That line of reasoning does make sense - I mean even in the newb game mafia went first for the more experienced players (Pod and Cyan if I'm not mistaken).
To clarify without revealing new info, I'll ask CC (and really no one else should answer) does your ability have a card explicitly (as in a card or cards (obviously other than your name) mentioned by name in your PM) related to it?
Considering that we have no knowledge of the circumstances in this game, except for our own roles, it seems highly strange to be calling people idiots. Maybe they have an array of spells, and can cast one each night?
I hadn't thought of that possibility. I was thinking more along the lines of the classical "one-shot" roles such as a one-shot vig for example, firing off.
@ZDS Your speculation makes no sense with your assumption that the SK's MO is that of Incinerate. We were given this as a description in the dayscene:
Next to him is a Terror, and he certainly looks terrified.
Now if you meant to say that Terror was the MO of the SK (which it could be, we shouldn't be making any assumptions at this point) then what you said might make some more sense, but not with Incinerate as the MO of the SK.
Care to show how those two posts are more like fishing than the rest of the speculation going on here?
It seems as harmless to me as any other post. In fact I was also thinking there might be numerous activated abilities out there - or triggered or static abilities for that matter.
I was actually referring to the post about people being Power 9(which is probably impossible, but that's not the point right now) and then the last one, I didn't realize there was one between them. Also, it's easy to fish for information on the basis of just harmlessly speculating. I'm sure alot of us have had similar thoughts, the difference is that we realize that it's not really beneficial to us to talk about them to that extent.
Also, getting increasingly sure of ZDS' scumminess. Over-speculation over reasons for nightkills is a townie no-no.
The thing is that till now only about half a dozen persons from 24 have posted in the thread and if I had to hazard a guess I'd say that the right play for Mafia at this point would be to lurk, given that it would be hard to recognize their absence.
Ljustus, i voted for ZDS, tho i think the vote wasnt in bold, so you might have ignored it for thar reason (oops).
And CF, i think you're just a lil impatient here. Not really much in that post (ive made such fishing posts before as town) that causes me such alarm.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mafia MVP Harry Potter Mafia!
Logical Reasoning is dead; Long Live Stupidity
Quote from Seppel »
I love Joboman, Poggy, Niv, and Vezok, because, while they may not be the best players, they still try to win. Having fun is the most important thing to a game, but I've learned that if you don't try to win, then you're ruining everyone else's fun.
If we're doing weak, early-game bandwagons in light of the deadline, I'd rather do Cyan. He's obliquely attacked AbbeyGargoyle for a non-tell and matjoeman for non-fishing.
For reference:
Quote from Cyan »
Considering that we have no knowledge of the circumstances in this game, except for our own roles, it seems highly strange to be calling people idiots. Maybe they have an array of spells, and can cast one each night? There are plenty of possibilities, assuming that they're just bad(idiotic) players seems like the worst of them. Unless you're mafia, in which case, making townies think negatively of other townies is a great idea.
Quote from Cyan »
I'd say that MatJoeMan's last two posts are a significantly better example of fishing than anything that Ikerr or Fayul said.
If we're doing weak, early-game bandwagons in light of the deadline, I'd rather do Cyan. He's obliquely attacked AbbeyGargoyle for a non-tell and matjoeman for non-fishing.
I wasn't trying to attack AG in the first one, and for the second, I do think that MJM was attempting to fish with the posts that I was talking about, even if he did present it as just 'casual speculation'. I've already explained why I felt this, in response to Passdog, earlier, when I said:
Quote from Cyan »
I was actually referring to the post about people being Power 9(which is probably impossible, but that's not the point right now) and then the last one, I didn't realize there was one between them. Also, it's easy to fish for information on the basis of just harmlessly speculating. I'm sure alot of us have had similar thoughts, the difference is that we realize that it's not really beneficial to us to talk about them to that extent.
The Szadek/Terror thing says this game isn't adhering to the rules of Magic as actually played. We should expect spells to be flavorful representations of what they do, and not mechanically consistent. Giant Growth as a "Doc" spell fits the bill. As does the Scrying for a Cop. I think speculation about other Magic related mechanics is kind of premature.
Szadek and Abbey Matron also suggest that LJustus is spreading the roles all over the various Magic sets and that someone who has a negative sounding Card shouldn't automatically be suspect. (I say without knowing much of the Magic storyline, and under the impression that Szadek was a bad guy. If I am wrong about this, please clarify).
It is still possible that we have a "themed" mafia in some way, however, be it by creature type/set/color, etc.
I'll also agree it's kind of early to be calling people out for lurking.
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.
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, the wisdom to know the difference, and a ****ing chainsaw.
Yeah, yeah. My point is that it probably doesn't matter what the name of the card is. It's just flavor.
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.
One more thing. People are talking about the "deadline" we are under. I assume this comes from the sign-up thread where our illustrious Mods stated:
I look forward to modding a fast-paced game. I expect day periods to last no more than a week. If day periods take more than a week, I will impose a deadline. Night periods should last no more than 48 hours.
This doesn't appear in the formal rules of the game, however. So I would ask the Mod. if we are under an official deadline or not, and if we get a deadline at one week, what kind of deadline will it be?
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.
At present, there is no official deadline. That said, Days should not last a month. After one week of Day-time, I will assess the game state and determine if an official deadline is warranted.
It is not fair to other people who want to mod a game to make them wait upwards of six months to do so.
There are plenty of possibilities, assuming that they're just bad(idiotic) players seems like the worst of them. Unless you're mafia, in which case, making townies think negatively of other townies is a great idea.
A lot of the random speculation at the beginning of the game could be considered fishing, but otherwise we wouldn't have much to get the game started. I thought the p9 comment might be a little too fishy, but I thought that any power roles would be able to use their discression in responding to the comment. That being said I think we are far enough into the thread to tone down the random speculation.
I don't see what Matjoe said as fishing at all. It would be funny if the power were Power.
I do see Cyan as a bit scummy (More from the attack on AG than on MJM). Vote Cyan
I'd love it if we don't tolerate lurkers at all this game. Someone want to make a list?
@Someone (Pod?)- The problem is that very few of those characteristics are shared across cards. Those that are leave a sufficent number of claims availible that they won't hindr scum, and scum could have some sort of list.
About the random voting: I agree, we are already getting past the point where that is useful. And to that effect
Unvote Keeper
I just guessed that he'd be the last one to post, and apparently I guessed wrong. Who knew?
At the moment, my eye is mostly on Sutherlands and Fayul, but nothing enough for a real vote yet. My eye is also on ZDS, but that's just because he's one out of like every 3 posts, you can't miss him.
So... first off, your eye isn't on everyone? I don't know what I've done to deserve such a watchful eye, but whatever. Second, there is a point that random voting becomes not useful? Wouldn't that be the beginning of the game? It's never useful, people just do it because it's fun.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
Second, there is a point that random voting becomes not useful? Wouldn't that be the beginning of the game? It's never useful, people just do it because it's fun.
Random voting is also used as a conversation starter at the beginning of D1 when there is not much to talk about. In much the same way that random speculation about the setup is used. These are both actions that are discouraged later in the game when it is no longer necissary.
Also random voting does provide some info at times. You can check out the persons' reaction to the vote - at times people do givesomething away in that way.
I don't see what Matjoe said as fishing at all. It would be funny if the power were Power.
I do see Cyan as a bit scummy (More from the attack on AG than on MJM). Vote Cyan
I'd love it if we don't tolerate lurkers at all this game. Someone want to make a list?
@Someone (Pod?)- The problem is that very few of those characteristics are shared across cards. Those that are leave a sufficent number of claims availible that they won't hindr scum, and scum could have some sort of list.
It's interesting that you're already trying to start a real bandwagon against me, and for a post that MJM himself(the only person that I really 'attacked' in it) seems to agree was justified. A little eager, are we?
@ZDS:
We weren't arguing. I was simply stating that it's foolhardy to underestimate the other players in the game, and that there is absolutely no benefit to the town when one person calls another an 'idiot', but that the mafia does benefit from this. That's all. If I had to classify that statement, I'd call it an explanation to AG, not an attack on him/her.
Honestly, it's not as though I'm shy about attacking people, and it's not as though I try to downplay it when I do. I called MJM out for fishing, that's true(and again, he himself said that one of the posts I was referring to was somewhat fishy, and that we're past the random speculation stage, so, apparently that calling out was with merit), and it was obvious that I called him out. But, I wasn't attacking AG, I was simply trying to explain something to him/her.
I don't see what Matjoe said as fishing at all. It would be funny if the power were Power.
I do see Cyan as a bit scummy (More from the attack on AG than on MJM).
Vote Cyan
I don't think that what MJM did was fishing. I see how one (townie or scum,) could (incorrectly,) consture it as such, (I've had this happen to me on more than one occasion.) thus, I did not see your attack on MJM as telling. However, I don't think insulting others is benifical to anyone (random others as opposed to specific people at which point it becomes an Ad Hom, and vaguley scummy). AG shouldn't call people idiots true. But he did have a point, it's unlikely that those were one shots as that would be unwise.
Saying "Unless you're mafia, in which case, making townies think negatively of other townies is a great idea." paints AG in a rather scummy position. It's good for scum to plant as many seeds of (specific) doubt as possible. I don't think the case against you is solid (by any means), but waiting for solid cases to develop D1 seems to result in month long days. I'm not necessarily angling for a lynch, but you seem as good a place as any to begin placing (real) votes.
There's something else I thought about tonight. DYH was the moderator for Newb 9, and to some of the players here it was their first game, or this game is their first game and they lurked Newb 9. To these players, DYH would certainly appear as very experienced, and therefore very dangerous. I may be completely wrong since this is just wild speculation, but don't you think it's likely that our SK is one of the newcomers (if we suppose the incinerate kill to be that of the SK) ?
First of all, there is a much more likely reason for DYH to be killed. He doesn't have quite the profile of myself or Axel, so he's not the most likely to recieve doc protection, but he is still one of the best players here. The players just below the N1 doc protection profile are the most likely to be hit. Chances are, this is why he is dead.
However, there is another problem with this speculation. It's total WIFOM. The mafia can easily find a reason, such as this, that a NK could happen, then preform the NK, and incriminate people based on this supposed reason. If there's one thing that I've seen as truly telling in the early game, it's speculating on the reason's for deaths, particularly in such a way that seeks to incriminate people on false premises. Furthermore, ZDS is at just the right level of experience to attempt such a thing: experienced enough to be flexing his manipulative muscles, but not exerienced enough to properly mask his intentions.
The two who are getting the most attention right now seem to be Cyan and ZDS. Of these I find ZDS' chances of being scum much higher. While I understand the argument on Cyan and can see where those attacking him are coming from I do not think it is the most powerful argument. Even for Day 1 it is not great. I mean MJM does agree he had a right to say what he did.
ZDS on the otherhand does seem pretty scummy. Someone said it in the early game they felt that ZDS was trying too hard. While this is not the most coherent or defendable flaw in play, I do feel it is true. ZDS has almost twice as many posts as the next person. He also seems to spreading doubt on various people. While I am not sure I support a lynch right now I am going to go ahead and agree with CC and go with a Vote:ZeDorkSlipeur.
In this case, you're wrong. Pointing fingers at lurkers is not constructive so early in the game. What are you going to say, "he hasn't random voted, he's obviously scum !" ?
If you want to get things going, which you should, pointing your finger at an active poster is a good thing to do, much better than pointing it at some air.
There's a distinct difference between people who read but don't post and people who aren't here and thus can't post. There's nothing wrong with pursuing lurkers Day 1, but pursuing people who don't post usually isn't a sound strategy because they have no chance to defend themselves.
If you want to get things going, which you should, pointing your finger at an active poster is a good thing to do, much better than pointing it at some air.
And Bluesoul should be appended to the list because he has 0 posts.
For those of you that missed the two messages in my other games, I've been busy moving into my new dorm and getting used to college life in general. As such, my involvement is hampered quite a bit for right now, but I am here and I do not need to be replaced.
Interesting little debate going on here, the only thing I'm seeing at the moment (and I do mean at the moment, only as far back as the "Most Recent Posts" in the reply window takes me) is CC's making kind of a lame iffy separation tactic. Just something I'll be watching. No vote here as it's a little late for randomvoting.
5 of 13 is comfortable enough for me. vote: ZDS. I don't think a lynch is close to warranted here, but it will be useful to check reactions to this, and he's likely the best lead at the moment, so I approve of this bandwagon as long as it doesn't dip above, say, 8 votes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, the wisdom to know the difference, and a ****ing chainsaw.
5 of 13 is comfortable enough for me. vote: ZDS. I don't think a lynch is close to warranted here, but it will be useful to check reactions to this, and he's likely the best lead at the moment, so I approve of this bandwagon as long as it doesn't dip above, say, 8 votes.
So, you don't approve of actually lynching ZDS, but, you're willing to put him 1/2 way to being lynched? What's the point of voting him if you don't think he should be lynched? There's no difference in pressure between 5 votes and 6. Seems like you're just pandering to the town.
5 of 13 is comfortable enough for me. vote: ZDS. I don't think a lynch is close to warranted here, but it will be useful to check reactions to this, and he's likely the best lead at the moment, so I approve of this bandwagon as long as it doesn't dip above, say, 8 votes.
This post really bothers me. "I want to put some pressure on ZDS but not too much pressure." This half-hearted measure seems more like something scum would do to try and force at least a claim while at the same time distancing himself for later if it comes back to him.
My opinion on the ZDS's wagon is that his posting thus far seems a lot like it did during Newb 9 when he was town. Other than that, I want to hear from him answering the points that CC and Sorryguy brought up before I pass any further judgements on him.
Through the posts that were made before the bandwagon, I believed that ZDS and Cyan were both Mafia, playing the "argue with my teammate" game. I kind of had suspicion on Matjoeman too. The latest post of Cyan's strengthens my suspicion.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
So..you think that ZDS and I are both mafia and fake arguing with each other(for the record, I don't know where you see ZDS and myself arguing, it'd be great if you could point that out), but somehow in that, it makes it more likely that I'm mafia because I criticized Fayul's action regarding ZDS bandwagon? Don't forget that I criticized the speed at which ZDS' wagon has grown previously, as well. There seems to be a huge contradiction between why you were supposeldy suspicious at first and how that became strengthened, maybe you could elaborate on that some?
Yeah I don't see why the case on ZDS warrants a band waggon.
Quote from Cyan »
(for the record, I don't know where you see ZDS and myself arguing, it'd be great if you could point that out)
I think he was referring to the exchange where ZDS thought you were attacking AG.
Quote from Sutherlands »
Through the posts that were made before the bandwagon, I believed that ZDS and Cyan were both Mafia, playing the "argue with my teammate" game. I kind of had suspicion on Matjoeman too. The latest post of Cyan's strengthens my suspicion.
Erm, are you including me in the "Mafia playing a game group?" The order in which you said that implies it. Also, I don't see how Cyan's argument with ZDS was any diferent from his with treigit or arimnaes.
Yeah I don't see why the case on ZDS warrants a band waggon.
Mainly because it is Day 1 and he is what we have to go on right now. Bandwagons lead to discussion. And discussion leads to many interesting things, like those which are occuring right now. Sutherlands' thought that ZDS and Cyan are both scum interests me a lot actually.
It interests me in that I did not really see that at all. As Cyan said, they never really argued, at least not moreso than Cyan and others. Him throwing doubt on Matjoeman also interests me. He never really did explain that. Sutherlands, please explain why you see MJM as scummy.
ZDS is a master spammer in Mafia games however his posting behaviour in this thread does not seem any different from the initial phases in newb mafia where he was townie.
This of course does not mean that he's necessarily townie, but I'm just saying that his post count in this thread does not seem particularly anomalous.
I'm interested in seeing QUOTES of the arguments between Cyan and Zds. In the meantime FoS Sutherlands.
Good morning, town. What a nice day, isn't it ? Just took my breakfast, turned the laptop on, connected to the mafia subforum, and oh ! Joy ! A bandwagon on me coming out of simply nowhere !
Isn't it a great thing to wake up to?
Did I tried to incriminate anyone ? No, I didn't. I simply said I thought a newcomer could have killed DYH. Did I use this thought as an argument against anyone ? No, I did not. What I was doing is speculating for the sake of bringing discussion, since speculating on reasons for night-kills is much more constructive than speculating on why the hell Szadek was killed by a terror.
Ah, but you have just outlined what was scummy about this action. When players take stances, it gives us the most blatant kind of info when the player they "suspected" dies. Mafia can distance themselves, but ultimately, they can't push at each other too much or they shoot themselves in the foot. Thus taking stances on specific players is inherently pro-town. When mafia take stances, they're either risking being held responsible for a townie death, or they risk shooting themselves in the foot when a scum buddy they were distancing from actually get's lynched.
Your statement, however, takes neither of these risks. It does open the door for other people to pick up the case, though. You cast people's eyes in a certain direction, but make no direct connection yourself.
Also, I've already given the same answer to Pod who made the same point against me. Repetitions for the win.
For the win, indeed.
FoS : Everyone on my wagon. That's not OMGUS as in "oh noes they voted for me they must be scum", that's OMGUS as in "you must be quite stupid to vote me for absolutely no valid reason".
Assuming we are all quite stupid for this wagon, how does that warrant a FOS? Stupid =/= scum. Actually, it would be smart for the mafia, if you are a townie, right? So the fact that you're calling us stupid actually suggests that you know that we are all townies, right?
FOS People who are suspicious of Fayul
There is absolutely nothing wrong with adding a bit of pressure to a wagon, especially when we're still not near a lynch. Doing so let's the whole town know that there is support for the discussion of the suspect, and it is useful info later in the game. I'm actually in the same boat as Fayul; I'd rather not see ZDS lynched based on what we've got now. My vote is for pressure. If and when that changes, I'll let you know.
Quote from SorryGuy »
Mainly because it is Day 1 and he is what we have to go on right now. Bandwagons lead to discussion. And discussion leads to many interesting things, like those which are occuring right now. Sutherlands' thought that ZDS and Cyan are both scum interests me a lot actually.
[/font][/font]Ah, but you have just outlined what was scummy about this action. When players take stances, it gives us the most blatant kind of info when the player they "suspected" dies. Mafia can distance themselves, but ultimately, they can't push at each other too much or they shoot themselves in the foot. Thus taking stances on specific players is inherently pro-town. When mafia take stances, they're either risking being held responsible for a townie death, or they risk shooting themselves in the foot when a scum buddy they were distancing from actually get's lynched.
Basically, this is why I kept my vote on ZDS. I felt like him and Cyan were trying to... not argue with each other, but just create a little tension so that if one died they wouldn't be seen as close to them. Then Cyan's two posts almost within 2 hours of each other:
So, you don't approve of actually lynching ZDS, but, you're willing to put him 1/2 way to being lynched? What's the point of voting him if you don't think he should be lynched? There's no difference in pressure between 5 votes and 6. Seems like you're just pandering to the town.
make me think that he's trying to get the ZDS bandwagon to fall apart, but doesn't want to say he thinks well of him. Basically he is using "logic" to try and get people to not vote for ZDS since he doesn't want to actually defend him.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
@Sutherlands: No, Cyan is arguing against a wagon which has a minimal basis. That last post you quoted is also somewhat of a gameplay theory argument, if I understand Fayul's actions correctly. And as it has been said before, the "tension" between Cyan and ZDS was no greater or meaningful than that of Cyan and others, or ZDS and others.
You know what, Vote Sutherlands. I think a bandwagon on you would be much better than one on ZDS.
EWP:
Quote from pod »
You think they might have PM'd each other in order to co-ordinate it just after they saw what was happening?
It has nothing to do with it, actually, because I was talking about Cyan's two posts being almost within 2 hours of each other. He doesn't need to PM himself to coordinate.
The exchange Cyan and I had did not in any way create tension between us. There's an important difference between "arguing" and "explaining".
Cyan is right in seeing my bandwagon as meritless, and in not defending me. This is because, except for one or two people, everyone on my wagon voted for the sake of voting, which is bad. On the other hand defending someone whose alignment is unknown to you is not something you should do to often.
You are trying too hard to link us, and are using flawed arguments to do this.
I voted first because you were saying mistruths about the game, which incriminated me (but were false). I kept my vote on you because I believe you are scum. The bandwagon is not meritless, because it is based on what we have so far. I believe that you and Cyan are most likely to be scum, and obviously other people do too. The tactics used, especially that of pulling a bandwagon off of a fellow mafia (if neither of you were mafia, you would probably want the other person to be lynched, because that means you get to survive the night) is something I have seen the mafia do many a time. I am not using flawed logic to link you, but rather my own intuition. What else is there to go on this early in the game?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
(if neither of you were mafia, you would probably want the other person to be lynched, because that means you get to survive the night)
Vote : Sutherlands. This is what I was waiting for. This is horrendously erroneous. Firstly, that one of us dies does not in any way gives any safety the other one during the subsequent night, and secondly, townies want scum dead, not "the one on whom there happen to be another bandwagon".Actually, that generally DOES guarantee that you will survive the night (if you are townie)... at least if you were one of the people that supported lynching. When two townies pit themselves against each other, and one is lynched and is town, that makes the other look like mafia. Whether or not they are, the mafia will not kill them during the night, because they have the "seed of doubt."
Do you realize how much this is self-contradictory ? Intuition is even more flawed than flawed logic. It might even be better if you voted because "your toe said so" !No, this is not self-contradictory. I never claimed my intuition was the end-all be-all of perfection in this game. However, that does not make my intuition any less or more correct, and my voting against you does not automatically make me scum (if you are townie... if you are mafia then obv it doesn't).
You :).I think the number of votes on me and the number of votes on you shows that you are the better choice. Especially considering that all but one of the votes on me are people who I specifically said i was suspicious of.
Edit: Nested quotes didn't work quite how I wanted them to... but all my actual text got in there I think. Just imagine those 3 quotes in a row are just 2, ZDS's quote replying to my quote.
[The Family]
I hadn't thought of that possibility. I was thinking more along the lines of the classical "one-shot" roles such as a one-shot vig for example, firing off.
@ZDS Your speculation makes no sense with your assumption that the SK's MO is that of Incinerate. We were given this as a description in the dayscene:
Now if you meant to say that Terror was the MO of the SK (which it could be, we shouldn't be making any assumptions at this point) then what you said might make some more sense, but not with Incinerate as the MO of the SK.
I was actually referring to the post about people being Power 9(which is probably impossible, but that's not the point right now) and then the last one, I didn't realize there was one between them. Also, it's easy to fish for information on the basis of just harmlessly speculating. I'm sure alot of us have had similar thoughts, the difference is that we realize that it's not really beneficial to us to talk about them to that extent.
The thing is that till now only about half a dozen persons from 24 have posted in the thread and if I had to hazard a guess I'd say that the right play for Mafia at this point would be to lurk, given that it would be hard to recognize their absence.
And CF, i think you're just a lil impatient here. Not really much in that post (ive made such fishing posts before as town) that causes me such alarm.
Logical Reasoning is dead; Long Live Stupidity
For reference:
I wasn't trying to attack AG in the first one, and for the second, I do think that MJM was attempting to fish with the posts that I was talking about, even if he did present it as just 'casual speculation'. I've already explained why I felt this, in response to Passdog, earlier, when I said:
Szadek and Abbey Matron also suggest that LJustus is spreading the roles all over the various Magic sets and that someone who has a negative sounding Card shouldn't automatically be suspect. (I say without knowing much of the Magic storyline, and under the impression that Szadek was a bad guy. If I am wrong about this, please clarify).
It is still possible that we have a "themed" mafia in some way, however, be it by creature type/set/color, etc.
I'll also agree it's kind of early to be calling people out for lurking.
Checking in, busy day, I'll read through tonight.
Yeah, yeah. My point is that it probably doesn't matter what the name of the card is. It's just flavor.
This doesn't appear in the formal rules of the game, however. So I would ask the Mod. if we are under an official deadline or not, and if we get a deadline at one week, what kind of deadline will it be?
It is not fair to other people who want to mod a game to make them wait upwards of six months to do so.
Emphasis mine.
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || sk: LookingforReality (Copycat) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || survivor: matjoeman (Anarchist) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || town: kops (Anarchist) |||
Mafia stats
I do see Cyan as a bit scummy (More from the attack on AG than on MJM).
Vote Cyan
I'd love it if we don't tolerate lurkers at all this game. Someone want to make a list?
@Someone (Pod?)- The problem is that very few of those characteristics are shared across cards. Those that are leave a sufficent number of claims availible that they won't hindr scum, and scum could have some sort of list.
Kenji
Passdog
cpol
Hvir
silicon
keeper
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || sk: LookingforReality (Copycat) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || survivor: matjoeman (Anarchist) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || town: kops (Anarchist) |||
Mafia stats
What I meant was that you should probably be pointing fingers more at those who are not posting rather on those that are.
Unvote Keeper
I just guessed that he'd be the last one to post, and apparently I guessed wrong. Who knew?
At the moment, my eye is mostly on Sutherlands and Fayul, but nothing enough for a real vote yet. My eye is also on ZDS, but that's just because he's one out of like every 3 posts, you can't miss him.
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || sk: LookingforReality (Copycat) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || survivor: matjoeman (Anarchist) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || town: kops (Anarchist) |||
Mafia stats
Random voting is also used as a conversation starter at the beginning of D1 when there is not much to talk about. In much the same way that random speculation about the setup is used. These are both actions that are discouraged later in the game when it is no longer necissary.
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || sk: LookingforReality (Copycat) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || survivor: matjoeman (Anarchist) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || town: kops (Anarchist) |||
Mafia stats
It's interesting that you're already trying to start a real bandwagon against me, and for a post that MJM himself(the only person that I really 'attacked' in it) seems to agree was justified. A little eager, are we?
@ZDS:
We weren't arguing. I was simply stating that it's foolhardy to underestimate the other players in the game, and that there is absolutely no benefit to the town when one person calls another an 'idiot', but that the mafia does benefit from this. That's all. If I had to classify that statement, I'd call it an explanation to AG, not an attack on him/her.
Honestly, it's not as though I'm shy about attacking people, and it's not as though I try to downplay it when I do. I called MJM out for fishing, that's true(and again, he himself said that one of the posts I was referring to was somewhat fishy, and that we're past the random speculation stage, so, apparently that calling out was with merit), and it was obvious that I called him out. But, I wasn't attacking AG, I was simply trying to explain something to him/her.
I don't think that what MJM did was fishing. I see how one (townie or scum,) could (incorrectly,) consture it as such, (I've had this happen to me on more than one occasion.) thus, I did not see your attack on MJM as telling. However, I don't think insulting others is benifical to anyone (random others as opposed to specific people at which point it becomes an Ad Hom, and vaguley scummy). AG shouldn't call people idiots true. But he did have a point, it's unlikely that those were one shots as that would be unwise.
Saying "Unless you're mafia, in which case, making townies think negatively of other townies is a great idea." paints AG in a rather scummy position. It's good for scum to plant as many seeds of (specific) doubt as possible. I don't think the case against you is solid (by any means), but waiting for solid cases to develop D1 seems to result in month long days. I'm not necessarily angling for a lynch, but you seem as good a place as any to begin placing (real) votes.
(Holy parantheticals BatMan!)
However, there is another problem with this speculation. It's total WIFOM. The mafia can easily find a reason, such as this, that a NK could happen, then preform the NK, and incriminate people based on this supposed reason. If there's one thing that I've seen as truly telling in the early game, it's speculating on the reason's for deaths, particularly in such a way that seeks to incriminate people on false premises. Furthermore, ZDS is at just the right level of experience to attempt such a thing: experienced enough to be flexing his manipulative muscles, but not exerienced enough to properly mask his intentions.
I'll bet you didn't see this coming: Vote ZDS
[The Family]
The two who are getting the most attention right now seem to be Cyan and ZDS. Of these I find ZDS' chances of being scum much higher. While I understand the argument on Cyan and can see where those attacking him are coming from I do not think it is the most powerful argument. Even for Day 1 it is not great. I mean MJM does agree he had a right to say what he did.
ZDS on the otherhand does seem pretty scummy. Someone said it in the early game they felt that ZDS was trying too hard. While this is not the most coherent or defendable flaw in play, I do feel it is true. ZDS has almost twice as many posts as the next person. He also seems to spreading doubt on various people. While I am not sure I support a lynch right now I am going to go ahead and agree with CC and go with a Vote:ZeDorkSlipeur.
There's a distinct difference between people who read but don't post and people who aren't here and thus can't post. There's nothing wrong with pursuing lurkers Day 1, but pursuing people who don't post usually isn't a sound strategy because they have no chance to defend themselves.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Ok, Unvote: AbbeyGargoyle, Vote: ZeDorkSlipeur.
For those of you that missed the two messages in my other games, I've been busy moving into my new dorm and getting used to college life in general. As such, my involvement is hampered quite a bit for right now, but I am here and I do not need to be replaced.
Interesting little debate going on here, the only thing I'm seeing at the moment (and I do mean at the moment, only as far back as the "Most Recent Posts" in the reply window takes me) is CC's making kind of a lame iffy separation tactic. Just something I'll be watching. No vote here as it's a little late for randomvoting.
Battle Royale Mafia
(Come see who won!)
(With 24 alive, it takes 13 to lynch)
Cyan (2) - arimnaes, Treigit
Sutherlands (1) - silicon
ikerr (1) - AbbeyGargoyle
ZeDorkSlipeur (5) - Pod, Sutherlands, CropCircles, SorryGuy, ikerr
Fayul (1) - Crippled_Fist
So, you don't approve of actually lynching ZDS, but, you're willing to put him 1/2 way to being lynched? What's the point of voting him if you don't think he should be lynched? There's no difference in pressure between 5 votes and 6. Seems like you're just pandering to the town.
This post really bothers me. "I want to put some pressure on ZDS but not too much pressure." This half-hearted measure seems more like something scum would do to try and force at least a claim while at the same time distancing himself for later if it comes back to him.
My opinion on the ZDS's wagon is that his posting thus far seems a lot like it did during Newb 9 when he was town. Other than that, I want to hear from him answering the points that CC and Sorryguy brought up before I pass any further judgements on him.
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)
I think he was referring to the exchange where ZDS thought you were attacking AG.
Erm, are you including me in the "Mafia playing a game group?" The order in which you said that implies it. Also, I don't see how Cyan's argument with ZDS was any diferent from his with treigit or arimnaes.
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || sk: LookingforReality (Copycat) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || survivor: matjoeman (Anarchist) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || town: kops (Anarchist) |||
Mafia stats
Mainly because it is Day 1 and he is what we have to go on right now. Bandwagons lead to discussion. And discussion leads to many interesting things, like those which are occuring right now. Sutherlands' thought that ZDS and Cyan are both scum interests me a lot actually.
It interests me in that I did not really see that at all. As Cyan said, they never really argued, at least not moreso than Cyan and others. Him throwing doubt on Matjoeman also interests me. He never really did explain that. Sutherlands, please explain why you see MJM as scummy.
This of course does not mean that he's necessarily townie, but I'm just saying that his post count in this thread does not seem particularly anomalous.
I'm interested in seeing QUOTES of the arguments between Cyan and Zds. In the meantime FoS Sutherlands.
Ah, but you have just outlined what was scummy about this action. When players take stances, it gives us the most blatant kind of info when the player they "suspected" dies. Mafia can distance themselves, but ultimately, they can't push at each other too much or they shoot themselves in the foot. Thus taking stances on specific players is inherently pro-town. When mafia take stances, they're either risking being held responsible for a townie death, or they risk shooting themselves in the foot when a scum buddy they were distancing from actually get's lynched.
Your statement, however, takes neither of these risks. It does open the door for other people to pick up the case, though. You cast people's eyes in a certain direction, but make no direct connection yourself.
For the win, indeed.
Assuming we are all quite stupid for this wagon, how does that warrant a FOS? Stupid =/= scum. Actually, it would be smart for the mafia, if you are a townie, right? So the fact that you're calling us stupid actually suggests that you know that we are all townies, right?
FOS People who are suspicious of Fayul
There is absolutely nothing wrong with adding a bit of pressure to a wagon, especially when we're still not near a lynch. Doing so let's the whole town know that there is support for the discussion of the suspect, and it is useful info later in the game. I'm actually in the same boat as Fayul; I'd rather not see ZDS lynched based on what we've got now. My vote is for pressure. If and when that changes, I'll let you know.
What he said.
[The Family]
As for now, I think I'll leave my vote on Sutherlands, as there is not much reason to move it.
Basically, this is why I kept my vote on ZDS. I felt like him and Cyan were trying to... not argue with each other, but just create a little tension so that if one died they wouldn't be seen as close to them. Then Cyan's two posts almost within 2 hours of each other:
make me think that he's trying to get the ZDS bandwagon to fall apart, but doesn't want to say he thinks well of him. Basically he is using "logic" to try and get people to not vote for ZDS since he doesn't want to actually defend him.
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)
You know what, Vote Sutherlands. I think a bandwagon on you would be much better than one on ZDS.
EWP:
Scum can't daytalk this game (I think).
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || sk: LookingforReality (Copycat) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || survivor: matjoeman (Anarchist) |||
<XylBot> ||| MAFIABOT || town: kops (Anarchist) |||
Mafia stats
Just a reminder that the answers to most questions are already available.
I voted first because you were saying mistruths about the game, which incriminated me (but were false). I kept my vote on you because I believe you are scum. The bandwagon is not meritless, because it is based on what we have so far. I believe that you and Cyan are most likely to be scum, and obviously other people do too. The tactics used, especially that of pulling a bandwagon off of a fellow mafia (if neither of you were mafia, you would probably want the other person to be lynched, because that means you get to survive the night) is something I have seen the mafia do many a time. I am not using flawed logic to link you, but rather my own intuition. What else is there to go on this early in the game?
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)
Dude's crazy.
Battle Royale Mafia
(Come see who won!)
You can read all about it on page 3.
Is that so ? Who obviously believes that ?Well, probably most of the people voting for you.
Of course they do ! It's not like they don't want to win !yes... of course... so you admit you're using tactics commonly used by mafia?
Vote : Sutherlands. This is what I was waiting for. This is horrendously erroneous. Firstly, that one of us dies does not in any way gives any safety the other one during the subsequent night, and secondly, townies want scum dead, not "the one on whom there happen to be another bandwagon".Actually, that generally DOES guarantee that you will survive the night (if you are townie)... at least if you were one of the people that supported lynching. When two townies pit themselves against each other, and one is lynched and is town, that makes the other look like mafia. Whether or not they are, the mafia will not kill them during the night, because they have the "seed of doubt."
Do you realize how much this is self-contradictory ? Intuition is even more flawed than flawed logic. It might even be better if you voted because "your toe said so" !No, this is not self-contradictory. I never claimed my intuition was the end-all be-all of perfection in this game. However, that does not make my intuition any less or more correct, and my voting against you does not automatically make me scum (if you are townie... if you are mafia then obv it doesn't).
You :).I think the number of votes on me and the number of votes on you shows that you are the better choice.
Edit: Nested quotes didn't work quite how I wanted them to... but all my actual text got in there I think. Just imagine those 3 quotes in a row are just 2, ZDS's quote replying to my quote.
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)