2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
@Tom maybe you are pocketing me? Trying to keep that neutral in my mind when trying to figure your alignment.
Excusing Tordecks based on meta doesn't seem to hold a lot of water, especially if he is someone who would be aware of that. However I can move on from that for now.
Burs claim doesn't dissuade me either, it's hard to say anything past what has already been said. He has done almost nothing (pot kettle yeah yeah) and seems to just be waiting to die. Really comes off to me as a resigned scum.
Catching up - here's my thoughts on the last ~5 pages of posts.
Don't like Anak's #518. If he/she really thinks that Seppel is scum faking a neutral claim in order to rack up empowerment, why not vote for Seppel?
I hate that Seppel can basically do whatever he wants and when he gets a little pushback, simply walk it back (see #525). Not that there's really a lot to be done about it right now.
In contrast to Tordeck's point in #557, I actually like D_V's OMGUS-like vote in #533. It smells of a townie who is super frustrated at Seppel walking back his promise. I guess it's possible that they're both scum, but then Seppel wouldn't be randomly unempowering his buddy. As for Tordeck going the other way, it's a nice easy one for scum to jump on.
Sir Chris' principle in #545 is solid, but I'm getting a little bit paranoid that he's spending a lot of time and energy effectively theorycrafting to substantiate reads. That may be dumb, but something slightly worries me.
Manders says that her ability is costly in #548, which is interesting at the very least. Speaking of which, voting for Bur in #569 is really bad logic (small number of posts != scum).
Having gone over Shadowlancer's interaction with Manders again, I do think his/her relative inexperience (rather than scumminess) is at work, and #571 confirms that's probably the case. Unvote.
GJ's #590 is pretty amazing in how it manages to say nothing in four bullet points. So what if the votes are stale? It only matters if there's someone else these people should be voting for instead (e.g. expressed strong suspicion but didn't vote). Then we have two points complaining about lack of activity. #592 seems like textbook scum trying to throw suspicion around and subtly just keep people guessing. #594 is a poor vote, essentially declaring that since there are probably some scum among the inactives, he/she will vote whichever one is more likely to attract other votes. (Not to mention that there's no justification for a vote on someone with 3 posts, nor that voting Bur requires an unvote on the supposedly scummiest inactive).
Axel's #633 is very analytical and I agree with Manders' earlier statement that Axel seems "authentic."
Like Axel later, I just hate Sir Chris' #637. Not really because I find it particularly scummy, but because it is arrogant and condescending. You may be God's gift to mafia, but at the end of the day you're typing posts on an online forum. There's no reason to bludgeon other people across the head with your greatness, it just isn't pleasant to be around.
Tom's #653 is an interesting one. It's a total waffle on Tordeck and Anak, two of the players with the most pressure on them this early in the game. It doesn't look good. But I do think the vote on GJ is reasonable, although a little out of left field as he/she is not a prime suspect at this point (I realize they've gone at it earlier). I think it's possible that they're buddies.
Anak's #654 is another bad post. By making it about Cyan, he/she softens the vote.
I feel pretty conflicted on Tordeck, but #671 is a bad post. The "if you want to lynch town" (as opposed to, e.g., "if you want to lynch me") is just trying way too hard. The condescension is already evident from "you'll need 4 more fools."
GJ continues to make scummy posts in #687. The Wildfire wagon has cooled off, but it's a nice place for scum to put a vote as it's somewhat defensible even if the reasoning is probably wrong. Then #691 is just wrong - if Tordeck is town it looks great to be against his/her lynch. I've definitely used this line of reasoning ("why would I do X as scum?") far more as scum than town. The logic re: Tordeck's wagon is also highly suspect as townies tend to be quite suspicious of these sorts of associations (I think X is scum, and X is voting for Y, etc.). Especially at this point in the game, where a lot of people are quite hard to read, I do not see town spending a lot of time engaging in this kind of reasoning. Then #720 is very much leading from behind - "I'll be happy to vote Anak if I don't have to make waves trying to force the issue." #747 seems like a fine post out of context but it's hard to tell without actually reading the game in question, and smacks a little bit of trying to shore up earlier reasoning given greater than expected pushback.
As for Bur, Manders' #734 and the corresponding logic just makes no sense. I mean he/she could easily be scum but you're essentially basing that read off nothing + lurking. That's so bad. Then in #750 she uses RB'er as a point against Bur...in a game in which roles are (probably) randomized. Ugh.
#755 is a really, really bad vote by Anak. If Bur's claim doesn't dissuade him/her, why wasn't he/she voting for Bur already?
So now for some thoughts. GJ is top of the scum pile. Anak is very close behind, especially given that vote right at the end. Tom is still scummy. I think Tordeck may be town, especially given how strongly GJ pushed back when the actual case for/against was pretty meh and didn't warrant such a strong defense. I am very conflicted about Manders, but currently think that she is town and is making/made some incredibly poor decisions re: Bur. I think Axelrod and D_V are town. For the time being, very happy to Vote Anak.
Hey bur.
Thanks for the mafia theory
Anything to add about this game?
Iso, does it need to be delivered all at once for some theatrical reason or...
There are some people I don't even have notes on at this point based on lack of poating/content. I'd rather post it all at once so I can get all of my thoughts on the table before I'm inevitably selected as the Nightkill for winning the game single-handedly again.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Because I haven't had a lot of time to keep up with this thread over the past few days.
Posts like this aren't convincing me that it's not the right move though.
Like, Anak is arguably opportunistic in his vote on Bur, but your vote on him isn't much better. I'd have to go back and check to verify this claim, but I have the feeling that your vote has jumped around a lot to whatever the wagon of the day is - I know for sure it was on me, then there was a brief foray into Seppel, then Bur when attention went to him, and then straight to Anak?
Also pushing for a claim at L minus like six? Do you just want to out all of the power so that you know where to place your team's abilities optimally tonight?
(For the record, deciding a lynch based on a claim is a foolish move in an Azrael game.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Also, I want to give my two cents on the matter of Seppel's claim and him being able to target ascetics:
Ascetics usually aren't immune to factional abilities. If Seppel is neutral is claims to be, his abilities should be factional abilities that can bypass asceticism. It's the say way how mafia can NK the ascetics: they aren't immune to factional abilities. Heck, even in Trigger Happy, tom's role (partial ascetic) specified that he can't be targeted by non-factional abilities.
That's all I wanted to say. Now you can lynch me or whatever.
Are... Are you coaching your team in your death throes...?
Bur was at L-2 by my count, and after claiming saw nothing to dissuade from that so I voted. Cyan jumping back to me is whatevs he already wanted me dead, but DV jumping around and asking for claims from me already is so opportunistic. Look at his responses to people hemming and hawing over Bur, to then immediately leave and vote me is really poor.
If it matters Seppel, my role also has no passives. Though I am loathe to claim the rest unless more votes come, also my role is the reason I was asking how your role works on someone without passives.
I see stuff is happening, but I'm still behind. Please do not lynch anyone just yet, okay?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Yes, I forgot roles were administered randomly. That's no longer a point for or against him.
OK so here's where I stand on Anak vs. Bur:
I see your case against Anak, and y'all could be right, he could be Scum...but I don't think you are.
I think this is a perfect storm of mistakes on Anak's part, natural reactions being misinterpreted as superficial, and Scum driving for a mislynch. I mean, I could go through examples and feelings on Anak's part, but the crux of my position is my gut tells me Anak is not Scum. He's playing poorly, which is unfortunate because it's likely to get him killed, but I believe him.
So I was going to be lazy and make this post without actually re-reading Anak, but I decided to look back and see what he had said about Bur before his post where he voted: nothing. He had not mentioned him once. Nor several other players. He's refereeing while defending himself.
Because I haven't had a lot of time to keep up with this thread over the past few days.
Posts like this aren't convincing me that it's not the right move though.
Like, Anak is arguably opportunistic in his vote on Bur, but your vote on him isn't much better. I'd have to go back and check to verify this claim, but I have the feeling that your vote has jumped around a lot to whatever the wagon of the day is - I know for sure it was on me, then there was a brief foray into Seppel, then Bur when attention went to him, and then straight to Anak?
Also pushing for a claim at L minus like six? Do you just want to out all of the power so that you know where to place your team's abilities optimally tonight?
(For the record, deciding a lynch based on a claim is a foolish move in an Azrael game.)
Why didn't you vote for one of the two Scumspects?
Furthermore, at everyone: saying they want to see someone's lynch is not pushing for a claim. He's saying more people need to vote Anak so he reaches L-2.
I have never voted someone because of the number of posts they have. I vote according to the quality of said posts. I have only mentioned the number of posts some players have to express how easily they can be looked into yourselves.
So y'all can stop saying that ***** when you mention me because it is not true. Not now, not ever.
By the way I need 2 empowerments total please, thanks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
2014 - Best Mafia Performance (Individual)(Wu Tang) 2014 - Best Mafia Newcomer 2015 - Best Town Performance (Individual) (Predator) 2015 - Best Town Performance (Group) - Predator Mafia 2015 - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - 2015 Invitational 2015 - Best Town Player 2015 - Best Mafia Player 2015 - Best Overall Player
Bur is pretty much resigned. He might as well be open wolfing at this stage.
So might Bur (you know, that person you're voting for). Also why wouldn't someone who has made a total of like 7 one-time posts be resigned regardless of alignment? It's not as if they've invested a lot in the game.
Bur is pretty much resigned. He might as well be open wolfing at this stage.
So might Bur (you know, that person you're voting for). Also why wouldn't someone who has made a total of like 7 one-time posts be resigned regardless of alignment? It's not as if they've invested a lot in the game.
You missed the "I guess you can lynch me post." Town don't decide to give up at that stage, especially with a roleblock claim. If Bur is town, why isn't he fighting back? It's not even the size, he was just as lurky in Drunk Trackers as my partner. Anak, is not resigned and although I would be fine with Anak at this stage, we aren't empowering him anyway, so why would I want to push him into claim range? Let's take what we got, keep the other information dark and move on with our lives.
TIM, why aren't you pushing me harder if you think I am your strongest wolf read? Right now, I am pretty ok with either option at this stage as both are in my scum team. So why are you ok with Anak, who is someone I have been pushing most of the day, rather than pushing me? You got tomsloger, maybe you could make something work.
Manders, I don't get why your last post was so absurdly defensive. Like, does anyone even think you are a wolf right now?
Two people on this page have said that I voted people for the number of posts they've made. That is, like, the absolute worst reason to ever vote someone and it's a bit irritating that people are claiming I've done so.
So I set the record straight.
It has nothing to do with what they think my alignment is. It's all about whether they actually believe I would do such a stupid thing. I find it insulting.
the towniest person voting the lead wagon is the second leading wagon.
that seems a good sign
Did you ever say why you felt Anak was town? I know you say that you lean heavily on gut, but I can't recall you saying anything substantive on your read of him.
Bur is pretty much resigned. He might as well be open wolfing at this stage.
So might Bur (you know, that person you're voting for). Also why wouldn't someone who has made a total of like 7 one-time posts be resigned regardless of alignment? It's not as if they've invested a lot in the game.
You missed the "I guess you can lynch me post." Town don't decide to give up at that stage, especially with a roleblock claim. If Bur is town, why isn't he fighting back? It's not even the size, he was just as lurky in Drunk Trackers as my partner. Anak, is not resigned and although I would be fine with Anak at this stage, we aren't empowering him anyway, so why would I want to push him into claim range? Let's take what we got, keep the other information dark and move on with our lives.
TIM, why aren't you pushing me harder if you think I am your strongest wolf read? Right now, I am pretty ok with either option at this stage as both are in my scum team. So why are you ok with Anak, who is someone I have been pushing most of the day, rather than pushing me? You got tomsloger, maybe you could make something work.
Town do sometimes give up at that stage - I'm fairly certain that I've done it before. If it feels insurmountable and he hasn't invested much, I could see someone doing that regardless of alignment.
the towniest person voting the lead wagon is the second leading wagon.
that seems a good sign
Talk to me about what makes Anak so townie (I'm assuming that's who you're referring to, as he's the second wagon)
Also, I could use 2 empowerments.
As much as I don't usually mind neutrals, I really dislike Seppel's reason for switching wagons. I don't think there is much to be done about it though, unless he goes full on anti town. Seppel: play nice!
All right, here's the second part of my readthrough. This is going to be more of a points-of-interest kind of post as opposed to a big readslist. If my read on someone has changed, however, I'll note it.
I find Sir Chris's basis for voting for GJ in #287 to be off. He says that GJ is voting Seppel for a false reason (GJ said that he did not believe Seppel had ever lied (as scum at least) about being a "Neutral" before.) Chris says this is definitively false as Seppel lied just (recently?) in a game about being neutral. So GJ is saying something he should objectively know is false, and this, to Chris, is a strong sign of scumness. Seems pretty convinced here. TIM makes the rather obvious counterpoint in #301, which is - why would scum knowingly say something that false? Wouldn't that be a bad idea? Doesn't it actually make more sense for GJ to simply be mistaken or have forgotten? I think TIM is entirely correct. Like, it's certainly not impossible for a scum GJ to say something he knows is false, but, like, for what purpose here? Wouldn't the reason be if he was trying to push for a mislynch or something? That wasn't what GJ appeared to be doing though. He was defending Seppel, by suggesting that this claim isn't something Seppel would make up as scum. And lying about an easily provable/disprovable point in order to defend the Neural claimer doesn't seem like much of a scum strategy.
I'm going on about this just because Chris seemed to think it was some kind of slam dunk point and he prides himself on being such a critical thinker, but there seemed to not be a lot of thought going into this vote.
And then, of course, in #353 he comes back and says he was high out of his mind on painkillers when he made that vote and was completely incorrect. But he's going to keep his vote where it is anyway to see if GJ "combusts." Right. I fail to see how that would do anything at all, particularly after you have announced it, but clearly Chris is just operating on a whole different level from me.
He also announces that his double-vote ability doesn't go live until tomorrow which had not been made "very clear" to him. Which is another from me. Because, really, your Role PM was vague on this point? And you misinterpreted? At the end of the day I'm not sure how alignment indicative it is though, because I'm not sure how it really helps him, as scum, to have pretended to have a double-vote for a relatively short period of time.
Wildfire entered at #320 with some medium reads and also announced he hadn't even read his role PM yet, which, frankly, is a scummy attitude to enter the game with, though obviously not alignment-indicative in itself. Basically trying to guarantee that his first post at least would come from a genuine townie mindset even if he actually drew scum. Bad Wildfire! Bad!
Possibly interesting note: Chris comes along and votes WF for this post, saying WF should basically know better about him since they have played so many games together. He seems to be ignoring/missing the part where WF said he hadn't read his role PM yet (meaning that whatever read WF had would, in fact, be genuine). Now, sure, WF could be lying about the "I haven't read my role PM" part. But he would kind of have to be for this vote of Chris' to make any sense, which Chris doesn't appear to acknowledge.
I kind of like Shadowlancer's interaction with Manders on page 7(50ppp). She criticized his list of reads. He said (essentially) too bad. She then accused him of dodging her, and he said if she wanted something from him she could have just asked, but now she was turning him off with her aggression/attitude. She then brushed him off a bit, and he retaliated and voted for her. Said if she actually cared what he thought she wouldn't' have dropped it like that. I don't see Mander's progression here as "fake" like Shadow did, but his reaction to it felt town to me.
I'm giving WF some points for his Manders post of #358, because there's some truth to what he's saying. Manders makes a lot of what could be called "fluff" or spammy posts. But she's kind of a spammy player in general (see: her post count), so I do believe that's ultimately not alignment indicative. She's like Tom in that way.
There may be a point here in how Seppel reacted to Manders in #373, and how he's reacted to me. Like, Manders said she was basically going to be ignoring Seppel after his claim, and he called her "scared" and voted for her. But I think I had the strongest negative reaction to his claim, and I have done more than say we should ignore Seppel. I'm actively arguing against giving him any Empowers, and openly speculating that he's lying about something and could easily be straight-up scum. And yet Seppel hasn't said boo to or about me.
Yeah, Shadow is moving up to the leaning Town pile. And Iso is still a complete non-entity (promising big things!), which is more troubling to me.
And we get all the way to post #535 before Cythare says anything that even registers? That's troubling right there. I did not intentionally leave him out of my earlier list. He literally had said nothing that made me make a note of him as existing in this game. Worse than even Bur and Anak. As such, his read list appears almost completely random. I have no idea why anyone is where they are, because Cythare has said nothing about anybody. And then, he goes into some detail about why his "null" people are null. Buuuu? Of all the places to be elaborating on, talking about why you have no feelings (or conflicting feeling) about a bunch of people does not seem like the most profitable way to be spending your valuable posting time. And it also bothers me that his (only) scummy people are (coincidentally?) the two lowest posters (not counting himself) and essentially the easiest targets.
Yeah, that's all bad.
The follow-up is #607, where he immediately notes he made a mistake and mistook my posts for Cyan's posts (huh?) and flips us in his reads list. The rest of this post is...okay? The callout to Manders asking for her opinion on Cyan feels incredibly random. Why are you asking for her opinion of Cyan specifically out of all the players in the game? There's also a certain amount of hypocrisy going on when he immediately afterwards call out Tordeck for not having very many/very informed or elaborated on scum reads.
I am also disliking Tordeck more. As a player at least. He's playing a nothing game, and yet being defiant about it, like "how could anyone with any brains possibly think I was scum" despite being a virtual zero presence. #632 is just rude and over the top. I sometimes have difficulty separating my active dislike for a playstyle from the inherent scumminess of that style though, so....
I'm going to be disappointed in Cyan if he drew scum. I'm just sad if he drew Town. My gut is saying sad/town.
I'm going to withhold comment on Bur's claim until later (I have to go). When I can pull all these thoughts together into something more coherent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
ITS TIME FOR A "HOW MUCH EMPOWERMENT DO YOU NEED?" MASSCLAIM.
DV: 5?
Chris: 2
GJ: 2
Shadow: 2
Manders: 5
Cythare: "2 or 4"
Seppel: Theoretically none, but the less I have, the less inclined I am to help the town. Hence my empowerment deals.
@Anak: Is it good or bad for you that I get no notification?
Seppel: How do you reconcile the existence of, say, a Godfather, while acknowledging that roles are randomized?
Aside from both being facts about the game, you're asking the game designer to reconcile that? Okay, scumIso. Easy peasy.
Role Set "Untruth" [Godfather, Miller]
If assigned to Town, untruth is Miller.
If assigned to Scum, untruth is Godfather.
At least that's how I'd do it. Maybe have 2 Untruths in the pool, and if the second one gets drawn, it gets randomed to someone of the opposite alignment.
You missed the "I guess you can lynch me post." Town don't decide to give up at that stage, especially with a roleblock claim. If Bur is town, why isn't he fighting back? It's not even the size, he was just as lurky in Drunk Trackers as my partner. Anak, is not resigned and although I would be fine with Anak at this stage, we aren't empowering him anyway, so why would I want to push him into claim range? Let's take what we got, keep the other information dark and move on with our lives.
TIM, why aren't you pushing me harder if you think I am your strongest wolf read? Right now, I am pretty ok with either option at this stage as both are in my scum team. So why are you ok with Anak, who is someone I have been pushing most of the day, rather than pushing me? You got tomsloger, maybe you could make something work.
Umm, that was the exact post I was referring to. I doubt all of Bur's posts combined, pre-claim, even filled up 3 lines. Why would he/she care? Especially if he/she is in other games - Bur, are you in any other games? As to your second point, it's comically hollow attempt to discredit my view of you. As if it's not more productive to join the wagon that actually some momentum.
As to Axel's point about Sir Chris' #287, I had totally forgotten this interaction. On review, it still doesn't make sense for GJ to lie about Seppel for no reason. I don't think this is particularly indicative of GJ's alignment though. I seem to be seeing a lot of possible buddy interactions but this looks like a potential one also.
You missed the "I guess you can lynch me post." Town don't decide to give up at that stage, especially with a roleblock claim. If Bur is town, why isn't he fighting back? It's not even the size, he was just as lurky in Drunk Trackers as my partner. Anak, is not resigned and although I would be fine with Anak at this stage, we aren't empowering him anyway, so why would I want to push him into claim range? Let's take what we got, keep the other information dark and move on with our lives.
TIM, why aren't you pushing me harder if you think I am your strongest wolf read? Right now, I am pretty ok with either option at this stage as both are in my scum team. So why are you ok with Anak, who is someone I have been pushing most of the day, rather than pushing me? You got tomsloger, maybe you could make something work.
Umm, that was the exact post I was referring to. I doubt all of Bur's posts combined, pre-claim, even filled up 3 lines. Why would he/she care? Especially if he/she is in other games - Bur, are you in any other games? As to your second point, it's comically hollow attempt to discredit my view of you. As if it's not more productive to join the wagon that actually some momentum.
What's hollow about it? The top two wagons right now are both people I have been pushing pretty consistently with the only thing of debate being who I want to push more. I am now your top scum read. Unless you think I have been shoving Anak just for the fun of it, why are joining a wagon that was being pushed primarily by Cyan and myself? It's not hollow, your posts aren't adding up.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
@ Seppel, why do you suddenly like Anak? You've been saying the opposite all game, have you not?
Hmm. After looking back, you never once mentioned him until now. You are claimed neutral, though.
I still want you to answer my question, please.
I was going to say that I didn't think I had ever mentioned him until now. [/quote]It would be weird if you weren't a claimed Neutral. Since you ARE....meh.
No way in hell. I can probably finish it on Sunday. But if you guys want, I'm content to lynch Bur, for now.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Thanks for the mafia theory
Anything to add about this game?
Iso, does it need to be delivered all at once for some theatrical reason or...
Excusing Tordecks based on meta doesn't seem to hold a lot of water, especially if he is someone who would be aware of that. However I can move on from that for now.
Burs claim doesn't dissuade me either, it's hard to say anything past what has already been said. He has done almost nothing (pot kettle yeah yeah) and seems to just be waiting to die. Really comes off to me as a resigned scum.
Vote Bur
I'm certainly not willing to lynch Bur today.
Unvote, Vote Anak
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
CFD BOIS.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Bur- GJ, shadow, Seppel, Manders, Anak
Anak-Cythare, Cyan, DV
Wildfire- Sir Chris, Tordeck,
Tordeck-tom
DV- Wildfire
Sir Chris- Axelrod
Shadowlancer- TheIceMan
9 to lynch
Official Empowerment Count:
DV- Tom, Manders, Cyan, Seppel, Shadow
Seppel- Sir Chris, DV
Axelrod- GJ
Sir Chris- Iso
that seems a good sign
I just want Anak to claim now.
Don't like Anak's #518. If he/she really thinks that Seppel is scum faking a neutral claim in order to rack up empowerment, why not vote for Seppel?
I hate that Seppel can basically do whatever he wants and when he gets a little pushback, simply walk it back (see #525). Not that there's really a lot to be done about it right now.
In contrast to Tordeck's point in #557, I actually like D_V's OMGUS-like vote in #533. It smells of a townie who is super frustrated at Seppel walking back his promise. I guess it's possible that they're both scum, but then Seppel wouldn't be randomly unempowering his buddy. As for Tordeck going the other way, it's a nice easy one for scum to jump on.
Sir Chris' principle in #545 is solid, but I'm getting a little bit paranoid that he's spending a lot of time and energy effectively theorycrafting to substantiate reads. That may be dumb, but something slightly worries me.
Manders says that her ability is costly in #548, which is interesting at the very least. Speaking of which, voting for Bur in #569 is really bad logic (small number of posts != scum).
Having gone over Shadowlancer's interaction with Manders again, I do think his/her relative inexperience (rather than scumminess) is at work, and #571 confirms that's probably the case. Unvote.
GJ's #590 is pretty amazing in how it manages to say nothing in four bullet points. So what if the votes are stale? It only matters if there's someone else these people should be voting for instead (e.g. expressed strong suspicion but didn't vote). Then we have two points complaining about lack of activity. #592 seems like textbook scum trying to throw suspicion around and subtly just keep people guessing. #594 is a poor vote, essentially declaring that since there are probably some scum among the inactives, he/she will vote whichever one is more likely to attract other votes. (Not to mention that there's no justification for a vote on someone with 3 posts, nor that voting Bur requires an unvote on the supposedly scummiest inactive).
Axel's #633 is very analytical and I agree with Manders' earlier statement that Axel seems "authentic."
Like Axel later, I just hate Sir Chris' #637. Not really because I find it particularly scummy, but because it is arrogant and condescending. You may be God's gift to mafia, but at the end of the day you're typing posts on an online forum. There's no reason to bludgeon other people across the head with your greatness, it just isn't pleasant to be around.
Tom's #653 is an interesting one. It's a total waffle on Tordeck and Anak, two of the players with the most pressure on them this early in the game. It doesn't look good. But I do think the vote on GJ is reasonable, although a little out of left field as he/she is not a prime suspect at this point (I realize they've gone at it earlier). I think it's possible that they're buddies.
Anak's #654 is another bad post. By making it about Cyan, he/she softens the vote.
I feel pretty conflicted on Tordeck, but #671 is a bad post. The "if you want to lynch town" (as opposed to, e.g., "if you want to lynch me") is just trying way too hard. The condescension is already evident from "you'll need 4 more fools."
GJ continues to make scummy posts in #687. The Wildfire wagon has cooled off, but it's a nice place for scum to put a vote as it's somewhat defensible even if the reasoning is probably wrong. Then #691 is just wrong - if Tordeck is town it looks great to be against his/her lynch. I've definitely used this line of reasoning ("why would I do X as scum?") far more as scum than town. The logic re: Tordeck's wagon is also highly suspect as townies tend to be quite suspicious of these sorts of associations (I think X is scum, and X is voting for Y, etc.). Especially at this point in the game, where a lot of people are quite hard to read, I do not see town spending a lot of time engaging in this kind of reasoning. Then #720 is very much leading from behind - "I'll be happy to vote Anak if I don't have to make waves trying to force the issue." #747 seems like a fine post out of context but it's hard to tell without actually reading the game in question, and smacks a little bit of trying to shore up earlier reasoning given greater than expected pushback.
As for Bur, Manders' #734 and the corresponding logic just makes no sense. I mean he/she could easily be scum but you're essentially basing that read off nothing + lurking. That's so bad. Then in #750 she uses RB'er as a point against Bur...in a game in which roles are (probably) randomized. Ugh.
#755 is a really, really bad vote by Anak. If Bur's claim doesn't dissuade him/her, why wasn't he/she voting for Bur already?
So now for some thoughts. GJ is top of the scum pile. Anak is very close behind, especially given that vote right at the end. Tom is still scummy. I think Tordeck may be town, especially given how strongly GJ pushed back when the actual case for/against was pretty meh and didn't warrant such a strong defense. I am very conflicted about Manders, but currently think that she is town and is making/made some incredibly poor decisions re: Bur. I think Axelrod and D_V are town. For the time being, very happy to Vote Anak.
There are some people I don't even have notes on at this point based on lack of poating/content. I'd rather post it all at once so I can get all of my thoughts on the table before I'm inevitably selected as the Nightkill for winning the game single-handedly again.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Because I haven't had a lot of time to keep up with this thread over the past few days.
Posts like this aren't convincing me that it's not the right move though.
Like, Anak is arguably opportunistic in his vote on Bur, but your vote on him isn't much better. I'd have to go back and check to verify this claim, but I have the feeling that your vote has jumped around a lot to whatever the wagon of the day is - I know for sure it was on me, then there was a brief foray into Seppel, then Bur when attention went to him, and then straight to Anak?
Also pushing for a claim at L minus like six? Do you just want to out all of the power so that you know where to place your team's abilities optimally tonight?
(For the record, deciding a lynch based on a claim is a foolish move in an Azrael game.)
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Spoilers: I didn't know how many votes were on bur. I just wanted to see how they'd react.
Are... Are you coaching your team in your death throes...?
Whynotboth.gif
Unvote, vote Anak
vote bur
i think thats 5-5
somebody break the tie
Bur is pretty much resigned. He might as well be open wolfing at this stage.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
If it matters Seppel, my role also has no passives. Though I am loathe to claim the rest unless more votes come, also my role is the reason I was asking how your role works on someone without passives.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
OK so here's where I stand on Anak vs. Bur:
I see your case against Anak, and y'all could be right, he could be Scum...but I don't think you are.
I think this is a perfect storm of mistakes on Anak's part, natural reactions being misinterpreted as superficial, and Scum driving for a mislynch. I mean, I could go through examples and feelings on Anak's part, but the crux of my position is my gut tells me Anak is not Scum. He's playing poorly, which is unfortunate because it's likely to get him killed, but I believe him.
So I was going to be lazy and make this post without actually re-reading Anak, but I decided to look back and see what he had said about Bur before his post where he voted: nothing. He had not mentioned him once. Nor several other players. He's refereeing while defending himself.
I'm cool with either lynch now.
Unvote; Vote: Anaklusmos
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Why didn't you vote for one of the two Scumspects?
Furthermore, at everyone: saying they want to see someone's lynch is not pushing for a claim. He's saying more people need to vote Anak so he reaches L-2.
Duh.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Also, let's set the record straight right now.
I have never voted someone because of the number of posts they have. I vote according to the quality of said posts. I have only mentioned the number of posts some players have to express how easily they can be looked into yourselves.
So y'all can stop saying that ***** when you mention me because it is not true. Not now, not ever.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
2014 - Best Mafia Performance (Individual)(Wu Tang)
2014 - Best Mafia Newcomer
2015 - Best Town Performance (Individual) (Predator)
2015 - Best Town Performance (Group) - Predator Mafia
2015 - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - 2015 Invitational
2015 - Best Town Player
2015 - Best Mafia Player
2015 - Best Overall Player
Same
The GJ way path to no lynching:
You missed the "I guess you can lynch me post." Town don't decide to give up at that stage, especially with a roleblock claim. If Bur is town, why isn't he fighting back? It's not even the size, he was just as lurky in Drunk Trackers as my partner. Anak, is not resigned and although I would be fine with Anak at this stage, we aren't empowering him anyway, so why would I want to push him into claim range? Let's take what we got, keep the other information dark and move on with our lives.
TIM, why aren't you pushing me harder if you think I am your strongest wolf read? Right now, I am pretty ok with either option at this stage as both are in my scum team. So why are you ok with Anak, who is someone I have been pushing most of the day, rather than pushing me? You got tomsloger, maybe you could make something work.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
The GJ way path to no lynching:
The GJ way path to no lynching:
So I set the record straight.
It has nothing to do with what they think my alignment is. It's all about whether they actually believe I would do such a stupid thing. I find it insulting.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
Talk to me about what makes Anak so townie (I'm assuming that's who you're referring to, as he's the second wagon)
Also, I could use 2 empowerments.
As much as I don't usually mind neutrals, I really dislike Seppel's reason for switching wagons. I don't think there is much to be done about it though, unless he goes full on anti town. Seppel: play nice!
I could put 5 empowerment to use.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
I find Sir Chris's basis for voting for GJ in #287 to be off. He says that GJ is voting Seppel for a false reason (GJ said that he did not believe Seppel had ever lied (as scum at least) about being a "Neutral" before.) Chris says this is definitively false as Seppel lied just (recently?) in a game about being neutral. So GJ is saying something he should objectively know is false, and this, to Chris, is a strong sign of scumness. Seems pretty convinced here. TIM makes the rather obvious counterpoint in #301, which is - why would scum knowingly say something that false? Wouldn't that be a bad idea? Doesn't it actually make more sense for GJ to simply be mistaken or have forgotten? I think TIM is entirely correct. Like, it's certainly not impossible for a scum GJ to say something he knows is false, but, like, for what purpose here? Wouldn't the reason be if he was trying to push for a mislynch or something? That wasn't what GJ appeared to be doing though. He was defending Seppel, by suggesting that this claim isn't something Seppel would make up as scum. And lying about an easily provable/disprovable point in order to defend the Neural claimer doesn't seem like much of a scum strategy.
I'm going on about this just because Chris seemed to think it was some kind of slam dunk point and he prides himself on being such a critical thinker, but there seemed to not be a lot of thought going into this vote.
And then, of course, in #353 he comes back and says he was high out of his mind on painkillers when he made that vote and was completely incorrect. But he's going to keep his vote where it is anyway to see if GJ "combusts." Right. I fail to see how that would do anything at all, particularly after you have announced it, but clearly Chris is just operating on a whole different level from me.
He also announces that his double-vote ability doesn't go live until tomorrow which had not been made "very clear" to him. Which is another from me. Because, really, your Role PM was vague on this point? And you misinterpreted? At the end of the day I'm not sure how alignment indicative it is though, because I'm not sure how it really helps him, as scum, to have pretended to have a double-vote for a relatively short period of time.
Wildfire entered at #320 with some medium reads and also announced he hadn't even read his role PM yet, which, frankly, is a scummy attitude to enter the game with, though obviously not alignment-indicative in itself. Basically trying to guarantee that his first post at least would come from a genuine townie mindset even if he actually drew scum. Bad Wildfire! Bad!
Possibly interesting note: Chris comes along and votes WF for this post, saying WF should basically know better about him since they have played so many games together. He seems to be ignoring/missing the part where WF said he hadn't read his role PM yet (meaning that whatever read WF had would, in fact, be genuine). Now, sure, WF could be lying about the "I haven't read my role PM" part. But he would kind of have to be for this vote of Chris' to make any sense, which Chris doesn't appear to acknowledge.
I kind of like Shadowlancer's interaction with Manders on page 7(50ppp). She criticized his list of reads. He said (essentially) too bad. She then accused him of dodging her, and he said if she wanted something from him she could have just asked, but now she was turning him off with her aggression/attitude. She then brushed him off a bit, and he retaliated and voted for her. Said if she actually cared what he thought she wouldn't' have dropped it like that. I don't see Mander's progression here as "fake" like Shadow did, but his reaction to it felt town to me.
I'm giving WF some points for his Manders post of #358, because there's some truth to what he's saying. Manders makes a lot of what could be called "fluff" or spammy posts. But she's kind of a spammy player in general (see: her post count), so I do believe that's ultimately not alignment indicative. She's like Tom in that way.
There may be a point here in how Seppel reacted to Manders in #373, and how he's reacted to me. Like, Manders said she was basically going to be ignoring Seppel after his claim, and he called her "scared" and voted for her. But I think I had the strongest negative reaction to his claim, and I have done more than say we should ignore Seppel. I'm actively arguing against giving him any Empowers, and openly speculating that he's lying about something and could easily be straight-up scum. And yet Seppel hasn't said boo to or about me.
Yeah, Shadow is moving up to the leaning Town pile. And Iso is still a complete non-entity (promising big things!), which is more troubling to me.
And we get all the way to post #535 before Cythare says anything that even registers? That's troubling right there. I did not intentionally leave him out of my earlier list. He literally had said nothing that made me make a note of him as existing in this game. Worse than even Bur and Anak. As such, his read list appears almost completely random. I have no idea why anyone is where they are, because Cythare has said nothing about anybody. And then, he goes into some detail about why his "null" people are null. Buuuu? Of all the places to be elaborating on, talking about why you have no feelings (or conflicting feeling) about a bunch of people does not seem like the most profitable way to be spending your valuable posting time. And it also bothers me that his (only) scummy people are (coincidentally?) the two lowest posters (not counting himself) and essentially the easiest targets.
Yeah, that's all bad.
The follow-up is #607, where he immediately notes he made a mistake and mistook my posts for Cyan's posts (huh?) and flips us in his reads list. The rest of this post is...okay? The callout to Manders asking for her opinion on Cyan feels incredibly random. Why are you asking for her opinion of Cyan specifically out of all the players in the game? There's also a certain amount of hypocrisy going on when he immediately afterwards call out Tordeck for not having very many/very informed or elaborated on scum reads.
I am also disliking Tordeck more. As a player at least. He's playing a nothing game, and yet being defiant about it, like "how could anyone with any brains possibly think I was scum" despite being a virtual zero presence. #632 is just rude and over the top. I sometimes have difficulty separating my active dislike for a playstyle from the inherent scumminess of that style though, so....
I'm going to be disappointed in Cyan if he drew scum. I'm just sad if he drew Town. My gut is saying sad/town.
I'm going to withhold comment on Bur's claim until later (I have to go). When I can pull all these thoughts together into something more coherent.
DV: 5?
Chris: 2
GJ: 2
Shadow: 2
Manders: 5
Cythare: "2 or 4"
Seppel: Theoretically none, but the less I have, the less inclined I am to help the town. Hence my empowerment deals.
@Anak: Is it good or bad for you that I get no notification?
Unvote, vote bur
I like anak
Aside from both being facts about the game, you're asking the game designer to reconcile that? Okay, scumIso. Easy peasy.
Role Set "Untruth" [Godfather, Miller]
If assigned to Town, untruth is Miller.
If assigned to Scum, untruth is Godfather.
At least that's how I'd do it. Maybe have 2 Untruths in the pool, and if the second one gets drawn, it gets randomed to someone of the opposite alignment.
As to Axel's point about Sir Chris' #287, I had totally forgotten this interaction. On review, it still doesn't make sense for GJ to lie about Seppel for no reason. I don't think this is particularly indicative of GJ's alignment though. I seem to be seeing a lot of possible buddy interactions but this looks like a potential one also.
Hmm. After looking back, you never once mentioned him until now. You are claimed neutral, though.
I still want you to answer my question, please.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
What's hollow about it? The top two wagons right now are both people I have been pushing pretty consistently with the only thing of debate being who I want to push more. I am now your top scum read. Unless you think I have been shoving Anak just for the fun of it, why are joining a wagon that was being pushed primarily by Cyan and myself? It's not hollow, your posts aren't adding up.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
I was going to say that I didn't think I had ever mentioned him until now.
I could use 3-5 Empowerments. We should probably get those all sent out before the lynch.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
One of these day, whenever you leave Mander's apron strings, maybe you will make a real post.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
Any empowerments made after the lynch but before the end of day scene still count. So hear that in mind.
Anyone is not empowering someone that should remedy that.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
I was going to say that I didn't think I had ever mentioned him until now. [/quote]It would be weird if you weren't a claimed Neutral. Since you ARE....meh.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!