was of Tom lying about something, if you'll go over my posts. It just didn't mean much with regards to his alignment, and he seemed scummy enough to push the lynch ahead.
Later on he hammers we should lynch scum and not lying town, even though he clearly says in his first post that lynching Tom is okay because in the worst case we lynch a lying town/TP/muppet. Apparently he found EvilTom far more scummy than Jo'ou, whom he attacks on that day for not voting on Day 1. His entire Day 1 participation is almost exclusively to promote an EvilTom train, with reasoning that, "If we mislynch on Day 1, at least we have a guaranteed town voice on our side." I'm mostly a bit lost on how he thinks EvilTom was scummiest on Day 1 based on a single post of EvilTom where he basically says "if I die I will still be able to talk".
By only paying passing attention to the game. By coasting. Which is what scum do.
He uses this argument later on as well, against me. (see last post) Except he seems to totally rule out the possibility that townies could, idk, also over-read stuff? Acting overly aggressive and attacking minor things is also something scum could be doing, and it's probably a bit better than "coasting" and "paying passing attention" to the game in itself.
QR because she's pretty much been central in making two lynches that mislynched in a row take place.
Also, this. This. He's saying QR is getting a look from him for this action, even though he's the one that started the EvilTom train with his, "We can't go wrong with an EvilTom lynch" (That's what it boiled down to, don't deny it.) and then later on Jo'ou. Well, guess we have to be extra scrutinous of Corwin now for leading two mislynches! (I daresay Corwin was more central to the first mislynch than QR, which he apparently gives her credit for)
Attribute that to luck or accident if you wish, but I won't because QR is a very good mafia player and so I'm wary of someone like her doing it twice in a row without any guarantee that she's doing it for the good of town.
For all that he's wary of QR, I haven't seen him produce a case on her yet. For ironic sake:
Another thing that jumps at me is that Shale mentioned Bardiche as one of the people of interest to him, but we've heard nothing on Bardiche from him yet. Did he change his mind? Is he working on a post to address that? Mystery. Noteworthy because I believe his day 2 criticism of Bardiche were justified, and not following up on them is strange.
Where he contradicts himself, especially considering I am wary of QR as well.
QR made the Tom train prominent (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25312#msg25312), even if he provided the most solid of reasoning to justify the lynch in that we'd have a win/win situation regardless, as he presented it.
He makes an... odd statement:
Don't think there's anything too scummy about Bardiche, aside from his confrontational attitude,
Considering the aggressiveness he's attacked people with, and his... General attitude, that's a very thing to say I'm scummy for. You follow up with, "Which I don't really care about", but why mention my 'confrontational attitude' when I've been mostly passive this game?
------>
In conclusion, though his Day 1 actions of lynching Tom, the reasoning he used and everything following that... I'm not convinced he's scum. Sure, Corwin has some things that don't add up (for me, anyway), but I don't feel this is a particularly strong case. While I dislike his playstyle of being aggressive and sometimes offensive, I can't say I'm going to support a Corwin train, unless someone else presents some sort of case that is pretty strong on him. This means that Corwin, to me, is off the hook based on post observation.
That dispels one of my three suspects, to me, so I'm going to go over DHE and see what else can be said that I haven't already. Currently, with other's suspicions and attacks on DHE, I'm somewhat more concerned about him. Things I didn't see before have been raised, and they make me incredibly wary.
-
Also, yes, I'm bloody aware it looks weird to first build a case on someone and then dismiss them as scum, but right now... I'm not seeing it. Maybe once I have looked everything over he looks worse by comparison, but this in itself... I wouldn't lynch him for it, and the case feels too weak to me to provide a basis for a LYLO lynch.
Reason I built the case: For peer review.
Reason I dismiss my own case: Though the actions might not add up entirely, I still don't get an OMG SCUM feeling from him that is so secure I want to pursue it.
-
Strago!
Elfboy, on the other hand, plays things so incredibly safe and "reasonable" that there's no paper trail whatsoever. His behind was thoroughly covered by everything he did, Day 1. And yes, sure, it was Day 1, but at the very least this characterizes an attitude and playstyle that I find pretty troubling when I look back upon it.
Mrrf. I didn't vote Day 1, yes. I really don't see why this is such a crime. I feel I got my opinions out there. Yes, I didn't leave a trail on the shiny vote record, for reasons I already gave. I am sorry. But I don't see how this is a significant scumtell at all. After all, people here aren't completely braindead. They remember not voting just as well as voting. Apparently more, in some cases. If I was trying to slip under the radar, I -would- have voted for one of Tom or OK or Delta... who were all non-scum anyway! It would be easy! My not voting attracted more attention than voting for any of them would have done. If not voting was a mistake, it was not one that indicates my allignment, since it is a mistake for both town and scum, apparently.
Quoting my own posts, now! Or rather the parts Strago found most concerning.
but I feel a jump to someone else this late in the day would be to grasp at straws
Remember my standpoint. My vote was on Meeple, for reasons I gave. Snow, meanwhile, had done his Snow-thing, and certainly had crept up my suspicion list (to the point were I tracked him the next night).
Day by this point was stalling a bit, and it looked like serious cases were not being made on anyone but those two. I had already made mine, and I had seen nothing to convince me I should make another. The Meeple case giving me some doubts did not mean I saw any better cases. Thus, jumping ship made no sense to me.
People as active and aggressive as you deserve a good look. They can be very helpful as town, but as scum... well, I don't need to finish that thought.
It's pretty clear which side of the aggressiveness debate I am on. It's cool and all that you disagree, but I'd hope you don't think this makes me inherently scummy.
That combined with his early Day 3 m.o. seeming to be to defend himself constantly against Meeple's parting shots just makes Elfboy seem more defensive and worried about public perception than ever.
Worried about my perception? What?
Bard had just made a case on me. So I defended myself! It's the right thing to do as town - same thing I'm doing now. I explained why I was uppity at the Meeple thing already - people were taking the words of a Dead Third Party as basis for attacking me, which is GRAAAH.
Back to another Strago post.
This post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25522#msg25522) is another rundown of everyone currently in the game, and to no great surprise Elfboy doesn't feel like voting for the person he apparently suspects the most of being scum.
You mean Snow? Snow was -1 to hammer.
If you mean Bard, maybe you missed
Overall? Yeah, there's a few unsettling things about [Bardiche] to me. But this review of his posts has convinced me there is not enough for him to earn my vote.
He was not my leading candidate. I had looked at him because I thought he might be, but after that look (and hence, at the time of that post), he was not. If he were, I'd have thrown a vote his way for sure. Not sure how you missed this, as finely combing my posts as you seem to be.
Next is Elfboy's whole "I'm going to hammer Snow!" song and dance which has been covered by others.
"Others" being Corwin, and I remain baffled about that people are complaining. Shale and Bard asked me not to hammer. You yourself, said you would be willing to hammer Snow. Why'd you do that "song and dance"?
Maybe because there's nothing scummy about it.
-
The entire 'pie' stuff... Who'd you toss it at the last night and the first night, QR?
The first night I threw a prozac-laced pecan pie at OK because I had to. Last night I hit Andy with a rhubarb pie for sng because it's one of my fave pies. For the pie thing, I have to throw it at someone who votes for me unless no one does in which case I can throw it at whomever I please or choose to not throw it.
-------------------------------
GAH that's a freaking lot of bloody WoT to have to sift through first thing in the morning people.
Anyway, after going back through everyone's logic on the case on Carth and then going back to re-read his posts in entirety, I have to agree that he looks very suspicious. Day 1 was entirely reduced to 'woe is me'. It's not until Tom pokes him towards the end of the day that he actually gets his act together and does something. Frankly, whether your role/ability is helpful to town or not, the fact that he spent more time making sarcastic comments and scathing remarks rather than participate is certainly not helping town.
I'm not prepared to say I fully think he's scum, but I think of his far less as a townie than I did yesterday after the full review.
Also, Elf's logic on why yesterday was not potential LYLO if you look at the possibility of both Bard and Carth being scum makes sense to me. I admit I don't see any scumminess out of Bard really except his holding onto Tom's Words of Wisdom with more security than he really should in this game. But I'm hardly infallable (as evidenced by my flipping vote record). Them both being on the same side does worry me.
Now sifting through the posts took me far longer than I wanted as I was supposed to leave for my mom's half an hour ago. I'm leaving now and will be back this evening.
-
Strago!
Elfboy, on the other hand, plays things so incredibly safe and "reasonable" that there's no paper trail whatsoever. His behind was thoroughly covered by everything he did, Day 1. And yes, sure, it was Day 1, but at the very least this characterizes an attitude and playstyle that I find pretty troubling when I look back upon it.
Mrrf. I didn't vote Day 1, yes. I really don't see why this is such a crime. I feel I got my opinions out there. Yes, I didn't leave a trail on the shiny vote record, for reasons I already gave. I am sorry. But I don't see how this is a significant scumtell at all. After all, people here aren't completely braindead. They remember not voting just as well as voting. Apparently more, in some cases. If I was trying to slip under the radar, I -would- have voted for one of Tom or OK or Delta... who were all non-scum anyway! It would be easy! My not voting attracted more attention than voting for any of them would have done. If not voting was a mistake, it was not one that indicates my allignment, since it is a mistake for both town and scum, apparently.
It's perfectly simple to look back now and say that voting would have been just as scummy as not-voting, but A) you can't have necessarily known that back during Day 1, since people often react differently to these matters from game to game, and B) the issue is a greater one, that being the fact that your Day 1 behavior is indicative of the caution and sense of self-preservation with which you seem to have played for the whole game.
but I feel a jump to someone else this late in the day would be to grasp at straws
Remember my standpoint. My vote was on Meeple, for reasons I gave. Snow, meanwhile, had done his Snow-thing, and certainly had crept up my suspicion list (to the point were I tracked him the next night).
Day by this point was stalling a bit, and it looked like serious cases were not being made on anyone but those two. I had already made mine, and I had seen nothing to convince me I should make another. The Meeple case giving me some doubts did not mean I saw any better cases. Thus, jumping ship made no sense to me.
Sure, the day was stalling, largely because people were getting wrapped up in Meeple/Snow and not proposing new cases or paying any attention to those that were proposed. You played right into the stall; as scum, it wouldn't matter which of the two ended up lynched, and why bother to stick your neck out as a proponent of killing someone who was going to flip town?
People as active and aggressive as you deserve a good look. They can be very helpful as town, but as scum... well, I don't need to finish that thought.
It's pretty clear which side of the aggressiveness debate I am on. It's cool and all that you disagree, but I'd hope you don't think this makes me inherently scummy.
Inasmuch as it's a pretty pat justification for behavior that often is scummy, I sure do.
That combined with his early Day 3 m.o. seeming to be to defend himself constantly against Meeple's parting shots just makes Elfboy seem more defensive and worried about public perception than ever.
Worried about my perception? What?
Bard had just made a case on me. So I defended myself! It's the right thing to do as town - same thing I'm doing now. I explained why I was uppity at the Meeple thing already - people were taking the words of a Dead Third Party as basis for attacking me, which is GRAAAH.
The problem isn't defending yourself. It's defending yourself to a greater extent than you are actually hunting scum, especially because I don't think you ever had more than one (possibly two?) votes on you at any given time. A townie in that position, I feel, should still be rooting out the scum instead of going into panic mode.
This post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25522#msg25522 (http://(http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25522#msg25522)) is another rundown of everyone currently in the game, and to no great surprise Elfboy doesn't feel like voting for the person he apparently suspects the most of being scum.
You mean Snow? Snow was -1 to hammer.
Ah. On this one you've got me. Constructing a post that large and going through the entire thread to do it, I hadn't connected that action of yours with the current votecount. That's my bad.
"Others" being Corwin, and I remain baffled about that people are complaining. Shale and Bard asked me not to hammer. You yourself, said you would be willing to hammer Snow. Why'd you do that "song and dance"?
I feel like I made it pretty clear that I didn't think Snow was all the scummy looking, and that my willingness to drop a hammer was mostly to get this infernal game moving. You, on the other hand -- and as I review, Shale was engaged in this too, a bit -- were engaged in some sort of game of Hammer Hot-Potato despite the fact that you did suspect Snow. Given how much you'd subscribed previously to the belief that lynch-trains like that were foregone conclusions, it just seems to me like you were trying to hedge your bets in a way that, admittedly, I don't quite grasp the logic of*. I think it's the fact that I don't quite get it that makes me suspicious, at the end of the day.
*A preposition is a perfectly good thing to end a sentence with.
-
Hmm. I've decided to look over QR's history in the game. I've been feeling both unable to read her and that she pings on my scum radar at the same time, and I can't quite figure out what that means, so a closer inspection at this point seems prudent. That said, I've had a difficult time putting it together, which may ultimately be because I've come down on the side of thinking that she's town.
You do realize Tom that after the game where you claimed to be a doc day 1 but lied through your teeth that the chances of my believing a day 1 claim out of you are non-existant, right? Just wanted to be sure you realized that. Personally, that makes me more likely to want you dead than not. And I agree with Carth that it screams third party to me. And with the craziness that seems to be lurking with people's comments and half-said abilities, I think a third party role with some ability where the longer they live the better they are makes sense in this game set up.
Putting my money where my mouth is: ##Vote EvilTom
I can't say that I'm particularly comfortable with using this sort of past game behavior -- a game that was... kind of a long time ago, to boot -- to determine lynch choices. Especially since I recall QR being pretty dang upset at Tom back then, this at least semi-emotional reaction and vote strike me as wonky.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24451#msg24451 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24451#msg24451): This post actually strikes me as fairly on the level; trying to explain the lay of the land to Delta is a good thing. The way Excal responded so snippily to Delta, as an instance in opposition to what QR did here, was one of the things that made me suspect him.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24468#msg24468 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24468#msg24468): This I don't like as much. While I understand Day 1 frustrations, the fact that QR just seems resigned to lynching town seems suspect. Play to win, yo. And hey, it's not like lynching scum never happens on Day 1. In Phoenix Wright mafia, we nabbed the Godfather! Sure, part of it is dumb luck. But a shot in the dark is better than lynching someone who has claimed town and whose claim you don't necessarily even disbelieve, you're just annoyed by it. Especially since she uses the fact that his power will apparently confirm his townness after death as a reason to say that even if it is a mislynch, we lose nothing from it. But then ends her post wondering if that is at all true. Without, of course, changing her vote or making any movement to reconsider it, apparently. Mrfff.
This (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24503#msg24503 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24503#msg24503)) is more or less a null read to me. Town or scum easily could've been wanting the day to end, etc.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24667#msg24667 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24667#msg24667): Basic rundown of the NKs and flips Night 1. Yeah, not a lot there that I can read.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24810#msg24810 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24810#msg24810): Mostly just game theory stuff here. Again, not a lot to sink one's teeth into.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24862#msg24862 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24862#msg24862): Here she finally starts talking about some new people, but says a bit on each without actually making much of a case against anyone. The one she seems to suspect most is Bardiche, which strikes me as odd considering her earlier conviction that his roleclaim was a good honest thing. Moreso because she can't even point to any scummy behavior in him; just that his role feels third-party or possibly scummy.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24883#msg24883 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24883#msg24883): When pushed to explain her stance on Meeple a bit more (by me, coincidentally), she responds quite reasonably. After a while the whole Meeple discussion sort of started to whiz over my head somehow or another, though, so I don't really know anymore if I find his defense of Shale to have been that much of an actually scummy tell. I mean, obviously in retrospect it wasn't, since Meeple flipped third party. But whether or not that ever struck me as a legitimate reason to gun for him... hmm. I'm not sure anymore.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25034#msg25034 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25034#msg25034): Now here... hmm. QR breaks the deadlock in votes between Snow and Meeple, tilting it towards the latter. I don't think I find her actual arguments for the vote all that compelling...
His defense of Shale, the inherant difficulty in reading concise arguments in his walls of text tus making it all look like rambling and the line quoted above all add up for me to feel that of all the cases, this one rings closest to me for a possible scum.
Especially significant part bolded. This is... in QR's own words, more of an admission of her own refusal to parse Meeple's actual (and admittedly muddled) content than a statement that he doesn't have any worth considering. Which doesn't look all that great to me. That being said, actually having some sort of argument and breaking that deadlock in favor of someone you honestly thought looked scummier seems much more like a town action than a scum one, to me. Scum could've easily sat back and let either one get taken out, instead of sticking their neck out to choose and getting potentially fingered with the mis-lynch. See my thoughts about Elfboy. She does say that she's still considering Snow a contender for the lynch... but votes tend to speak louder than words. Hrmm.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25082#msg25082 (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25082#msg25082): Comports herself well here, I think. Addresses quite a few different issues, she's already established her vote against Meeple so making new cases against someone else isn't exactly necessary. My only issue with this post is that it introduces her weird anti-LAL policy, the reasons behind which I understand but don't particularly agree with. Her first Day 3 post is mostly an extension of her views on lurking, no need to go over that again since I've made my opinion known.
I... hrmmf. Honestly I'm running out of steam, here, and it doesn't help that QR tends to write large posts. I've just finished re-reading her contributions and I really don't have much of a case to make against her. Even her early vote for Snow came with the caveat that lynching him quickly wasn't particularly in the town's best interest, which was correct.
I will say that I find it somewhat ironic that it's Shale's "lurkerishness" that she cites as a reason she can't read him and therefore suspects him, since she apparently found lurking so harmless before. Not that I don't understand the difference in the situations, here, but yeah. Bit o' irony. Also I disagree with her assessment of Elfboy being so clearly town, which...
... hmm. I guess if I had to finger a scum trio right now, I might go out on a limb and say Elfboy/QR/Shale. Having noticed that QR now glosses over Elfboy so completely... that connects the three of them quite a bit, in my mind. Something about how she gave Shale a pass and yet now suspects him -- but in a way that she's not pushing strongly -- for the same reason speaks of scum camaraderie to me. But maybe I'm just tired and burnt out. I'm not sure. All things considered I'm still most comfortable with voting for Elfboy, and QR and Shale just happen to be sort of circumstantially (and tenuously, but sometimes that's all you have to go on) linked to him.
-
the issue is a greater one, that being the fact that your Day 1 behavior is indicative of the caution and sense of self-preservation with which you seem to have played for the whole game.
I'm cautious by nature. Go read FFT if you don't believe me.
And I disagree with you that non-voting doesn't attract attention. It pretty much always does that I can recall. LAL, etc. People have bitched about it more this game than usual, yes, but there's still no way I'd try to slip under radar by not voting, with such easy trains as OK and Tom to attach myself facelessly to. Go back and read Day 1. What I did does not make sense for scum. (Which doesn't clear me, I understand, but you're acting as if it is a mistake for town and desirable for scum... which is wrong!)
Sure, the day was stalling, largely because people were getting wrapped up in Meeple/Snow and not proposing new cases or paying any attention to those that were proposed. You played right into the stall; as scum, it wouldn't matter which of the two ended up lynched, and why bother to stick your neck out as a proponent of killing someone who was going to flip town?
When you put it that way, yes, scum might have done just what I did. However I defended what I did from a town perspective; do you have a problem with that defence?
Inasmuch as it's a pretty pat justification for behavior that often is scummy, I sure do.
Aggressiveness makes a fine scum cover, too!
Also, I must say, I find it curious that you've come out hard with a "aggressive is the way to be!" stance today, when I don't recall hearing much from it you before. The time for such debates was really earlier in the game, so now it kinda feels like you're just trying to build a case on me based on playstyle. Despite it not being something you... really believe strongly in.
A townie in that position, I feel, should still be rooting out the scum instead of going into panic mode.
I don't really feel like I was in panic mode at all! And I don't see what you wanted me to do. Defend myself LESS? You'd be all over me for that. I feel like I can't win, talking to you. Like you've already decided I'm scum, and make circular arguments based on my being scum meaning all my decisions are based on what scum would do, therefore I am scum!
I've done my share of going over targets for scumhunting. I have plenty of posts doing so.
Given how much you'd subscribed previously to the belief that lynch-trains like that were foregone conclusions, it just seems to me like you were trying to hedge your bets in a way that, admittedly, I don't quite grasp the logic of*.
Well, trying to explain my thought process here...
I had just come to the conclusion that yes, Snow was indeed scummy enough to lynch that day. However, it was clear people still wanted the day to continue. Shale. Bard. You've heard the names. I considered it a courtesy to stay the hammer until we were ready. And not to be "obsessed with my image", but if I'd suddenly jumped on Snow and hammered him without warning, I think people would be a bit upset with me.
-
Mrrf. I just realised something. You're going after me for being obsessed over my image. Which... I don't think I was. But who definitely was? Bard, in his whole claiming on day 2. Now, I don't consider this quite such a high scumtell as you, since I think it's pretty natural for town to not want to appear scummy (appear scummy -> mislynch). However, I find it curious you haven't uttered a peep about this (that I recall, please correct me if I am wrong since this is a quick post and I am not combing all yours to check), and instead consider him to be high on your townie list. It feels like you are a townie relying on gut checks rather than solid arguments at this point, which is suicide. (That or, of course, you are scum, a scum who has chosen his target(s) for LYLO.)
-
Alright, so.
It really feels like discussion's stalled and everything's just going to turn into more walls of text that don't really, I feel, get anywhere productive at this point. Safe to say that everyone has their prime suspects in mind, and the lines have been drawn, so I think it's time to stop dragging this day (and for that matter, this game) out and get down to it already. I'm going to summarize what I think people have said so far for the sake of being concise.
Rat and NEB seem to be the two cases most people have a view on. In particular, on Rat's case is myself, Shale, NEB, and possibly QR (and all of us sans Shale are wary of Corwin as well; not sure how I or others feel about a Corwin push). On NEB's case is Corwin and Strago (and possibly Bardiche? See below, I'm not sure.) Rat's primary suspect lies in Shale, I believe, but to be to the point, since he can't vote that's mostly going to be irrelevant.
I am somewhat unsure where Bardiche stands since he's not said exactly positive things about Rat but voiced sentiment against lynching him due to his votelessness, and he apparently has suspicions but doesn't buy the case on Corwin. His NEB view at this is nebulous to me as well. Pointedly, in any scenario where Bardiche is town, he has to vote with the rest of town to get a lynch done.
I think QR wanted to get one last overview done as well, and possibly NEB (on myself and QR). I also obviously am not speaking for everyone and simply summarizing what I've seen from posted content/suspicions. Obviously if I am incorrect point it out.
But regardless, unless some dramatic new discussion changes, I am announcing the intent to drop a vote in the next 12 hours if no one else has by then (sometime next morning for me). Time to move on, this game's gone long enough.
-
the issue is a greater one, that being the fact that your Day 1 behavior is indicative of the caution and sense of self-preservation with which you seem to have played for the whole game.
I'm cautious by nature. Go read FFT if you don't believe me.
I really try not to compare playstyles from game to game in that way. It's going to be a factor to some extent, sure, but I try not to let it be a massive influence. Especially in your case, since FFT's the only other game in which I've seen you play, as far as I can recall. It just isn't a productive kind of comparison to sit around making, in my mind.
Given how much you'd subscribed previously to the belief that lynch-trains like that were foregone conclusions, it just seems to me like you were trying to hedge your bets in a way that, admittedly, I don't quite grasp the logic of*.
Well, trying to explain my thought process here...
I had just come to the conclusion that yes, Snow was indeed scummy enough to lynch that day. However, it was clear people still wanted the day to continue. Shale. Bard. You've heard the names. I considered it a courtesy to stay the hammer until we were ready. And not to be "obsessed with my image", but if I'd suddenly jumped on Snow and hammered him without warning, I think people would be a bit upset with me.
They might have, but it's also possible that nobody would have batted an eye. Bard's early hammer on Tom Day 1 was viewed as suspicious by some players for about... half a page of the topic, if that? Again, it's the type of action that when viewed on its own is potentially a null read but when set up against the rest of your behavior just looks bad to me.
Mrrf. I just realised something. You're going after me for being obsessed over my image. Which... I don't think I was. But who definitely was? Bard, in his whole claiming on day 2. Now, I don't consider this quite such a high scumtell as you, since I think it's pretty natural for town to not want to appear scummy (appear scummy -> mislynch). However, I find it curious you haven't uttered a peep about this (that I recall, please correct me if I am wrong since this is a quick post and I am not combing all yours to check), and instead consider him to be high on your townie list. It feels like you are a townie relying on gut checks rather than solid arguments at this point, which is suicide. (That or, of course, you are scum, a scum who has chosen his target(s) for LYLO.)
I see a pretty strong difference in that Bard was, in a way, putting himself on the line by claiming his role. I remember quite well how much chaos erupted when ID made his similar claim in the FFT game, for instance. Bard was worried, but at the same time handled both the claim and the execution of the role in ways that struck me as being pro-town.
The rest of your response can be pretty fairly, I think, summed up by your following statement:
I don't really feel like I was in panic mode at all! And I don't see what you wanted me to do. Defend myself LESS? You'd be all over me for that. I feel like I can't win, talking to you. Like you've already decided I'm scum, and make circular arguments based on my being scum meaning all my decisions are based on what scum would do, therefore I am scum!
Alright, I guess that you're correct in that... yeah, most things in this game can be potentially distilled down to a massive WIFOM issue. But when I start with a strong gut check against someone and then find so many points against them, I have a hard time going "oh, sure, my interpretation must be absolutely the opposite of what's actually happening." And as far as how much you should have defended yourself, I think that's a pretty specious claim you're making about what I "would have" done. Have I been nailing people for... not defending themselves?
Oof. There's been a lot of silence since this afternoon. Feel like weighing in, other people? Am I way off the beam with the Elf, here, or do others see it as well?
Ninja'd by Laggy. I pretty much agree with him. Woo.
-
For the record, FFT is indeed my only previous game. And while you're free to ignore previous games, I just boggle at lynching someone for playing style. In LYLO. When that person's record in mafia includes THE SAME PLAYING MENTALITY in a game he was town in. Could I keep the same mentality in this game were I scum? Probably! I dunno how I'd play as scum. But it is logically fallacious that I am scum due to this playing style, since there's a big ol' counterexample.
Have I been nailing people for... not defending themselves?
You're suggesting not defending yourself is okay? Seriously? Because letting it be okay to not defend yourself is like handing scum a free pass. So I dunno if you have been nailing people for that, but you should be!
The rest is in nebulous WIFOM land as you say. But... You really should have a strong case to leverage against someone, not gut. Back 'em into a corner. Have some role backup. Even if you weren't attacking me and therefore I didn't know with confidence that you'd misfired, I'd never trust anyone's gut instinct to help us finger THREE scum from this point on. We've seen what gut instinct does to this point. All of your arguments against me are centred around vague suspicions and disagreements with my playing style. That doesn't cut it, and it's a good way to lose the game. Definitely in this case since I know my allignment, but I wouldn't support lynching anyone else by it, either.
-
Alright, back home and will get a chance to make my last post of the night.
Connections per request. Who do I see as possible scum teams, not just people that I find might be scummy personally was, I believe, the request for all of us. Since I find Cor the strongest for me, I looked into who I thought he might be in cahoots with. What I found has only given more fuel to the fire through which I'm viewing Carth. Looking back over it, Carth is the only person I noticed Cor never picking a point and his attitude has been quite cordial for the most part. Considering he's been a bit thorny with the rest of us, I find the ease of which he glosses over Carth and my own concerns about Cor specifically, make me want to analyze their interactions.
Day 1: Cor's posts are firmly in the area of pushing for content (nothing wrong with that) and pushing for the Tom lynch (went there myself). But it did stand out that his first post is to give a small case for Tom, but not too terribly worded. In his next post, though, he starts a heavy push for Tom and says that he disagrees with Tom's case on Carth. Carth for his part is all over Tom.
Day 2: Cor says jack and dice to Carth except a very nice and cordial reminder to post more since as he has no votes, discussion is all he has.
Day 3: Here things get odd. I've posted them below. Considering what I found in Day 4, this, looking back, did seem worthy of note. Up until the end of Day 3, everything Cor's posted about Carth has been mildly poking him to post more or echoing his conjectures.
And, uh, I don't actually have anything to add to what's been said, really, without combing his posts from the beginning of day 1. And that would give me... day 1 posts. I hope I'll form a better opinion as Excal participates more. Rat's concerns over convenient cases could easily be dispelled or strengthened as we look at what Excal does next day (if he is town and he isn't NK'd, or the rest of us don't decide to lynch-switch to him today; I don't think we should since JR must be lynched).
The Rat section is pretty small, I'm afraid. While I can feel something off about him (specifically, I don't believe Rat was being entirely truthful with us), I don't actually see any slips on his part, and his participation, while on the scarcer side than I'm used to from him, is sufficient content-wise. He also doesn't merely go for the conventional targets. Even though he made the third lurker vote in several minutes for Shale, I can't blame him because Shale is pretty damn suspicious even without lurking. If JR flips as I expect him to, there would be more here.
Day 4: Here's the kicker and what made me really cement the above into more than 'maybe it's coincidence'. Cor says that he was one of the first to put forth the idea that Carth being blocked had something to do with there being no NK. When I went back and looked, he said no such thing. In fact, the only conclusion he drew that he bothered to say was that Carth's gaining a vote might have had something to do with scripted events. This looks more than a bit like trying to distance himself now that the tide is turning against Carth after he'd been pretty soundly considered town before. I can certainly see this course of action if they're scum buddies.
Now, Laggy seems willing to back up his conviction on Carth with a vote. I find myself with no certainties, but I would support the lynch based on what I saw going back through stuff. I still find Cor suspicious, but Carth does to me now, too.
-
Re: QR
Wow. I didn't even catch that. And ironically enough it was Tai who brought up, so very long ago on Day 2, that Corwin's reaction there was drawing a line between him and Rat (how he obsessively made note of Snow's roleclaim and claimed night action)
I sat down and read the case against NEB from Strago, and I am... just... not... seeing it. NEB's defended himself more than adequately in my eyes and nearly every point Strago brought feels incredibly superficial and/or generically laced in "NEB is too careful and non-aggro and doesn't vote!" I myself got on NEB's case for this earlier in the game, but I don't feel it's nearly as excessive to the degree Strago's tried to portray here. And yet while my own suspicions of Strago are based on similar uneasy feelings and process of elimination (at this point, I can firmly say I trust NEB given who I think is scum, and QR and Shale ring less worrisome to me) his overall attack on the elf at this point missing the mark doesn't help him in that regards.
Yeah, at this point, I'm just about ready to lay down a vote on Rat. Association with Corwin still highly suspected. Only reason I'm holding off now is Bardiche, who needs to weigh in now, since as the math has laid out before, this may possibly not get anywhere without him.
-
The case on me stems from night actions, which means people have- and every single point raised could fall under this- gone back, looked at my play, quoted it, and then said 'this is bad.'
I see QR attacking me for day one shit, when I was in fact contributing from my second post (where I attacked Laggy and generally tried to stir shit up and make the day, y'know, happen.) Also, for someone who has gone in the past 'well, Rat's role sucks so it's expected that he's a bit acerbic', this is a lame, self-justifying turnaround.
I think it's ridiculous that both her and Laggy are pointing to a connection between me and Cor based on what essentially remain incredibly minor points, and not to blow my own trumpet or encourage metagaming (although everyone else seems to be doing it), but I'm quite capable of faking a fight in a way more believable way than what they're suggesting. In any case, is it so unreasonable that two people would think alike? Both QR and Laggy are essentially saying that since we never had a serious fight, we must be a team? Am I reading this right? I think I am.
Is this me trying to save my own skin? Yes! It damn well is, you know why etc. As things stand I have wound up suspicious of half the game due to kneejerk OMGUS and the focus on things that are ultimately aside from actual post content. That I may be lynched because I didn't hate on someone who I completely agreed with is retarded.
I've basically dropped the case on Shale at this point and would vote QR on the spot right now, because of all the people attacking me, she's the one who jumped on the latest and seems to have contributed the flimsiest evidence (it's practically a less-thorough rehash of what Laggy said), and I can't see this as anything but an attempt to rush the game to a conclusion. Her posting all game has generally been spotty, too, with a large amount of informative posts compared to actual case-making posts. But I find her LYLO play to be the most damning thing about her.
-
I will not support a Carthrat lynch. I will not vote on Carthrat. My reasoning is as follows:
1) I don't have enough evidence on him and the case against him doesn't feel entirely strong.
2) We're in LYLO. Lynching Carthrat helps us nowhere because the scum wouldn't be down one vote, just one hitman. Well, whooptiefreakin'doo, forgive me if I find that a negligable victory.
At this point, I feel more strongly for NEB (case here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25449#msg25449)), for whom my suspicion only grows with his current defense. In fact, Laggy's getting there as well.
We're in LYLO, we need to thoroughly think this through! I abstained from presenting anything else on the matter until Strago and DHE were done dancin'. There's still Strago's case on QR that has had no defense from QR yet. Are you suggesting we go ahead with a lynch when people still have to defend themselves against accusations, Laggy? You'd better have a pretty damn good excuse here.
It doesn't help I've been suspicious of QR and she's the one immediately supporting Laggy in this absurd train of thought that, "Let's lynch Carthrat because we don't want to wait any longer z___z", without defending herself from Strago's accusations. No, sir, I am far more comfortable with a Laggy Lynch or a QuietRain Lynch than I am with a Carthrat Lynch, especially given that I want to take away one scumvote power.
Yes, Corwin's... Apparent affection for Carthrat may be considered weird. I'll go back through Carth/Cor interaction after this post. What doesn't connect is that QuietRain wants to go for the easier Carthrat lynch (since Laggy voiced support for that one) but does so because apparently she has no certainties about Carthrat. But Laggy is willing to vote on Rat, which is more important than pushing a case for Corwin. Excusable on earlier days, definitely not excusable in LYLO.
While Quiet says he feels more strongly about a Corwin lynch...
Cor: Looking back, I think it may be impossible for me to separate my distaste for the playstyle and my impression of him. The only thing I really have is his too aggressive play and his push on Snow, who frankly was very suspicious.
Apparently she lacks any argument to justify it. Doesn't help I am thinking of Corwin more as Town-With-Absurd-Aggressive-Playstyle. Also:
Carth: Suck role is confirmed by Tai. He’s being acerbic, but that’s Carth, frankly. Nothing new no matter what he’s playing and given the circumstances of this game (no vote and all), I’d be a bit of a curmudgeon as well. As far as content, he’s been putting it out there. I’m not seeing him hanging back or anything. He’s been firm with suspicions and made valid point. I can’t see anything scummy in it as he’s been picking out people that have been acting in ways that really do raise some eyebrows. Thinking townie.
Last view of Carthrat was pretty positive, then she swings to sudden "Carthrat is my choice for LYLO lynch". Seriously, Quiet, like Laggy, you best have a pretty damn good explanation for this behaviour.
There's this gem (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25479#msg25479), which I can only read as a way of trying to get Strago modkilled. Modkilling people is at the mods behest, if you are a town player I see no reason why you are trying to get someone you can't say is scum get modkilled. Besides, I somehow can't see a townie looking for clues on who's scum look at the post date of people and then proceed to subtly push for a modkill by highlighting their inactivity and asking if it's "getting close to modkill".
QuietRain's play is so passive, she hardly has any case on anyone. Yes, there's "I think Meeple is scummy" when everyone trained Meeple, there's "I agree Snow is scummiest" when everyone's going on Snow, and there's "Let's end this day, I'll vote for whoever gets the most votes".
------>
Going to review Laggy's posts, just wanted to throw this out there. I rather spend an extra day of arguing and debating so that we know everyone's suspicions than to end the day right here and now with a very shoddy lynch target.
-
Laggy's entire day has consisted about game mechanics, mathematics, suspicions on Corwin, who he links to Carthrat, and for the rest... No cases. Pretty tunnel visioned into a Corwin/Rat/MTP lynch, even though we... We really don't have a case on Carth, he rather lynches Carthrat. Uh, okay. Sure. I think.
BP and actual Vanilla just seem so starkly in contrast with everyone else; and in particular I have offer a large "harumph" to the way you used it to try to justify your behavior throughout the game, Cor.
Need I remind you of SSBB Mafia, where I was convinced Excal was scum because "vanilla townie is impossible!"? Yeah, I rather not fall in the same trap again and assume that just because someone got spooned with a vanilla role that they are scum.
This also presumes Andrew, in fact, did target Ashdla during that night - and as I read back through Day 2 and his posts in particular,
Care finishing this sentence?
Given that town's train of thoughts (and my own)
The syntactical stuff Strago loves so much. Quoting it.
Now this post here, (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25548#msg25548) I'm not sure what to make of. His interaction towards Corwin makes me wary. Basically, Laggy's expressing that if Jo'ou flips town, Corwin will get hard looks from him. (doesn't follow this up much, instead, goes for Rat and maths)
WIFOM here, but if he wasn't too sure in Snow's being scum, why didn't he build any cases on other people besides me?
I don't really feel like finecombing the rest of his posts, but maybe others will. IDK. I'll do it later on regardless, supposing the day hasn't ended then yet.
-
1) I don't have enough evidence on him and the case against him doesn't feel entirely strong.
Could you explain why you don't feel it's strong? The roleblock to unexplained lack of NK really feels like a smoking gun to me, singlehandedly raising him above everyone else. I laid a case on him, a case to which he has not even responded, just tried to rely on "but you guys thought I was a townie earlier!" Yeah, everyone thought El Cid was a townie early in Smash mafia, too. When the evidence is there, you don't ignore it.
2) We're in LYLO. Lynching Carthrat helps us nowhere because the scum wouldn't be down one vote, just one hitman. Well, whooptiefreakin'doo, forgive me if I find that a negligable victory.
Do the math. I'll assume you're town so I'm not wasting my breath.
We lynch Rat. Scum is down to two. They NK someone, let's say you. Town is down to 4, scum to two. Game goes on.
Alternatively, we lynch non-Rat scum. Scum has one less vote the next day, which is cool and all, but it's no better a situation. Still LYLO. Still "lynch town and lose". (If we lynch wrong here, then we lose two town, and are it's now two scum, two town, victory to scum because it takes three to lynch and you're dead by this point.)
Lynching Rat is exactly the same as lynching any other scum. The order is irrelevant. We must lynch three scum in three days, we do not somehow get a reprieve by letting Rat live longer.
I'd like to see QR defend herself too, yeah. But frankly I am extremely unlikely to vote for her today, since my current thoughts have her not part of a scumteam.
At this point, I feel more strongly for NEB (case here), for whom my suspicion only grows with his current defense.
I thought I addressed the case to your satisfaction earlier? How is your suspicion growing? I really feel I have responded to Strago adequately, so if you disagree, can you explain how?
-
Clarifying a sentence in my middle paragraph, the one in parentheses:
"(If we lynch wrong here, then we lose two town, and it's now two scum, two town, victory to scum because it takes three to lynch and you're dead by this point.)"
-
1) I don't have enough evidence on him and the case against him doesn't feel entirely strong.
Could you explain why you don't feel it's strong? The roleblock to unexplained lack of NK really feels like a smoking gun to me, singlehandedly raising him above everyone else. I laid a case on him, a case to which he has not even responded, just tried to rely on "but you guys thought I was a townie earlier!" Yeah, everyone thought El Cid was a townie early in Smash mafia, too. When the evidence is there, you don't ignore it.
Oh, yes, because it is impossible that scum, after seeing Jo'ou's revelation, didn't think, "Well whaddya know! Let's abstain today, because there's a bigger chance Jo'ou will hit town than scum, so that whoever gets roleblocked is screwed!"
I'm holding possibilities open in mind. Last I recall scum weren't forced to make a kill every night.
I thought I addressed the case to your satisfaction earlier? How is your suspicion growing? I really feel I have responded to Strago adequately, so if you disagree, can you explain how?
I keep looking back at it, your responses, then back at it again... Something about you feels incredibly off. At this point, everyone is suspect, so shouldn't you, y'know... Not be afraid of suspicions until they solidify into a "I feel strongly for DHE lynch"? I'll admit I have nothing to solidify it (yet), but I am giving you extra hard looks, yes.
-
Bah, I'll respond to it, then.
-Day 1... well, I remember finding it odd at the time just how upset he seemed by his role. How he'd snap into anger about it, and out, at the drop of a pin. At first, I thought it was a joke, that he was hamming it up for fun. Now, I think it was an act. Maybe he knew that he'd be angry as town, so pretended to be, and that's why it doesn't look natural?
Early day one was a trial for me. I'd been assigned the world's stupidest role and was none too happy about it. I was thinking about how best to play it, and was pondering trying to overdo how lame my role was. I figured people would actually think I had some compensating role to start, and was hoping others would whip scum into some paranoia of their own. Didn't really have much hope it'd fly, and I pretty much reverted to posting how I normally do as the game went on.
I had considered fakeclaiming something like doc later in the game to drag a kill over to me (possibly made easier with Bardiche running around), but I can't do that with Tai around. Yes, I would've lied as town, sue me. (Bomb was my next choice, but of course the only time a case against me would come up is LYLO.)
-Defends Strago as not-lurking Day 2, and attacks Shale instead. Hmm. Defends him from EVILTOM, at that. Why go to the trouble of defending someone who is pretty lurkerish from a confirmed town?
Because Shale looked worse, and they were both lurky at the time. Also because I had basically zero confidence in Dread Thomas' scumhunting powers. There, I said it straight.
-Feels like he's fanning the flames on Corwin/Tai a bit
Quote
Being an aggro whore is the superior playstyle, which should neatly sum up my opinion on most of Tai's posts.
I was mad at Tai at the time, sorry. I get really testy when people go 'being aggressive is bad', as he was doing, not to mention the logic that went into the people who were against Jo'ou's lynch.
-As initially active he has been, he has faded. Not the direction you want to go in. Day 3 posts, aside from his "yay I can vote!" opener and a closer about making sure we know he is vanilla, total up at three. In all three, discussion of aggression, Corwin, and Tai figure in. He does have... some other stuff, including a case on Bard that feels token-ish, a lookover of Excal which paints him as "You're next!", while going after Snow (like most everyone else).
I actually have no excuse for lack of quantity, fire away if you must, I feel there have been worse offenders with regards to content.
Excal was looking very scummy to me then and I felt I had to put something out there, as Strago had asked earlier. I'd not considered Excal very much until that point in the game.
<->
I'll admit you've put more into this than the others, and I'm not going to disagree with my late day 3 conduct being spotty. The rest I think is essentially a nontell, and you should agree if you study my playing style in general as well as factor in the genuine irritation that comes with this role.
<->
Bardiche: Scum wouldn't do that, I think. Jo'ou's block has a chance of failure, meaning they could no-kill and he'd be all 'well I didn't block anyone' and they'd kick themselves for that.
-
Bard:
By all means, I welcome the hard looks. Just back them up with something more than vague gut instinct please, and listen to my responses.
"Well whaddya know! Let's abstain today, because there's a bigger chance Jo'ou will hit town than scum, so that whoever gets roleblocked is screwed!"
Scum, pass on a NK and wait for a 50% roleblocker to actually hit someone? Someone town? Someone town who will report being roleblocked? (else it's pointless; note that in some setups, vanillas don't even know a roleblocker hit them) That's... out there. Yes, it's not impossible. But it's ridiculously unlikely.
(Ninja'd by Rat on this.)
Rat:
Early day one was a trial for me. I'd been assigned the world's stupidest role and was none too happy about it. I was thinking about how best to play it, and was pondering trying to overdo how lame my role was. I figured people would actually think I had some compensating role to start, and was hoping others would whip scum into some paranoia of their own.
*nods* I suppose that's possible. I will say that I do not approve of misleading others, generally. Just because while it can throw the scum off balance, it can also invite needless suspicion on yourself later, e.g. Excal in Smash. Misleading is okay if you are Zombie Captain K, with nobody to call you up to the lynching block for it later. Aside from that? Don't do it, please. So I can accept this defence... but don't really want to give you a pass for it.
Because Shale looked worse, and they were both lurky at the time. Also because I had basically zero confidence in Dread Thomas' scumhunting powers. There, I said it straight.
I agree with you about Tom, with all due respect to him. However, it's still odd.
-Defending Strago in general. He was pretty darned lurkerish, and he admits as much himself. Various others, with more "scumhunting powers" than Tom as you put it, called Strago out too. I disagree that Shale was worse, I think (would need to look at the exact time of post again to be sure) but it's moot. Strago was not worth defending, the dude needed to post more.
-Defending anyone from Tom. Generally, people should defend themselves; lurkers especially. It's cool to shoot down other players over their attacks, since you can expose scum through poor arguments. But Tom wasn't worth shooting down either.
The combination is strange, and the most logical explanation I can think of is that you had a vested interest in defending Strago. As you could not possibly know Strago's alignment as town thanks to your own roleclaim, this is strange indeed.
I was mad at Tai at the time, sorry. I get really testy when people go 'being aggressive is bad', as he was doing, not to mention the logic that went into the people who were against Jo'ou's lynch.
Again, I can accept anger as a possible explanation, but I can not give you a pass for it. This and misleading townies I do not consider valid playstyles, I consider errors in judgement.
-
DHE: Time to quote myself whee
On DT's post in general- I don't really agree that Strago has been terribly lurky, and he's already given a decent excuse. Shale is something else, as I just went through. I feel that Day 1 and Day 2 are, in fact, different things (only ONE of these days had three people behaving like morons in it), and that you can't very well say 'what QR is doing is usually good, except this time, when it's bad.''
This rates as a defense? I was basically hyping a Shale lynch over a Strago lynch. I don't think I really came strongly over to his side here, and am naturally confused as to why you think so. :|
-
"Well whaddya know! Let's abstain today, because there's a bigger chance Jo'ou will hit town than scum, so that whoever gets roleblocked is screwed!"
Scum, pass on a NK and wait for a 50% roleblocker to actually hit someone? Someone town? Someone town who will report being roleblocked? (else it's pointless; note that in some setups, vanillas don't even know a roleblocker hit them) That's... out there. Yes, it's not impossible. But it's ridiculously unlikely.
No, but Jo'ou WILL mention who he's roleblocked if he did roleblock, and that'd set the stage for incrimination. (because scum know Jo'ou isn't lying and know he's town!)
Since the philosophy behind such a move is endless WIFOM, let's not get into that. Carthrat arguing against his own case is uh... Questionable, since he's uh, dispelling one of the restraints I have against lynching him.
I'm still more comfortable with a QR lynch based on the findings above.
Elfboy, I would be pushing for your lynch if I had anything substantial to back it up with.
For now I want to hear QR, Shale and Corwin.
-
Uh, seriously, Bard? I don't have a lot to say asides from "ahaha scum passing up an NK kill" and "oh yeah I have no case at all, all those posts I made back there were for fun". If you don't think my cases were substantial enough, that's fine. If you think I am somehow trying to curtail discussion and quickly skip to a mislynch, you know what, I got nothing to say to that. I'm tired of things being dragged ridiculously out, pretty much everyone now has a rock-hard opinion on who's where; if you feel that damn strongly about things lay down the vote and move things out already. If you think this is scummy behavior, well too bad; I don't (oh yeah, Rat actually agrees with me on this sentiment during Day 4, and he's my main lynch candidate!)
I find the evidence against Rat far more damning/something I'd be willing to stake on than generic sentiments of "QR has been playing too passively, she must be scum" (or insert NEB here too for that matter). I find Corwin's association with Rat to be very suspicious in this regard, more so than any other two players I can see without totally stretching things out into the air. I don't know how else to better explain this and I feel more giant WoTs or WoQs is an absurd waste of time at this point. I'd be fine with either lynch, but Rat's part in the role madness of Night 2 makes me that more certain of him, votelessness or not. That's pretty much how it goes.
If you're really going to drag this out another 24 hours I'm going to say right now that I won't have a whole lotta to say during it.
-
Speculation follows!
All right, I've been thinking. Specifically, about who the scum team is. And I want to get this out here now, since there's no guarantee I live through the night, etc.
I believe it's Carthrat, Corwin, and Strago.
Rat and Corwin I have already gone over, as have others. I won't restate it. However, how does Strago figure into this? Sure, he's been a lurking all game, - not really a great sign to begin with - but what really did it for me is reviewing Day 4 under the assumption that Rat, Corwin, and Strago are indeed the scumteam.
The trio needs one more mislynch to win. They choose me as their target. For a while I was wondering why; why me? Sure, avoiding Laggy and QR to a lesser extent I can understand: they've looked towniest, Laggy in particular. But why me and not Shale/Bardiche? Then I realised the answer.
Bardiche.
With his double-vote, Bardiche is the key townie to convince, worth two of the rest of us when pulling off the mislynch. And who did Bardiche voice suspicion of yesterday? Well, Excal headed his list, and may have been in scum's plans until Andrew did the deed he did. But I was second. Hence, I became THE target to gun for. All scum would have to do is convince Bardiche that someone he already felt apprehensive about was scum.
And who would make this argument? Rat? Oh, no. With my laying the argument on Rat, that would stink of OMGUS. Corwin? Already had it in for me, not to mention town might not so easily follow his bludgeoning lead a second time. Which left one man. Strago. Strago, the too-busy-until-now "townie" coming out of the woodwork to lay one hell of a case on me, the best he could muster. To lay a case on me that tried to cast every one of my actions as something scum would do. To lay a case on me that attacked my unaggressive style... an odd complaint for Strago, but one that makes perfect sense when you realise the argument was concocted with help from scumbuddies Corwin and Rat. And a case which, in the eyes of unbiased ol' me, was pretty stretchy and relied on the sudden, gutcheck belief that I was scum before he even started.
Adding more fuel to this theory? Strago, in his posts he's made today, has gone to great lengths to note Bard is a townie. He says it both at the start of the day, and notes it again when he criticises my suspicion of Bard, one of the towniest in his eyes. It's as if he's implicitly saying, "Bard, you're a great guy. I don't like that elf; you don't like that elf. Let's vote for him!"
This theory isn't bulletproof; these thoughts can and should be re-examined. But it's certainly an appealing one to me at the moment. It just makes so much sense.
-
Just woke up and played catch up. And frankly, what kind of crack are you ON Bard?
enough evidence on him and the case against him doesn't feel entirely strong.
2) We're in LYLO. Lynching Carthrat helps us nowhere because the scum wouldn't be down one vote, just one hitman. Well, whooptiefreakin'doo, forgive me if I find that a negligable victory.
Are you actually and honestly saying that even if Carth were scum, you'd rather hit someone else in the HOPE they're scum, too, because he can't freaking vote? Did you miss the part of the game where hitting scum (ANY scum) is what we're trying to do? ANY scum has got to go. We're in LYLO! Accidently hitting town loses us the game, Bard! Can you PLEASE explain the logic of why you're advocating letting a scum live?
And as for Strago, what exactly were you wanting me to respond to? He says he would be going out on a limb to say I was scum but only pings me because he suspects the Elf and thinks I'm on the same side. Where are you getting that he's making a case for me to be scum on my own merit? The only thing he's really said is that I haven't been playing very assertively. And perhaps not, but frankly, I don't play that way. His point that I'm not very 'in your face' is accurate. I don't believe being gung ho does anything but get you tunnel visioned and unable to see other things trying not to be noticed. I do play in a more laid back style, which is why I don't often game here. It's not really a conductive way to play when everyone else is very intense. But it was Suicide Squad and I couldn't resist.
So, tl;dr from Bard, why did you just advocate letting someone live even if they were scum because they can't vote? And why are you twisting Strago's comments into being a 'QR is scum' post instead of an 'I think Elf is scummy, and based on that, QR looks bad to me'?
And I agree with Laggy. If Bard can answer these relatively quickly, I am not in favor of dragging the day out much longer. Tai flies in today and I have a ton of stuff that I need to get done before I go pick him up from the airport. I'll be on for most of what's left in my morning, but after that it'll be hit or miss if I'll be around to see a response.
-
Are you actually and honestly saying that even if Carth were scum, you'd rather hit someone else in the HOPE they're scum, too, because he can't freaking vote? Did you miss the part of the game where hitting scum (ANY scum) is what we're trying to do? ANY scum has got to go. We're in LYLO! Accidently hitting town loses us the game, Bard! Can you PLEASE explain the logic of why you're advocating letting a scum live?
Oh yeah, just because I see Bardiche raising a fuss about this, I want to nip this in the bud right now. Bard = town and Rat = scum is scenario 3 (with 3 scum total, this similarly is not disputable), as I've said. If Rat gets lynched in such a scenario, and Bard gets killed overnight (worst possible scenario), we'll have 4 townies the next day and 2 scum. In other words, not a loss. Even with Rat's weightlessness, nailing scum is still living to see another day and a chance to win this game. The math checks out on this and is undebatable.
So saying you don't want to lynch Rat because it will have no impact is completely absurd. Scum need to die today or we lose. Period.
-
Are you actually and honestly saying that even if Carth were scum, you'd rather hit someone else in the HOPE they're scum, too, because he can't freaking vote? Did you miss the part of the game where hitting scum (ANY scum) is what we're trying to do? ANY scum has got to go. We're in LYLO! Accidently hitting town loses us the game, Bard! Can you PLEASE explain the logic of why you're advocating letting a scum live?
Because I don't believe Carthrat is as scummy as you all say. (ie: I don't think he's scum at the moment)
why are you twisting Strago's comments into being a 'QR is scum' post instead of an 'I think Elf is scummy, and based on that, QR looks bad to me'?
Have you been paying attention? I advocated my distrust in you since Day 3.
And I agree with Laggy. If Bard can answer these relatively quickly, I am not in favor of dragging the day out much longer.
Mrf. I don't really like getting pressured into laying down a vote. The theories so far seem sound, and the only thing I can hold against it is possibly scum abstaining from a kill, but maybe I'm reading too much into it...
Screw it. If we lose as town, then good game to scum. You played an excellent game.
##VOTE: Carthrat
-
If QR and NEB are scum (or some other scumteam I cannot fathom) than GG to them, they played ridiculously well. Time to see where this gets us.
##Vote: Carthrat
-
Votecount: Holy tuna someone voted
Carthrat (3): Bardiche, Anonymous, Laggy
With 8 alive it takes 5 to lynch.
-
DHE comes to this conclusion after no doubt paying close attention and watching me slam bardiche all game, right up into LYLO, and encouraging him to actually make up his own damn mind rather than rely on other people, whilst Laggy still continues on about some connection that isn't even there.
Oh wait ninja lol there we go.
-
I also take offense. Scum didn't need to play ridiculously well this game to win. *Every single day* was overshadowed by lunatic play except for LYLO, where I freely admit now I would've lynched myself if I was someone else. But whatever.
Man, fuck my sig, I *am* bitter.
-
##UNVOTE: Carthrat
Yeah, screw it. Second thoughts forthcoming.
-
Votecount:
Carthrat (1): Laggy, Bardiche, Anonymous
With 8 alive it takes 5 to lynch.
-
....what.
Okay, either Bard's going to now move a lynchtrain on me or NEB. Or something, you know what, I don't even know anymore.
Vote's not changing barring massive massive convincing circumstances.
-
Now, there's something in my personality that makes me submit to pressure. I am aware of this. You may all now proceed with "oh man, Bardiche is such a lamer for stalling the game".
But you know? There's three people pushing for a Carthrat lynch.
DHE.
Laggy.
QR.
That leaves the following opinions out of view:
Corwin.
Shale.
Strago voiced... No opposition nor support for this lynch, but he's already pointed at DHE/QR as being potential scum.
See where I'm going here? My own, personal belief is that DHE and QR are pretty scummy and I am suspicious of them, gut jerking and everything. Now why the hell should I let myself get pressured into lynching Carthrat when I do not support this lynch? Fine, fine, we may lose because we end up lynching the wrong person.
But I don't want to feel bad for being pressured into voting and then losing. At least let me lose while voting on a target I sincere believe in.
QuietRain, Laggy, I don't care if you're going to be around for discussion afterwards or whatever. I want to make a lynch I support.
EDIT:
Has Carthrat's "ohnoez I'm bitter" influenced me a bit? I really hate the part where when you lynch someone they go all "._. oskrew". It makes me want to push the lynch through just to hush them up and get it over with because I don't know whether people are honestly annoyed or are making a lame attempt at emotional and psychological warfare to cause a "You lynch scum, but you don't feel any better" scenario. But right now, I want to hear Corwin, I want to hear Shale. I want to hear if Strago supports such a lynch.
-
Oh my freaking god man, the posts before this state exactly where everyone stands.
Strago is out for NEB. Corwin is also out for NEB. Shale is on Rat's case. You don't believe me? I'll put up the exact posts, next post forthcoming. This drag drag drag discussion is infuriating me, I can understand YOU not being sure on a case but practically everyone else has laid out where they are and not seeing that smacks me of absurdity and glossing over posts.
-
Bardiche is my hero <3
Laggy, stop being so frigging thick. Your entire case on me is stupid and *you know it*, you're just using it as some kind of justification to end the game already. Don't you think it's not even slightly odd that nobody at all actually called me out on this day 3, especially when it's so perfect? No, people, including those who were all like 'don't wanna vote for Jo' pretty much let that slide in order to let the straight town mislynch through, enabling them to follow up with this bullshit lynch on me. Frankly, I wish I'd seen it earlier. Gonna go back and look at who's actually responsible for this, since I'm now sure this is what happened. >_<
<->
Bardiche, while I'm here, I'll admit my entire rant was because with those votes on me, I assumed the game was over and scumhammer was imminent. My urge to rant cannot be contained under those circumstances. I would pretty much never do that on any other day, but today is special.
-
Shale: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25788#msg25788
He's just a hilarious national stereotype. Come on, a heavily-accented Australian supervillain named CAPTAIN BOOMERANG? I can't not love that.
Anyway. I haven't had a lot of time to reread yet, but looking at this logically, my top suspect is Carthrat. Not for textual-analysis reasons, mind, I've already said he checks out pretty well on those. But I've been wrong about that on everybody but Delta and OK, so I'm not trusting my powers of analysis very far. However, I have to look at him funny because the only objective evidence in this entire game points at him: there was no kill on the night he was roleblocked by a townie, and the only other kill-stopping power that's been claimed has not triggered. Hence, the options for Night 2 are: Andrew chose not to kill (unlikely, given how trigger-happy he seems to have been); Andrew and scum targeted the same person (possible, I guess?); Andrew was roleblocked and didn't say anything because it would have drawn attention to his vigness (possible); and the person who used a potential kill-stopping power did in fact stop the kill.
Corwin: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25674#msg25674
My suspects for now, at the start of the day? DHE, pretty much. He feels off with his defensiveness whenever I would ask him something, and the wait pre-hammer was just strange. I'll do it! I will! I really will! Just seemed weird.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25839#msg25839
Laggy: I found DHE suspicious even before, and as the rest of my suspects drop like flies he remains the scummiest-looking of all those who still live. The waiting on the hammer, making sure we know just how much he's with town and willing to do it but not just yet, the endless discussions of essentially metagaming issues which contribute to a sense of presence but not so much to viable content... even his attitude puts me off, laughable as it is to hear me say that. Incidentally, Meeple's analysis of the scum team does not play a particularly important role for me, here.
Strago: Read the last page or two, giant posts against NEB.
-
Laggy, stop being so frigging thick. Your entire case on me is stupid and *you know it*, you're just using it as some kind of justification to end the game already. Don't you think it's not even slightly odd that nobody at all actually called me out on this day 3, especially when it's so perfect? No, people, including those who were all like 'don't wanna vote for Jo' pretty much let that slide in order to let the straight town mislynch through, enabling them to follow up with this bullshit lynch on me. Frankly, I wish I'd seen it earlier. Gonna go back and look at who's actually responsible for this, since I'm now sure this is what happened. >_<
Man, Rat, you can call it stupid as many times as you want, you're not really budging me on how I feel about it.
The fact that it was completely overlooked on Day 3 and "it's so perfect" probably has largely to do with the fact that everyone was dogpiling on Snow that day, yourself included. Hell, you even used the roleblock weirdness to twist it around and make Snow look scummy for -not dropping a case on you!-
-
Well, yes, we might as well all go angry and mad and infuriated at this game. I like trying to play in a way that does not unduly cause grievance to others, but I also don't want to have to cause grievance to myself by doing something I do not want to do.
Strago is out for NEB, so is Corwin. That's cool.
So what do they think of the Carthrat lynch?
----->
Rat, you'll have to forgive me for not being sure whether that's an attempt to gain my favor and avoid a lynch today if I happen to get convinced or what. >_>
-
Putting my money where my mouth is and crossing my fingers. ##Vote Carth
-
I hate speaking in place of people so I will not. I can't recall Strago voicing a stance on Rat offhand. However, I'm pretty sure Corwin's feelings on Rat can be summed up in this quote here:
The case on Rat? Well, I believe I was the first who mentioned the possibility of Rat being blocked from making the kill. But it really is the only thing (outside him thinking much like I do, which none of you care about) that I find truly suspicious of him in our current situation.
(Incidentally QR later fired off a note saying that Corwin did not in fact point the possibility out, but that's not directly relevant to his stance on Rat.)
Apologies for getting riled up there and just headdesking. This game is driving me insane, and to be frank, Bard, if you're town, once again you are the only freaking person who can move this day on. If you want to deliberate more on your own, sure; but I really feel there's not a lot much other people here have to add, since everyone's taken positions and drawn the lines, as it were.
In a more lighthearted tone,
Hey Rat: You have a right to be a bitter if I'm wrong, feel free to chew me out endlessly over it, I'm sure you'll find it karmic justice. =p
-
BECAUSE IT WAS, if you are a town roleblocker, you BLOCK SUSPICIOUS PEOPLE WHO YOU HAVE CASES ON ARGH! How is not retarded to do otherwise? This hunch crap is a lame method of playing and you know it. I stand by Snow behaving in an incredibly scummy and anti-town fashion regardless of his flip.
And given there was significant let's-not-lynch-snow sentiment that day, YES, I DO find it surprising that nobody at all bothered to call on this.
<->
Bardiche, I freely admit I will use any dirty trick in the book right now to avoid getting lynched, and I know most of them. Since my first one apparently worked, you can't blame me for plugging a good thing.
QR = scum 100%, kill her now plz bardiche.
-
It's driving me insane as well, Laggy. Basically, I am here, with a bunch of people I all have come to like (except you, Carthrat, you play nasty games T_T) and then I have to lynch one of them, knowing they'll very likely take it very personal, burst off in rage and then probably come with something akin to "this is why I never play here".
So when people constantly say "You are the one that has to decide!" I'm going all orz emo because now to the fate of another's enjoyment rests on my shoulders because if I lynch a townie he'll probably go orz omg i never play agin h88888.
-
I am on Rat's case and Bardiche's vacillation is making him look that much worse to me, especially what with the error to my earlier math being pointed out to me.
Don't you think it's not even slightly odd that nobody at all actually called me out on this day 3, especially when it's so perfect?
Ahem?
Other things I need to consider if I get another chance to post this game day: Excal, Strago, Carthrat (who doesn't look suspicious to me offhand, but when someone is roleblocked and a kill disappears on the same day, this should require deeper analysis by default).
I thought the Snow case was stronger, as I elaborated later in the day. It was still there then, it's there now and stronger given our awesome scumhunting-through-text abilities.
-
Don't you think it's not even slightly odd that nobody at all actually called me out on this day 3, especially when it's so perfect?
Don't be foolish, Rat. Shale said it himself, and I believe I did too? Until all the roles were on the table, there wasn't enough evidence to go after you. There might have been a doc. A second (town) roleblocker. The vig might have been a one-shot. Ash might have been a bizarre target for the vig, instead of someone he turned out to have been audibly suspicious of. Now that those possibilities are off the table, you look very bad.
##Vote: Carthrat
At this point, I think I've seen enough. I feel Rat is flailing. I trust Laggy. I've made the best case to defend myself and my views today I think I can. If both Laggy and I are wrong, well, hell. Good game to the scum indeed. I readilly admit I have nooo idea who you are if you don't include Rat in your ranks.
Massively ninja'd. QR's in on it too. That doesn't change my mind. QR has generally seemed helpful to me too, and the recent arguments against her I just have not bought. Vote stands.
-
BECAUSE IT WAS, if you are a town roleblocker, you BLOCK SUSPICIOUS PEOPLE WHO YOU HAVE CASES ON ARGH! How is not retarded to do otherwise? This hunch crap is a lame method of playing and you know it. I stand by Snow behaving in an incredibly scummy and anti-town fashion regardless of his flip.
And given there was significant let's-not-lynch-snow sentiment that day, YES, I DO find it surprising that nobody at all bothered to call on this.
Honestly? I don't recall a lot of let's-not-lynch-Snow sentiment, I think that was pretty much limited to Andy (who never supported it post meltdown) and Strago (who said himself he prefers not to jump on the main lynchtrain). That's not really flying as an excuse to me, although I won't deny that I am bewildered that no one pressed harder on your roleblock + no second kill that day even with that. I've said as much.
Unfortunately, that doesn't change the fact that that evidence looks incredibly bad on you. And that is NOT a hunch. The only reason I can possibly accept for it and clearing you is that scum and Andy both hit Ashdla that night (scum not NKing or Andy not vigging = remote possibilities I don't buy). I can't really think of another way to phrase this. You either buy into that evidence or you don't. It itself is not based on hunches or playstyles or anything like that, it's about as plain as you can get. And the entire reason I'm pushing for such a case is because it is NOT prone to such gut-relying like things.
-
You're hating on me because I don't know how to love, Bardiche? That hurts. I'm really very friendly, you know. Ask anyone but Laggy or Corwin.
Like Shale and others say, the lines are drawn in the sand, if you're going to vote for me, do it now and I won't be unable to sleep due to the tension tonight (it's 2am, you realise how long this game is keeping me up? And I go back to school tomorrow, too.)
-
Votecount:
Carthrat (3): Laggy, QR, NEB, Bardiche, Anonymous
With 8 alive it takes 5 to lynch.
-
You're hating on me because I don't know how to love, Bardiche? That hurts. I'm really very friendly, you know. Ask anyone but Laggy or Corwin.
Like Shale and others say, the lines are drawn in the sand, if you're going to vote for me, do it now and I won't be unable to sleep due to the tension tonight (it's 2am, you realise how long this game is keeping me up? And I go back to school tomorrow, too.)
Sorry, had to massively lol at that for a moment. <3 you Rat, don't lie.
Otherwise I agree with Rat's sentiment, which is probably just about the only thing we agree on right now! (That is, you should vote. Sometime. The agony's not just on you, Bard, it's on all of us. Ahem.)
-
... Is Rat telling me to end the game for him? ...
I'm so terribly confused right now. All I hope is that we can conclude this damn game in friendly spirits and we'll all hold hands and sing and laugh as we build a oh screw it.
##VOTE: Carthrat
I'll love you even in death, Carthrat. :(
-
It's driving me insane as well, Laggy. Basically, I am here, with a bunch of people I all have come to like (except you, Carthrat, you play nasty games T_T) and then I have to lynch one of them, knowing they'll very likely take it very personal, burst off in rage and then probably come with something akin to "this is why I never play here".
So when people constantly say "You are the one that has to decide!" I'm going all orz emo because now to the fate of another's enjoyment rests on my shoulders because if I lynch a townie he'll probably go orz omg i never play agin h88888.
No no no Bard, I would like to think that in our current roster of players we don't have people who are going to take things that hard. Seriously. Don't let that get in the way of you making a move and being assertive in Mafia. This is still a bloody game in the end, no one's going to h8 and pester 4 life. The fact that I'm trying to be a little more light-toned about it is to ease your feelings in that regard. Christ, man. =p
NINJA'D BY HAMMER
-
Final final votecount:
Carthrat (5): Laggy, QR, NEB, Bardiche, Anonymous
"I'm harmless!" the victim cried. "You all know that! I got beaten up by children once (as none of you will let me forget!) I've hurt none of you, can't you let me be?"
"You DID help kill Count Vertigo yesterday," someone with an Australian accent pointed out.
"Yeah," a man with a metal mask chimed in, "and after he talked us into letting you vote for the day too. What kind of gratitude is that? Clearly the actions of a vile terrorist."
"I think we're agreed," said the Wall. "Arthur Light, you're guilty of conspiracy and sentenced to death." With that, she shot him right through the head. And so concluded the vainglorious life and death of Doctor Light. Yet a search of his possessions and of his cell turned up nothing untowards. He was, as he claimed, completely harmless.
Carthrat--Doctor Light, AKA Arthur Light (Town Voteless)--was lynched!
This left very few suspects indeed, and everyone went to bed that night in an uneasy state of mind, knowing that one more loss could seal their fate...
...as, in fact, it did. The influential Thugee assassin Ravan was killed overnight, which left the prison hopelessly in the conspirators' hands. They wasted no time in eliminating their remaining opponents...except for one, who was mysteriously not to be found...
The game is over! Scum win! Perfect game!
Strago--Duchess, AKA Lashina (Self-aligned Bulletproof Survivor)--also wins!
---
Well, there you go. Role breakdown and night actions to come. Start your ranting.
-
*cuddles to Bard*
Yeah, that was mean, I know. We luvs you, promise! But a scum's gotta do what a scum's gotta do!
And Laggy, do you not remember when I told you when you were over here that I lie like ze dog? ;)
-
Ohhhhhh I'm going to find a way to get back for that. Seriously. u_u
I am obviously way too nice in Mafia if I drew no heat at all and got scum-puppeted the entire game. Man.
-
Nice job, Strago.
-
You know what sucks? Rat saying, "I'll use every dirty trick in the book to stay alive" was the last drip.
I was already going the NEB/QR way (I've been damn vocal about this), and Corwin, mrf, he tricked me good.
Damn you guys. :P I knew I should've just pushed through for a QR lynch.
-
It was a very difficult situation for you, even believing that. You'd have to make a good argument that wouldn't push Shale onto our side.
Otherwise yeah. Seconding Laggy's hammer post generally. Don't take anything that happens in mafia personally. ^_^ We're just having fun. Hope you continue to play, honestly. As much as I find you infuriating at times. :p
-
Strago, congrats, you felt off and lurkery all game but I couldn't make an easy case on you so....
Re: Tai, I honestly didn't aim for him with that post he cited as the reason of his hate, but generally the people who moved from Snow to Meeple day 2.
And today was so busy I didn't get a chance to post from work, and then it took me time to get home due to a traffic accident. Which probably saved me, too.
P.S.
Rat! We should play as a team again, we really do think alike~
-
Cor: Shut up. :V
-
Hope you continue to play, honestly. As much as I find you infuriating at times. :p
After every game I say the next game is the last one. The only thing I take trouble with is the "BEFORE I GO, I MUST INFLICT AS MUCH MORALE DAMAGE AS POSSIBLE" some of the townies have.
But yeah, you COULD have thrown the lynch back on me if I tried to get one of you two lynched, because no one but me seemed to see the QR case Strago and I made.
Corwin, damn you. I gutjerked you to "playstyle". Which it was; Playstyle to WIN AT SCUM.
-
Cor: Shut up. :V
-
Ohhhhhh I'm going to find a way to get back for that. Seriously. u_u
I am obviously way too nice in Mafia if I drew no heat at all and got scum-puppeted the entire game. Man.
How about we settle it over a game of UNo. *grin*
-
How about we settle it over a game of UNo. *grin*
You may soon regret those words, because I have the power of CHINA on my side now.
-
YOU PEOPLE FAIL FOR NOT GOING AFTER COR IN DAY 4. That is all. ^_^
In spite of my breakdown, I actually had a ton of fun, particularly on day 3. It was pretty amusing, and I expected people would, you know, actually look over Corwin after he put his foot on the mud in his one-track pursuit (which I gleefully goaded. Yes, that was on purpose, I was being a bastard).
Also, Strago is always right. He was right about what I was trying to do, and he was right about the scumteam. Just really didn't matter for him anymore.
-
Next time I will try to be decisive, and erase this indecisive personality I have. :v I always worry about WHAT IF I-- so let's try and see how that works out.
Also, if there's anyone that wants to settle our indifferences over a game of Chinese chess, regular chess, scrabble (mmm, scrabble...) or what have you, PM me on IRC or here? :v This talk of fun games to do to settle Mafia differences appeals to me.
-
After every game I say the next game is the last one.
I say this to Rat after every mafia game, too.
-
You haven't said it yet
-
After every game I say the next game is the last one.
I say this to Rat after every mafia game, too.
Will you play next game? I need a chance to get back at you.
-
Roles
Andy:
Black Thorn: You are Black Thorn, AKA Elizabeth Thorne, a compassionless killer for hire whose present target is a member of the Suicide Squad played by Corwin. You've infiltrated the team's home base to make sure that your target is dutifully interred--only to find the team succumbing to internal strife and an unknown cabal of murderers lurking amongst them. You don't know which side of the internecine fighting your target is on, and it doesn't matter: you are a Lyncher and cannot achieve victory unless your target is killed before you are.
Your prowess at tracking and murdering unsuspecting victims also makes you a Vigilante. You may attempt to kill one player during each night phase if you choose to do so. You cannot pierce bulletproof status (if such a role exists in the game).
Of course, since you're not actually part of the Squad, using an alternate identity would be advisable in order to allay suspicion: try that of Black Orchid (AKA Susan Linden-Thorne, funny how those parallels work out). Adopting a team member's identity functionally places your survival with the Squad's, of course, which means that--
You win with the Town (well, as long your target's dead).
Standard vig--with an extra win condition attached.
-
Snow:
Count Vertigo: You are Count Vertigo, AKA Count Werner Vertigo (yes, that's actually your name). Last living heir to the throne of a tiny, fictional eastern European country called Vlatava, you were trained by the KGB as an assassin during the Cold War. Oh yes, you're also extravagantly bipolar. It's a pretty eclectic package, overall. As your name suggests, you can render foes incapacitated with dizziness, and you also have some capacity for flight.
You are a Roleblocker. You may choose to target one player during the night phase; if said player has a power role, any attempt to use it during that night will fail (passive roles will simply be negated for the night and the following day). However, due to your crippling manic-depression, you have a 50% chance of just being too god-damned depressed to do anything. You will be notified of your status at the end of each game-day.
You win with the Town.
Snow probably did the best thing he could with this role by blocking Carthrat. Not that letting him vote was Snow's intent.
-
Carthrat:
Doctor Light: You are Doctor Light, AKA Arthur Light, perennial failure villain. Despite possessing enough firepower to burn a hole through a human being's torso, you are a coward and almost totally ineffectual in a fight. You are a dweeb; no one likes you and no one listens to you.
This makes you Voteless. Talk all you want, but you can't make a concrete contribution to the votecount beyond convincing other players to adopt your point of view. You are free to explain this fact to your fellow players, but whether they'll believe you is another matter altogether. Look on the bright side, though: with this powerlessness comes the knowledge that everyone else in the game is more special than you. That's good for something...right?
You win with the Town.
My apologies for what's probably the cruelest role in the game. I'm sure this is karma for PR Mafia in some manner.
Yes, Rat was pure voteless and nothing else. I expected some metagaming based off this. I didn't expect people to totally ignore Tai's confirmation that Rat was purely voteless. What the hell?
-
Ashdla:
Enchantress: You are The Enchantress, AKA June Moon, a mild-mannered woman possessed by an evil spirit bearing a suspicious resemblance to the Wicked Witch of the West. All the powers of the occult are at your command--though considerably restrained in order to keep your sadistic alter-ego from going on a killing spree. Given this, you have only one ability at your disposal:
You are a Power Detector. You can scan one other player during each night phase and determine whether or not they have a power role--but not what it is. Anyone possessing a power role will scan as Positive; vanilla players (regardless of alignment) will scan as Negative.
You win with the Town.
Mostly useless. For the record, only Excal would've scanned as vanilla.
-
Excal:
Javelin: You are Javelin, AKA...uh, real name unknown, as it turns out. Actually a pretty minor figure in the comics, your only demonstrated gimmick was...throwing Javelins. Wowsers. Wikipedia informs me that you were a German Olympic athlete prior to turning to a life of crime. This makes your role title unintentionally apt, as it turns out (I chose the role title before doing my research).
Your power role is Illinois Nazi. You are not from Illinois. You are not a Nazi. And actually, you don't have any useful powers at all. But you do have a wacky title that'll make people go WTF on seeing the cardflip in the event of your death, so that's something. Hey, there are worse fates than being an unnecessary Blues Brothers reference. Trust me.
You win with the Town.
Yes, he was the only pure vanilla player in the game, despite the wacky role name.
-
EvilTom:
Mindboggler: You are Mindboggler, AKA Leah Wasserman, a punk amnesiac with a stylin' 80's mohawk and a knack for projecting illusions. Unfortunately, you were betrayed and killed on the Suicide Squad's first outing in the comics, so your power role has nothing to do with your talents as an illusionist.
Instead, you are a Zombie. If you are killed in the game, you may still make one post per game-day afterwards, although you cannot cast a vote after you're killed. There is no intrinsic limit to the size or content of your daily post (as long as you don't quote your role PM, obviously).
You win with the Town.
Standard deathspeaker, basically. I'm not sure why Tom took it upon himself to get lynched day one.
-
Laggy:
Nightshade: You are Nightshade, AKA Eve Eden. An exile from a demon-infested parallel dimension, you control darkness itself and can teleport from one location to another at will.
You are a Shadow. During the night phase, you can choose to vanish from the game altogether; the text for the next game-day's start will simply state that you disappeared and provide no further explanation for you being inactive (you will even be removed the list of active players in the opening post, without a cardflip happening). You cannot post or vote while you are gone, and you cannot return until the next night phase (though you can choose to stay vanished for multiple consecutive days if you wish). However, as long as you are gone, you also cannot be targeted by night actions (neither on the night you leave nor the night you return) and you cannot be voted for. Whether this is worth not being able to post or vote at all yourself is your decision. Aside from the dubious worth of a role that makes you temporarily unable to play the game, you should also take note of the fact that, as long as you are gone, the amount of votes needed for a lynch (and, therefore, a scum victory) will be adjusted accordingly.
You win with the Town.
No, I didn't actually expect this ability to be used.
-
Shale:
Oracle: You are Oracle, AKA Barbara Gordon. Yes, the Barbara Gordon from Batman, daughter of Commissioner Gordon, and formerly Batgirl. Sometime in the eighties DC decided you were expendable and let Alan Moore write a storyline in which the Joker shot and crippled you from the waist down, more or less just as a trigger to make Batman really, really pissed off. Fortunately, you didn't languish in obscurity thereafter: other writers decided to reinvent you as a techie serving a number of super-teams (such as the Suicide Suqad in its later years).
As such, you are an Elite hax0r. If you choose to do so, you may press the Delete button during the night phase. You may do this only one time throughout the game. It might do something helpful, or it might not. There's really only one way to find out.
You win with the Town.
Pressing delete imposed a word limitation on Zombie Tom. Pretty much useless, if not harmful to town.
-
Ciato/Taishyr:
Poison Ivy: You are Poison Ivy, AKA Pamela Lillian Isley. Yes, the Batman villainess with an affinity for plants. I think this one's famous enough that I can dodge the flavor text, no?
You are a Lie Detector. Each night phase, you may select one game post of your choice in which a player roleclaimed and submit it to the mod. You will be told whether the roleclaim is True, False, or Partially True (I.E., the player has the role stated, but it is not their only one). Note that you will receive no information about the player's alignment or nameclaim--the Lie Detector ability only applies to information regarding the player's stated power role. This means it's functionally useless if no one's roleclaimed, yes.
You win with the Town. P.S.: Please please please don't avatar Uma Thurman.
Turned out more useful than I expected...and then no one listened to the results even after the flip. What.
-
Bardiche:
Ravan: You are Ravan, AKA...actually, that's your real name. Go figure. A follower of the old Thugee sect (remember those creepy cultists in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom? Those guys,) you believe that each human sacrifice you make staves off the onset of the age of chaos for another thousand years. An assassin and a former terrorist operative, you were recruited by the Squad after your defeat at their hands. And really, working for an Arab dictator or the United States...it's all the same to you, just as long as you can keep killing. Your living quarters were once described thusly: "Part playboy mansion, part shrine to Kali. And that tells you pretty much all you need to know about Ravan." And, well, it pretty much does.
You are a Conditional Multivoter. Every time you participate in a successful lynch train (I.E., your vote must be on the person being lynched at the end of the day; if you voted for the lynchee earlier in the day but subsequently unvoted, then it doesn't count), your voting power permanently increases by one. It doesn't matter whether the killed player is town or scum; you simply have to contribute to their death. Any extra votes you accrue will appear as Anonymous on the votecount. You cannot choose to not use your extra votes; they will automatically be applied to whichever player your vote rests upon.
You win with the Town.
Self-explanatory, I think.
-
Delta:
The Thinker: You are The Thinker, AKA Cliff Carmichael, a cyberpunk sociopath gifted with powers of mind-control via the implantation of computer chips. Of course, your powers were dialed down a bit to keep you in check once you joined the Squad, and what you can actually do right now is somewhat limited.
Thus, your powers are limited to being a Messenger. Each night, you can telepathically send a message of twenty-five words or less to another player of your choice, who can respond in kind if they wish. Send your message to the mod (me) each night phase and it will be passed on to the target of your choice. It will be delivered anonymously; if you wish the other player to know who you are, this information must be included in the text of your message.
You win with the town.
---
OK:
Deadshot: You are Deadshot, AKA Floyd Lawton. A minor Batman villain, you had a privileged upbringing similar to that of your old nemesis but chose to pursue a life of crime basically just for the kicks. You are a whiz with any kind of firearm and quickly became the Squad's gunner par excelance once you were recruited. However, being the product of a deeply twisted family, you also wound up with a wide variety of emotional problems including but not limited to total lack of empathy for your fellow man, reckless behavior, and a (sometimes very active) death wish.
Given this, it shouldn't be much surprise that you are a self-aligned Jester. Your win condition is simple: get lynched and go out in a blaze of glory. If you succeed in bringing this about, everyone else fights for second place thereafter. How you go about ensuring that this happens is your own decision, but keep in mind that inactivity will earn you a modkill just as it would for any other player. You do not win if you are nightkilled, so tread carefully.
I was really disappointed to see OK get killed night one (I wanted to see more of that craziness--but I guess other people filled in for him soon enough).
-
Strago:
Duchess: You are Duchess, AKA Lashina. Born and raised on Apokolips, brutal and barren home of Darkseid (the DCU's big baddie), you follow a simple philosophy: rank goes to those who can take it by force and the weak exist only to be ground underfoot. This served you well for a long time. Unfortunately, a failed mission left you stranded on Earth, and you're now killing time with the Squad until you can figure out a way to get back home. This doesn't mean you care about them, of course--quite the opposite. As long as you survive to the end of the game, it doesn't matter which faction achieves the formal victory. This means that you are a Survivor. Your win condition is simply to live; manipulate the other players in whatever manner you believe suits this goal.
Your superhuman physique renders you nearly impervious to harm. Thus, you are also Bulletproof. You cannot be brought down by a single individual and need not fear nightkills. Of course, you'll still fall to a lynch mob.
Meeple:
Major Victory: You are Major Victory, AKA William Vickers, former field leader of a (rather ridiculous, really) outfit called the Force of July, hyper-patriotic to the point of self-parody and populated with rabid hawks plucked right from the depths of the Cold War. Things went okay for a few years; you were protecting the nation from communists and traitors! And then the rest of your team got massacred and the government decided to stick you with the outfit responsible for killing them. Brilliant move, huh? Needless to say, you're not very enamored of your new teammates. Half of them are career criminals and the rest are complicit in murdering your comrades.
Thus, you are a self-aligned Survivor: your only goal is to live until the end of the game. It doesn't matter whether Town or Scum claims the formal victory; you can escape in the confusion as they mop up the last of the other side. However, because of your status as a former enemy of the Squad, and your noted resentment at simply being placed in their company, others will treat you with suspicion: you are also a Miller and will read Scum to cops.
Miller in a game with no cops. Yeah.
---
Corwin:
Amanda Waller: You are Amanda Waller. You administer the Suicide Squad from Belle Reve prison in Louisiana. An overweight black woman might not be the typical comic-book lead but, well, Suicide Squad wasn't a typical comic. You run the Squad with an iron fist and tolerate no dissent from those under your command.
Thing is? You're not really Amanda Waller. You're actually...EVIL CLONE WALLER. Identical to the original in every way, except that your mission is to eliminate the Suicide Squad. This means two things: you are the Godmother, and will read Town to cops; you are also Bulletproof and will not fall to nightkills. Both of these traits remain in effect even if you yourself go out on the nightkill.
You win with the Scum.
BE WARNED: You've received intel suggesting that one other player in this game is out to kill you specifically. You don't know who it is or even their aligment, so be on the lookout for this individual. It's up to you whether or not you need to share this information with your scumbuddies.
NOTE: Although it's not necessary for your scumbuddies to have cover identities, anyone with the slightest knowledge of the flavor will likely make some kind of inference upon seeing Waller in the game. If you ever decide to claim , you may wish to do so as Shade, the Changing Man, as this character possessed a forcefield which would fit with your bulletproof ability.
Godfather in a game with no cops. Yeah. Bulletproof was functionally irrelevant since I figured Andy was likely to assume the person he had to kill was bulletproof and never try to NK them (which turned out to be accurate).
-
QuietRain:
Captain Boomerang: You are Captain Boomerang, AKA George "Digger" Harkness, an Australian career criminal seemingly beyond redemption. Rude to your teammates, insulting to everyone else, a hopeless letch and devoted to nothing but your own greed...Which is actually the only reason you're aiding the conspiracy to wipe out the rest of the team, actually: Waller paid you great gobs of money to do it.
You are a Mad Pieman. During each night phase, you must choose one player who voted for you during the preceding day and hit them with a pie. This does nothing, but it is hilarious. If no one voted for you during the preceding day, you don't have to throw a pie but may still do so if you wish (your target can be freely chosen from the roster of living players). Unless you specify otherwise, the default flavor of the pie will be custard.
You win with the Scum.
HOWEVER. You are also a Politician. You delight in provoking outrageous reactions from others and, should you accumulate the highest number of votes in the game and survive, you win to the exclusion of all others. It's your choice whether or not you wish to mention this your scumbuddies, who have only been told that you are a Mad Pieman.
Politician angle proved too daunting for Qr to pursue (understandable!)
-
NEB:
Manhunter: You are Manhunter, AKA Mark Shaw, a freelance bounty hunter sometimes employed by the Squad. Your present contract asks you to...help eliminate the Squad, actually.
You've taken up residence in the office of Belle Reve's chief of security. You have access to the prison's internal surveillance devices and can use them to follow the actions of one player during each night phase. You are a Watcher/Tracker, and you will know who your target acts against as well as whoever acts against them that night.
You win with the Scum.
The only genuinely useful role on the scum side, I think.
---
Night actions forthcoming.
-
Night actions
Night 1:
Andy: Kill Delta (success).
Ashdla: Scan OK (result: not vanilla).
Ciato: Lie detector on Carthrat roleclaim (result: true).
Corwin: Does nothing.
Deltaflyer2k8: Message Bardiche (received and responded).
Elfboy: Watch OK (sees Ashdla and QR target him).
Jo'ou Ranbu: Depressed, can't act.
Laggy: Does nothing.
QuietRain: Throw pie at OK (flavor: Prozac-laced pecan). Kill OK (success).
Shale: Does nothing.
Night 2:
Andy: Does nothing.
Ashdla: Scan Carthrat
Taishyr: Lie detector on Snow roleclaim (result: true).
Corwin: Does nothing.
Elfboy: Watch Snow (sees Tai target him, sees Snow target Rat).
Jo'ou Ranbu: Roleblock Carthrat (success).
Laggy: Does nothing.
QuietRain: Throw pie at Carthrat (flavor: banana cream). Kill Ashdla (success).
Shale: Does nothing.
Night 3:
Andy: Kill Excal (success).
Corwin: Kill Andy (success)
Elfboy: Watch Excal (sees Andy target him).
Laggy: Does nothing.
QuietRain: Throw pie at Andy (flavor: rhubarb).
Shale: Presses Delete button.
Night 4: Scum kill Bard (nothing else matters).
-
Yeah. Good fun overall.
I had this long, elaborate plan to play the game, and it was actually working ;_;
1) Start normally - vote joke, lalala.
2) Go through some type of insanity breakdown and make up a role restriction. People ate this one up.
3) Act normally throughout, and hopefully get lynched at the end.
I let drop the part about wanting to die because I was expecting people to over-read that - "Hey, he's asking to die, so he must be hoping not to be lynched or something". I kept it vauge by not mentioning lynching because I wanted to stave off a night kill as well. I was hoping to stick it out and cause havok with my 'role restriction' (which I was going to pull certain words and phrases as an insanity trigger and note them if asked), and either get lynched early (for causing a mess so much) or lynched at the end (when I had done nothing the whole game, so I'd be a good safe LYLO lynch - people wouldn't suspect a Jester of doing that!). Sadly, I was killed anyway ;_;
I was hoping I'd be investigated (which I was!), and that would help push the lynch for me later. Goddamnit QR ;_;
Otherwise, I was right - always kill Corwin first no matter what. Damn him and QR for being unreadable to me.
Good fun, good times. Wish I lived longer, but I think I caused enough of a mess to help town lose, so I call 2nd place here! >_>
-
You haven't said it yet
I'm never playing another mafia game. :(
Will you play next game? I need a chance to get back at you.
Sure, I guess.
-
You can blame QR, yes; she wanted to kill you. Decided your ability reminded her too much of her own.
Besides that, we nailed Ash because I saw her night 1 and figured she was the cop, and Andy because he seemed like he might have some sort of power role. Watched OK to try and see cops/vigs, Snow ditto, Excal because we also suspected he might have a role and I wanted to choose a target I could defend in a roleclaim if need be.
-
Seconding bafflement at Cor not being a lightning rod for criticism on day four. Just...what.
Strago is totally awesome for fakeclaiming on LYLO (presumably to avoid attention from the debate that would ensue over whether or not him and Cor could have the same ability) and guessing the scum team right in the same post.
But where did the bile come from, people? I mean...yikes. Days two and three were just bloody vicious. What happened? I have to admit, I'm glad this game is over.
-
Your power role is Illinois Nazi. You are not from Illinois. You are not a Nazi. And actually, you don't have any useful powers at all. But you do have a wacky title that'll make people go WTF on seeing the cardflip in the event of your death, so that's something. Hey, there are worse fates than being an unnecessary Blues Brothers reference. Trust me.
That is so awesome, I wish I had that role. :/
Yes, Rat was pure voteless and nothing else. I expected some metagaming based off this. I didn't expect people to totally ignore Tai's confirmation that Rat was purely voteless. What the hell?
The speculation that Rat, while powerless, could've been a scum on a kill (and gotten blocked) doesn't seem so strange. It doesn't really interfere with Tai's confirmation, either.
BE WARNED: You've received intel suggesting that one other player in this game is out to kill you specifically. You don't know who it is or even their aligment, so be on the lookout for this individual. It's up to you whether or not you need to share this information with your scumbuddies.
I love the irony in the only kill that I made being the person trying to kill me. And I didn't share it with the other scum pretty much because it was a useless bit of info that could only do harm (i.e. have them know of it in advance and react accordingly).
-
Hahaha. Man, I cannot believe that I actually won. I was massively distracted for most of the game -- hence my absurd bouts of lurkitude -- and really didn't play up to my potential.
I felt pretty sure at the beginning of Day 3 that a scum win was my ticket to victory, and during Day 4 that was obviously on my mind. Ironically, however, I was way off on my reads of people; in actuality I really did think that QR and Elfboy were town, which is why I gunned for them. Corwin I'd had pegged since Day 3 or so, mostly a gut call, and then we he claimed Bulletproof I felt sure that he was the Godmother, so I didn't go after him. Thought the scum team was him, Carthrat and Bardiche, by the final Day. I guess it's good that the game so suddenly wrapped itself up this morning when I wasn't around, since it meant I didn't have a chance to stick my foot in something stupid. Heh.
El Cid: Did I guess the scum team correctly? I forgot that, since I, uh, hadn't even meant to do so, given that I was basically playing for scum at that point. But yes, the fakeclaim felt necessary after Cor's claim.
I was also taken aback by all the anger, but that's been true in several mafia games I've played in. Don't know why this one was so virulent.
Anyway, nice win, scum. You deserve it more than I do. ^_^
-
Tai had his circumstances, Rat and I reacted (and Rat was already frustrated, while I myself was the target of the attack) badly, Snow was trying to goad me by his own admission, and delta is ...idk.
-
And I just realized, I was totally right about Tom. He lied day 1 as town again for no gain. :/
-
Yeah. Stop doing that, Tom.
-
I don't really get the anger myself. (And didn't feel any of it myself. Not sure if any posts make it look like I did? If so, apologies.) It's just a game; have fun with it.
Heh, Strago, I was wondering what your mentality was as soon as you flipped in the aftergame. Interesting to see I was right about your attack being off.
-
El Cid: Did I guess the scum team correctly?
Yes. You called out the entire scum faction, spot on. As did Tai, shortly after leaving the game. Hilarious.
-----------
Not to put a damper on things, but this was in many ways the worst game the DL's had yet, and I hope a lot of the stuff that went down this game never goes down again. Co-modding this was exceptionally painful; since Cid was almost never here, nearly every player in the game vented their frustrations at me constantly, while I could neither say anything back to them or do anything about their concerns.
- Timeliness and deadlines. This game would have heavily benefitted from having, say, 72 hour days. Less walls of text, which turned a lot of people off. Less "Hold on, nobody vote until we hash out every single issue ten million times." (Whatever it is, you can talk about it the next game day!)
- Raging and personal attacks. I am appalled. These are inexcusable, they got way, way, WAY out of hand and out of line. Had I been main mod, Tai, Rat, Corwin and Snow would have been out instantly for the level of hostility displayed here. I think we can all grasp why this is bad.
- Players quitting, and in spectacular fashion. If you can't or don't want to play, DON'T SIGN UP. If you do sign up, respect your commitment. Replacements past early day 1 are unfair to everyone else, and modkills aren't fun either. They're very much preferable to keeping disruptive players in the game, though.
I wasn't kidding about wanting to modkill half the living players at one point. In addition to nipping nasty arguments in the bud, it might've actually given town a chance. As things turned out, scum had a guaranteed win, just because they got lucky and all the people who imploded were on town's side.
-
Yeah, I definitely find myself in agreement with Alex on this one. It was a weird game, and I hope we'll all try not to let that sort of play happen again.
-
z_z I thought it was standard issue for any townie getting lynched to wreak as much damage to town's morale as possible here on RPGDL.
Mrf. Let's hope Barkley Mafia will be fun, and after that Mia and I get to do CODE TRAINWRECK MAFIA. Which will probably be enlightening due to no role madness/no role heavy. fufufu~
(seriously though, I want to see a Mafia with just Cop/Doc/Scum again, or screw the Cop and Doc and just do Town and Scum.)
-
That's a total exaggeration considering the heated feelings after (and during), say, Vampire or Touhou, just to name a couple games.
-
Killed Delta for the obvious reasons.
Skipped the night kill 2 because I couldn't come up with anyone who I really felt was a viable target.
Killed Excal for some earlier concerns I had.
Indeed, I never even considered trying to kill Corwin because I figured there was no way in hell it could be that easy. Never really got comfortable with a case on him before I died, either.
-
Huh, strange. I was really curious the entire game, and I considered Laggy since day 3, but not you.
-
Sadly, I got stuck trying to worry more about scum than my target, for all that they ended up being the same. You just flew right under my radar.
-
I think i prefer living, you know. Ill be more co-operative next game as our mafia (DS mafia) has basically just... broken.
-
Interesting game. My best friend had surgery during Day 2, and I wanted to be around her without having that looming over my head all the time (and I was a little worried since she looked awful) so I decided that real life was simply a priority over trying not to die in Mafia. I think that the playstyle here just encourages an unreal amount of time investment and it's one that is hard for me to justify meeting normally without extra things going on, which is why I decided to quit while I was ahead.
The shame is that none of the things went town's way in the entire game pretty much, and everyone seemed to have blinders to Corwin's playstyle pretty much directly reflecting his playstyles of his scummy days past. I don't think I'd have caught all the scum, but after a certain point it was dead obvious that Corwin was trying to incite Tai which to me is going to garner my vote. Elfboy and QR's playstyles are much more laid-back so I'm not sure if I would have caught them, it's hard for me to go back and say obviously. When I found out who the scum were I was pretty sure that town was pretty much done for since there were too many people in there who made things too easy for the scum.
Also I think that scum having the most powerful role in the game is rather ridiculous. Honestly the setup feels extremely not designed for a town win in general, since there weren't a lot of resources at their disposal. Basically only a vig and some other roles of dubious worth, and there were -three- ITPs, one that was immune to the vig! I mean seriously, what.
I kept track of the game pretty well once things got sane again (and was rooting for scum to win, since I really didn't feel like I was part of the town since I dropped the game) and it was kind of painful to watch and I was really glad I wasn't playing. I was pretty nervous there in the last portions because Bard was going "I don't know why I want to vote for you but I do!!" and I wanted to give him a good ol' fashioned beating from the Internet despite not playing in the game anymore. <_<
-
: ( Don't beat me up, me loves you long time.
-
Well, keep in mind that NEB and I are in cahoots.
-
Also I think that scum having the most powerful role in the game is rather ridiculous. Honestly the setup feels extremely not designed for a town win in general, since there weren't a lot of resources at their disposal. Basically only a vig and some other roles of dubious worth, and there were -three- ITPs, one that was immune to the vig! I mean seriously, what.
Scum having a watcher/tracker isn't so hot given that the vast majority of town roles don't do anything threatening in the first place. The only thing that really would've been a coup is catching Andy in the act, and they killed him before they even knew he was the vig. Really, the whole idea behind the game was making reliance on power roles pointless at best.
-
Strangely enough, Ciato, that really wasn't the intent (to incite Tai into some kind of implosion). Glad you rooted for us, sorry RL didn't let you keep on playing. Maybe next time~
-
Indeed! Well, I kind of thought it was. Ah well. <_<
-
And I just realized, I was totally right about Tom. He lied day 1 as town again for no gain. :/
Pfft, did not lie. Everything I said was true. Not my fault I had a funky role :P
And the gain was, I got lynched instead of the Jester. Yeah, I totally meant for that to happen >.>
Though I was glad to be able to confirm Shale's roleclaim in LYLO.
-
Tom, forcing town to waste a lynch on you when you could just as easily have had us scum NK you instead makes no sense. When you know you're town, you don't waste your side's lynch on yourself for the simple goal of reducing your own posts to just 1 a day. If you'd made us waste a NK on you, you'd have been much better off and your credibility wouldn't be shot to dirt. Just saying.
-
Not to put a damper on things, but this was in many ways the worst game the DL's had yet
Hooray, I'm off the hook!
-
Pfft yeah, getting lynched was totally my aim.
-
You do realize this was a major reason for the town's loss, right? Hardly the sole one, but yeah.
-
Whoa, deja vu.
-
Fuck you Corwin.
-
Not sure I'd say major given he almost ceased to be a factor after Day 1, but yeah... Tom, I do have to ask, what was your purpose with that needless roleclaim followed up by being generally useless? The only reason we went with you was that you didn't feel like you wanted to die as much as OK did. And honestly, given the way I seem to pick up awesome scumdar when I die, I'd fucking kill to get that zombie power. Hell... I'd kill to get Rat's power.
On a side note, good game to scum. Just because town played badly doesn't mean they didn't play well. Corwin should have been lynched, but got a good mislynch train going for two days before heavy suspicion fell on him. The Elf used his role exceptionally well. And QR, just blindsided me. I remember being a bit stunned when I heard she was scum.
-
Also I think that scum having the most powerful role in the game is rather ridiculous. Honestly the setup feels extremely not designed for a town win in general, since there weren't a lot of resources at their disposal. Basically only a vig and some other roles of dubious worth, and there were -three- ITPs, one that was immune to the vig! I mean seriously, what.
Scum having a watcher/tracker isn't so hot given that the vast majority of town roles don't do anything threatening in the first place. The only thing that really would've been a coup is catching Andy in the act, and they killed him before they even knew he was the vig. Really, the whole idea behind the game was making reliance on power roles pointless at best.
Seconding this, and also noting that three scum is a pretty small number. Definitely gave me some nerves over the whole situation at first. Three ITP do balance this out some granted.
-
Given that I don't think I would've survived LYLO had the case on Tom not been as 'obvious', Excal, it probably would've made a difference. >_>
Anyway, town only really had three safe lynches and one of them got wasted on Tom for no repercussions to scum. I considered that pretty key and said as much, as always, ymmv.
-
You mean Rat, Corwin? Hmm, I'd say I had word of mod he wasn't scum, but that Role PM of mine is more vague about other roles sucking more than I recall it being. But yeah... mocking Town with your awesome role is a good way to help your team lose.
-
I kinda meant that if Tom didn't help me my attempt to get someone lynched would've gotten a lot more raised eyebrows right from the start.
Also, Illinois Nazi. I laughed. This just had to be said.
-
Yeah. I was planning to fake claim ultimate vig. I could kill anyone through, any protection, any time, and I could target as many times as I want. Day or night, Doc or BP, it was all meaningless before me. The only downside? Each and every one of my kills would backfire and target me.
Seemed a fitting fake claim for the Role Name that wouldn't actually change what I could do. Though... apparently there were two roles put in play for the specific reason of preventing having any fun with the role, and thereby cementing the Mod's views that I am not welcome in role heavy games.