Mafia is a game of odds. If you don't like stats, don't play mafia.
MTGS tradition says that lynching people who are making stupid stats-based arguments catches scum 9 times out of 10
Cyan: Can you guarantee that if you die, there couldn't be a second role (whom you don't have information on) who's similarly connected to you and could muddy the waters as to which one is "clear"?
Re DotA: Re-hashing the balance of DotA in this thread isn't achieving anything. Take it outside.
The reality is that it's generally worth giving a confirmably power role a chance to prove themselves. atlseal's claimed role is borderline confirmable, although the likelihood that he's going to say in the morning he was roleblocked (whether he's town or scum) messes with that. Nonetheless, that at least could mess with how the mafia plays tonight. And you never know, perhaps atl is town and the scum have no blocker or the blocker is tied up doing something else, or whatever.
Quote from Xyre »
There's always a degree of uncertainty in the town's lynch simply because they are the group with the least amount of information.
There's that "treating the town like a foreign country" attitude again. I need to go back and see why I stopped voting Xyre in the first place and see if there's any reason I shouldn't go right back to voting him now.
on me: Naturally, I'm part of the "let him try his cop ability tonight" crowd.
on Cyan: I still don't see the validity of this wagon.
I still think there's more that can be learned from the timing of arim's sudden death and I'll actually have the time to make the proper chart for myself tomorrow. Who I think should be lynched will come with this assesment.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're town and I'm mafia, you've already lost. You just don't know it yet.
It's easier to win with more people on your side, that's not what I'm arguing. It doesn't matter how many people are alive at the end, the mafia only need one.
Sure. But that's totally irrelevant. The mafia will lose if they cash in all of their chips to push one guy to the end game. We don't have to do anything wacky in that scenario... we just play our game, let the scum hand us their chips, and then we outplay them in the end game.
I'll take that all day.
The scum you fear are the ones who play like townies all game and try to get the "perfect victory."
Like... ok, let's use a MTG analogy... if you're aggro facing heavy white, do you drop all your beaters on the board turn 3? Or do you hold some back for the wrath?
if you're the control player, which are you more afraid of?
Quote from Sutherlands »
I'm going to ignore the scenario where there is a cop alive and somehow he inspected the 3 masons and the doc but never inspected a mafia and instead focus on the "math" of your argument, if you can call it that.
Good. Because that was the point. The point was 5 townies who would not be lynched. I picked those roles just cuz.
Quote from Sutherlands »
To make the math easier to comprehend, I'm going to assume 15 town and 5 mafia. The mafia have to get the town to mislynch 5 times to win. At that point they will have killed 5 people and it will be 5-5. If the town get 1 mafia, they have to kill 6 people and it will be 4-4. If the town get 2 mafia, the mafia have to kill 7 people and it will be 3-3. Etc, etc. Therefore, "For every mafia that gets killed, they need to kill 1 extra townie to make up for it."
You're twisting language to make it say what you want it to say. I find it deceptive, because on the surface your post is right... but strategically it's oh so wrong.
Because even if we play your game where the first 5 kills are "assumed", you're brushing off lynches, which for the mafia are kills they need to win. Each lynched mafia member is one less mislynched townie AND one more townie they need to kill.
So it's still 2 to 1 even when I play your game.
Quote from Sutherlands »
You didn't say that his claim was dubious, but that's not what I said either.
Yes you did. Do I really need to quote you back at yourself?
Me: "I never suggested NOT lynching a power role with a dubious claim. Never. By bringing this into the discussion and using an example of such, you are implying a position I did not take."
You: "Sure you did. Or at least you suggested not lynching for "3-4 days [. . .] at a MINIMUM!"
Are you going to deny saying that? Because it's right there on the forum.
Quote from Sutherlands »
Multiple people have expressed doubt as to his ability, you said the idea that we're even CONSIDERING lynching him is "INSANITY." Thus, you're saying that lynching a power role who "we" think has a dubious claim is dumb. Thus, you're suggesting "NOT lynching a power role with a dubious claim."
Wow... that is some fancy stretches of logic you're reaching for there. I hope you didn't pull anything.
The idea that WE are considering lynching him is insane because his claim is NOT DUBIOUS.
Would you have been happier if I had prefaced it by saying "people who are calling his claim DUBIOUS are INSANE!"
Does that work for you?
Actually, I'm not sure I would say insane, but I would def disagree with them.
Quote from Sutherland »
Except that the my point has, and always will be, that the mafia are more likely to create mislynches WHILE THEY'RE ALIVE, especially if we believe they have a power role. By the time they're dead, we will have lost a lot of ground.
Oh man... i am getting wood just thinking about the idea. If they do that, this game will be over so fast, I'll need to start taking enzyte just to feel like a man again.
Quote from Sutherlands »
How does that confirm him?
The mafia would not have 2 roleblockers. Well, I mean, they could, but we're back to that REASONABLE doubt concept that I mentioned earlier.
Obv, when I said "confirmed roleblock" i meant confirmed via flavor and "confirmed" to have been distinct from the roleblocks performed by the dead mafia member.
Shoudl have made that clearer.
Quote from Sutherland »
And making sure that we know there's not a town RBer.
The town having 2 roles that roleblock when one of them is a JOAT is not implausible. Similar thing happened on MT not too long ago. Almost got a townie lynched too.
Quote from Sutherland »
So we "clear" someone by having them die? Isn't that exactly what you were going against?
!!!
No! I mean, I don't think he needs to die either, but what I am going against so strongly is using our lynch on him.
if the mafia kill him, we clear out someone who a lot of the town apparently wants dead AND we do it at the mafia's expense!
Quote from Sutherlands »
Not to mention that the mafia aren't going to clear people for us, so this is really not a way to "confirm" someone.
Unless he really is a JOAT, in which case the mafia will NEED to kill him.
Quote from Sutherlands »
And if he's mafia, we've just wasted an investigation since we were going to lynch him anyway.
Catching scum is NEVER a waste of an investigation. Especially when the worst case is lynching a townie power role.
Quote from Sutherlands »
That doesn't confirm that he's not lying about his role.
Who cares if he's lying about his role, if he's a townie?
There were several roles in a Seol run game on MT that actually rewarded the townie for lying about his abilities.
Quote from Sutherlands »
Huh? You lost me.
Oh, uh, a questioner normally is someone who can ask the mod a question. Normally very limited in scope. Somethings it's yes or no, and cannot include players names.. or sometimes it's limited to a specific subject, or range, or can only be done once, or something like that.
Normally, their best use is to confirm roleclaims. Things like "is the chesire cat in the game?"
Quote from Sutherlands »
Won't help if he's the SK.
But it will 1) lock down his kill method 2) Give us something to analyze 3) kill a mafia member.
Like, if we see the same kill method later.. or if it's not that simple, you can count up missing kills too. That often provides either validity or doubt.
Mafia do this all the time, it helps their "townie credibility". Not proof.
Quote from Sutherlands »
We gain one doc result, a probably useless protection, and a vig that will probably kill a townie anyway.
Man... you're a negative nancy. Maybe the cop result will catch scum, the doc protection will stop a kill and the vig will take out the SK?
Quote from Sutherlands »
Then we have to hope the vig is still alive. What do we stand to lose? 3 days where he is misleading us and we all "trust" his investigations and are more likely to lynch the wrong person since there are more mafia.
Again... nothing makes me happier than scum who think they can mislead the town. NOTHING!
Quote from Sutherlands »
And then we can't trust a thing he says, because he could easily say the rolename of one of his mafia buds.
He's still giving us info. No one says we have to take his word for it till after he's dead.
Quote from Sutherlands »
But as I said, that wastes an investigation.
I am confused... if catching scum is wasting an investigation, what is a good use of one?
What if he's telling the truth and the cop verifies him? And we have a JOAT on our side that is cop confirmed?
Quote from Sutherlands »
Go read the very end of it. The town was EXTREMELY overpowered. We should have easily lost that game.
I'll take your word for it. It's not really relevant... because you get into power creep at that point, which completley blows up day mafia anyways.
I've sseen a game where something similar happened... Superhero Mafia on tings. Power creep made people get lazy during the day and rely on nights too much.
What?! Look at the initial post; he is dead. Deceased. Kaputt. Indefinitely horizontal. In mafia games, you see, people are occasionally "killed off," and when that sad event occurs, he or she is no longer allowed to post, on account of rigor mortis and what-have-you.
'Welcome to Mafia Salvation', it said, 'Population: 3,660.' And someone, they never figured out who, had painted on the sign in red letters: '1,831 to lynch.'
What?! Look at the initial post; he is dead. Deceased. Kaputt. Indefinitely horizontal. In mafia games, you see, people are occasionally "killed off," and when that sad event occurs, he or she is no longer allowed to post, on account of rigor mortis and what-have-you.
'Welcome to Mafia Salvation', it said, 'Population: 3,660.' And someone, they never figured out who, had painted on the sign in red letters: '1,831 to lynch.'
on me: Naturally, I'm part of the "let him try his cop ability tonight" crowd.
on Cyan: I still don't see the validity of this wagon.
I still think there's more that can be learned from the timing of arim's sudden death and I'll actually have the time to make the proper chart for myself tomorrow. Who I think should be lynched will come with this assesment.
1. That's sounds a bit flippant considering your circumstances.
2. What do you like about Cyan?
3. Are you seriously saying that you are going to base you next vote off of the "timing" of Arimnaes's death? That strikes me as both poor reasoning and a colossal waste of time.
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.
Sure. But that's totally irrelevant. The mafia will lose if they cash in all of their chips to push one guy to the end game. We don't have to do anything wacky in that scenario... we just play our game, let the scum hand us their chips, and then we outplay them in the end game.
I'll take that all day.
I can think of a few players on the site who would love the chance to prove your assumptions about this kind of scenario wrong.
What?! Look at the initial post; he is dead. Deceased. Kaputt. Indefinitely horizontal. In mafia games, you see, people are occasionally "killed off," and when that sad event occurs, he or she is no longer allowed to post, on account of rigor mortis and what-have-you.
'Welcome to Mafia Salvation', it said, 'Population: 3,660.' And someone, they never figured out who, had painted on the sign in red letters: '1,831 to lynch.'
1. That's sounds a bit flippant considering your circumstances.
What do you expect me to say? I've stated what my role is and if I'm going to end up lynched, the best thing to do is let me try to get that one result out in the open. Of course, all of this has been stated already and I didn't feel the need to rehash all those statements.
2. What do you like about Cyan?
Oh, don't get me wrong. Ever since he got on my wagon for really weird reasons, I've found him suspicious. However, the case on him at the moment really isn't... I agree with him that a lot of the votes on him have seemed like bandwagoning.
3. Are you seriously saying that you are going to base you next vote off of the "timing" of Arimnaes's death? That strikes me as both poor reasoning and a colossal waste of time.
Of course not. If I figure out something that I find interesting about it, then it will play into my vote. What I was saying in that post is that tomorrow (in the same post as where I assess the circumstances surrounding arim's death), I'll be placing my vote in the place I view to be the best bet for a lynch. On that subject, Unvote
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're town and I'm mafia, you've already lost. You just don't know it yet.
There's that "treating the town like a foreign country" attitude again. I need to go back and see why I stopped voting Xyre in the first place and see if there's any reason I shouldn't go right back to voting him now.
Sure. But that's totally irrelevant. The mafia will lose if they cash in all of their chips to push one guy to the end game. We don't have to do anything wacky in that scenario... we just play our game, let the scum hand us their chips, and then we outplay them in the end game.
No... they're bound to get a few mislynches early in the game, so then if each mafia can force through one mislynch, they win. (Since they only have to get 5 in that scenario)
You're twisting language to make it say what you want it to say. I find it deceptive, because on the surface your post is right... but strategically it's oh so wrong.
Because even if we play your game where the first 5 kills are "assumed", you're brushing off lynches, which for the mafia are kills they need to win. Each lynched mafia member is one less mislynched townie AND one more townie they need to kill.
So it's still 2 to 1 even when I play your game.
No... no matter what the mafia need to get the same number of mislynches... 5 in the scenario described. So going from 5 mislynches and 5 kills to 5 mislynches and 6 kills is going up by 1.
Yes you did. Do I really need to quote you back at yourself?
Me: "I never suggested NOT lynching a power role with a dubious claim. Never. By bringing this into the discussion and using an example of such, you are implying a position I did not take."
You: "Sure you did. Or at least you suggested not lynching for "3-4 days [. . .] at a MINIMUM!"
I'm saying that his claim is dubious. I am not saying that you said his claim is dubious. That quote right there is saying "Sure you did [suggest not lynching a power role with a dubious claim]."
Would you have been happier if I had prefaced it by saying "people who are calling his claim DUBIOUS are INSANE!"
Does that work for you?
I would have been much, MUCH happier with that. Why? Because then it's a matter of your opinion. I still would have disagreed with you, but at least you wouldn't be trying to tell me that you said something you didn't.
Oh man... i am getting wood just thinking about the idea. If they do that, this game will be over so fast, I'll need to start taking enzyte just to feel like a man again.
What do you think the mafia do? Sit around and twiddle their thumbs and only vote for each other? No, they try to coerce the town into voting for other townies. What game are you playing? The whole POINT of mafia is to find out which people are scum by that exact interaction.
The mafia would not have 2 roleblockers. Well, I mean, they could, but we're back to that REASONABLE doubt concept that I mentioned earlier.
If the mafia had a RB, they could have RBed the target instead of the JoaT, that's why it doesn't clear him. Not all mods allow you to figure everything out by flavor... a lot specifically don't put any flavor in.
Who cares if he's lying about his role, if he's a townie?
Why would he be lying about his role if he's a townie? If we find out that his rolename is correct, that doesn't mean a whole lot except that he wasn't lying about his rolename. It in no way confirms that he's not mafia.
The rest of the stuff I think I've addressed above, so if you have any questions, feel free to ask.
@RafK: It is possible(though highly unlikely) that a 'counter' exists to my role. However, the relationship between my role and the other role I know of is so obvious that, if I die at some point before claiming and only my role is revealed, there is no way anyone will be able to take advantage of the information. People will literally see my role/name and say 'oh, the other role can only possibly be soandso', and they'll be right.
@RafK: It is possible(though highly unlikely) that a 'counter' exists to my role. However, the relationship between my role and the other role I know of is so obvious that, if I die at some point before claiming and only my role is revealed, there is no way anyone will be able to take advantage of the information. People will literally see my role/name and say 'oh, the other role can only possibly be soandso', and they'll be right.
Are you going to answer my question?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
There's that "treating the town like a foreign country" attitude again. I need to go back and see why I stopped voting Xyre in the first place and see if there's any reason I shouldn't go right back to voting him now.
Good job with the whole "failing to realize I'm speaking on a general function of the game of mafia and not on this town" thing. Maybe next time I'll say "they" instead of "the town" to make it clearer for you.
Also, all the "hints" that Cyan's throwing out into the open about his role are really, really starting to irritate me.
I can think of a few players on the site who would love the chance to prove your assumptions about this kind of scenario wrong.
You'll never hear Kobe Bryant say "Man.. at the end of the game, I don't want the ball... and I def don't want it when Lebron James is guarding me."
You'll hear him say "There is nothing I want more than to be in a tie game with Lebron Jame guarding me, 10 seconds on the clock and the ball in my hands."
Quote from CP »
RafK is of the opinion that using any kind of statistic to prove a point makes an argument stupid, and he'll go out of his way to misunderstand them.
Raf won't like arguing with me then. I'm a software engingeer who does work in manufacturing and Statistical Process Control.
Quote from Sutherland »
No... they're bound to get a few mislynches early in the game, so then if each mafia can force through one mislynch, they win. (Since they only have to get 5 in that scenario)
when the first mafia member goes down, the rest get progressively easier to spot because of connections that start showing up.
While, again in theory, what you're saying is valid, in reality, it's never the right call. If they are good enough to execute it, they are better off just playing sound mafia.
Now, if they make a mistake and are getting caught, absolutly, they should try to sew confusion or claim something that buys them time. But those are stop-gaps at best. Like, punting on 4th down. It's better than going for it most of the time... but it's still giving the ball up.
Quote from Sutherland »
No... no matter what the mafia need to get the same number of mislynches... 5 in the scenario described. So going from 5 mislynches and 5 kills to 5 mislynches and 6 kills is going up by 1.
You should study opportunity costs. They are real. The loss of a benefit is a tangible loss. The loss of a mislynch is the equivilent of adding a kill requirement.
Quote from Sutherland »
I'm saying that his claim is dubious. I am not saying that you said his claim is dubious. That quote right there is saying "Sure you did [suggest not lynching a power role with a dubious claim]."
There was this clip on the Daily Show where the whitehouse press secretary said something, and then 2 months later denied saying it. And Jon Stuart played both clips back to back. And did it repeatedly.
It was funny.
That's what you're doing here. I've just quoted it plainly in a way that anyone can see. Everyone here knows that you said it. The fact that you're now going "Oh, no, that's not what I said..." is just making you look ridiculous.
The repetition thing worked for Jon though...
Me: "I never suggested NOT lynching a power role with a dubious claim."
You: "Sure you did."
Me: "When did I say that ATL's claim was dubious?"
You: "You didn't say that his claim was dubious, but that's not what I said either."
It's really that simple. It's black and white. There is no wiggle room here.
Honestly, I am not sure it matters. But it's curious to me that you're denying something that you're quoted as saying.
Quote from Sutherland »
I would have been much, MUCH happier with that. Why? Because then it's a matter of your opinion. I still would have disagreed with you, but at least you wouldn't be trying to tell me that you said something you didn't.
IMO, that preface was assumed in the conclusion. But I'll accept that the preface might not have been clear. Obv, there is a line where you say "Ok, even though he's claiming a power role.. I'm not buying it." But we're not at that line with Atl... esp not day 1.
Quote from Sutherland »
What do you think the mafia do? Sit around and twiddle their thumbs and only vote for each other? No, they try to coerce the town into voting for other townies. What game are you playing? The whole POINT of mafia is to find out which people are scum by that exact interaction.
That's simply wrong. I don't have the time or the desire to prove this out to you, because the best proof is example and i'll have to wait till I'm scum for that one, but I'm telling you with 0 doubt, that the best way to play as scum is to play exactly as you do as a townie. To completely forget who is on your team.
That means making good arguments against people who post scummy things. No matter what side they are on. You NEVER go into a game day with a plan to direct the town.
Man.. that one bit me in the ass GOOD on mafiascum once. I thought I was hot **** cause I talked the town into 3 mislynches... and then got baked for it. We won that game via sheer laziness by the town and because Axelrod pulled off some slick **** in distancing himself from the last mafia member.
Ah... good times, noodle salad.
Anyways, the only time you try gambits as mafia is when you're losing.
Quote from Southerland »
If the mafia had a RB, they could have RBed the target instead of the JoaT, that's why it doesn't clear him. Not all mods allow you to figure everything out by flavor... a lot specifically don't put any flavor in.
Oh, totally agree. But SOME do. I'd say, in general, across scum, ML and MT, it's 50/50. Not sure what it looks like on MTGS. The point is, it MIGHT work.
Quote from Southerland »
My point is that the mafia WON'T kill him, because they know we'll kill him in the end anyway.
Unless he proves himself out. At which point, they have to kill him.
Personally, I like making the scum play the WIFOM games.
Quote from Southerland »
Yes it is... when you were going to lynch that person anyway and you could have used it to "cut down another tree".
Except you weren't neccesarily going to lynch him anyways. You were giving him a chance to prove himself out and you were going to lynch him if he failed to.
Quote from Southerland »
Why would he be lying about his role if he's a townie? If we find out that his rolename is correct, that doesn't mean a whole lot except that he wasn't lying about his rolename. It in no way confirms that he's not mafia.
There was a role in a mafia game on MT called Baron Munchousen (sp?), townie liar. He could claim any of the major power roles, and after claiming them, he gained the actual ability. But he didn't have ANY of those abilities to start out with.
Also, rolenames are often a clue to alignment. Especially after you have some dead scum to compare them to.
This argument is a rehash of an argument i've had with multiple players multiple times, and the general summary is this:
don't lynch power roles on day 1 without seriously extenuating circumstances.
When games are balanced, mods consider "lynchable" townies and "unlynchable" townies. Lynchable townies are townies who are plausibly going to be lynched. These are the "trees" the mafia hides behind. Unlynable townies are townies the mafia or SK are probably going to have to kill. When the town lynches an "unlynchable" townies, it throws the town into a major hole that they will struggle to climb out of. It's like losing in the first round of a PTQ.
It is FAR, FAR, FAR more damaging to lynch a power role early than it is to let one mafia member live for a few more days (barring powerful abilities like misdirector or mafia extra kill).
Just as a quick update. I am no longer gainfully employeed so my activity should pick up some now with the free time.
That being said, with two and a half new pages since I last viewed it will be a bit as I look over things, especially with Grak and Suth (look who's come out of the woodwork and started an argument ;)) making posts that put War and Peace to shame.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Soul Collector count: 184
PM me if you have any to trade or sell.
Games finished:17
Games ongoing:1
Town/Mafia/Other - 13/2/2
Won/Lost/replaced/modkilled- 4/13/3/1
NK'ed(vig'ed)/Lynched/Endgamed(Survived) - 7(2)/5/5(1)
Matrix Mafia Town MVP
Medieval Mafia Mafia MVP
Ye have enemies? Good, good - it means ye've stood up for something, sometime in thy life. - Elminster of Shadowdale
RafK is of the opinion that using any kind of statistic to prove a point makes an argument stupid, and he'll go out of his way to misunderstand them.
Dude, you might want to remember you were scum in Elegant and your stats were kind of ridiculous. I know that lynch kind of annoyed you, but you were actually scum
It is true, though, that my opinion of stats in mafia is generally dubious. I don't think people generally are susceptible to prediction based on what OTHER people have done. The only math arguments I like are demonstrations of "forced" wins or losses, or else stats of how a particular person has acted in the past.
Cyan: Gotcha. Then if you're a townie, no need to claim it, and if you're scum we don't need you muddying the waters with it
There was this clip on the Daily Show where the whitehouse press secretary said something, and then 2 months later denied saying it. And Jon Stuart played both clips back to back. And did it repeatedly.
It was funny.
That's what you're doing here. I've just quoted it plainly in a way that anyone can see. Everyone here knows that you said it. The fact that you're now going "Oh, no, that's not what I said..." is just making you look ridiculous.
The repetition thing worked for Jon though...
Me: "I never suggested NOT lynching a power role with a dubious claim."
You: "Sure you did."
Me: "When did I say that ATL's claim was dubious?"
You: "You didn't say that his claim was dubious, but that's not what I said either."
It's really that simple. It's black and white. There is no wiggle room here.
Honestly, I am not sure it matters. But it's curious to me that you're denying something that you're quoted as saying.
I'm tired of arguing most of these things, but I still have to address this one. The "Sure you did" was not addressing the quote you provided. You can't take one sentence out of 4 posts and then say you proved me wrong. You're taking them completely out of context.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
"This is a freebie."
"Cyan, I can think of only two legitimate reasons for you not to have responded to Grakthis' case yet. only one of them is in the best interests of the town. The other is just selfish, but not necessarily scummy. I think that it is time for you to address them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
Dude, you might want to remember you were scum in Elegant and your stats were kind of ridiculous. I know that lynch kind of annoyed you, but you were actually scum
It is true, though, that my opinion of stats in mafia is generally dubious. I don't think people generally are susceptible to prediction based on what OTHER people have done. The only math arguments I like are demonstrations of "forced" wins or losses, or else stats of how a particular person has acted in the past.
First of all, my being scum in that game had zero to do with my argument. The argument was valid then and it would be in this game as well. I have maintained the stance I had in that game in all the games since where it was relevant. You do not 'just trust' 3-person masonries. You took a mistake in the math as evidence that the point was wrong, when it was irrelevant to the overall argument, and you took a mistake in the math as evidence of scumminess, which was not only wrong but incredibly scummy. I had every right to be infuriated at that lynch.
Second of all, you're still wrong. Statistics are an excellent predictor of what people do, and an even better indicator of what roles do. You just seem incapable of separating the idea of 60% likely not being equal to 100% likely.
What?! Look at the initial post; he is dead. Deceased. Kaputt. Indefinitely horizontal. In mafia games, you see, people are occasionally "killed off," and when that sad event occurs, he or she is no longer allowed to post, on account of rigor mortis and what-have-you.
'Welcome to Mafia Salvation', it said, 'Population: 3,660.' And someone, they never figured out who, had painted on the sign in red letters: '1,831 to lynch.'
You always think you've been lynched for a bad reason when you're scum, though, same as Sutherlands. Your maths were fogging the issue, not helping find scum- hence they were bad, hence they were a sign of your scumitude there. Stats used to fog and confuse- which is usually the case- are scummy exactly because they fog and confuse rather than helping.
I don't see how you could argue it was scummy to successfully lynch a mafia member, btw.
Speaking of fogging, why raise the 3-man masonry argument again for crying out loud?
Good thing for you that I don't believe in mafia multivoters. Although I could be brought to believe in a neutral multivoter if you keep this up.
So, you're saying that we should give Xyre a pass, based on his playstyle, even though he just decried that position himself? Not buying it. Xyre has come across to me as misinformed before. Now is not one of those times. In this game, even the intention behind his posts has come across as scummy.
I'm tired of arguing most of these things, but I still have to address this one. The "Sure you did" was not addressing the quote you provided. You can't take one sentence out of 4 posts and then say you proved me wrong. You're taking them completely out of context.
Well, we can let the town decide that for themselves. It's pretty obvious that it WAS adressing the line I quoted, because there was nothing else it could plausibly be addressing.
Quote from Rafael »
You always think you've been lynched for a bad reason when you're scum, though, same as Sutherlands. Your maths were fogging the issue, not helping find scum- hence they were bad, hence they were a sign of your scumitude there. Stats used to fog and confuse- which is usually the case- are scummy exactly because they fog and confuse rather than helping.
I obv don't know what the actual argument was, but if his numbers were correct, then they weren't fogging the issue. They were providing information.
Now, wheather or not that information was valid or misleading should be judged in the same way ANY information or statement or post or whatever should be judged. There isn't a seperate standard for people who provide information in the form of statistics and people who provide information in the form of quotes and arguments.
Both have their place.
Of course, if his numbers were wrong, then he's just as guilty as someone making an intentionally misleading and false argument in any circumstance.
Is it just me, or has it become totally apparent yet that Sutherlands is faking this vote count restriction?
In light of current posts, possibly, maybe even probably, although I want Azrael to post in here (even if it is just a votecount) before we jump to conclusions.
The man EDITED A POST to put a votecount in. That's commitment. Obv, the restriction is real. Who the hell in their right mind edits for a fake restriction?
The man EDITED A POST to put a votecount in. That's commitment. Obv, the restriction is real. Who the hell in their right mind edits for a fake restriction?
Someone who skimmed the rules and saw we could edit up to three minutes after posting (but missed only for tag corrections, etc.)?
Someone who doesn't want to get called out for faking a restriction?
I'm sure there are other potential reasons. Thing is, I'm asking a simple question out loud and you seem awfully sure of the answer.
And let me remind you- he didn't have a postcount in his first post.
And let me remind you- he didn't have a postcount in his first post.
Which begs the question, where did he get the crazy idea to start faking itfrom the 2nd post? You should be more receptive to the simple explanations. Like "he forgot".
Is it just me, or has it become totally apparent yet that Sutherlands is faking this vote count restriction?
/offtopic @Vamp: I hope that doesn't mean you lost your job unwillingly?
There's no reason to assume the mod wouldn't be fine with him posting the votecount within a few minutes.
If Sutherlands forgets for like, a day or something, then you might have a point.
I'm split on Sutherlands. His arguments feel honest, but his conclusions are not pro-town. But if his arguments are honest, then bad conclusions (or, just conclusions I disagree with) are not signs of scumminess...
Seems a little early to be applying that just yet. Particularly from someone who fake-claimed unnecessarily as scum in his last game.
Quote from Alx2 »
Which begs the question, where did he get the crazy idea to start faking itfrom the 2nd post? You should be more receptive to the simple explanations. Like "he forgot".
Which also begs the question:
If you just got your brand spanking new role, and it says "you must put a vote count in every post"- you immediately come out and forget to do it?
Feel free to expound on this. Particularly since I'm right.
Xyre's 'reasoning' for suddenly not accepting the 'people shouldn't get a pass because of their playstyle' argument makes no sense. Instead of trying to present logically why this shouldn't happen(and it shouldn't, something I have always maintained), instead he just tried to appeal to everyone emotionally by making himself look vulnerable and making me look like the bad guy. Nevermind that this somehow hasn't come up since the end of that game and this one. What Xyre is asserting doesn't add up at all.
I fail to see where I've done this. When you say I'm "changing my tune", you fail to notice that the game in question, 24 Mafia, was MONTHS AGO. Unless you're honestly arguing that people never change, your argument is meritless. Frankly, I'm sick of getting lynched Day 1 as a townie. That's part of why I'm arguing this differently. So stop with the roundabout attacks (like accusations of "emotional appeals" and irrational arguments) and make sense for a change. This line of attacks on me isn't making me any more comfortable with the idea that you're town.
Quote from Cyan »
@Xyre: People have asked questions, I have answered them. As indicated by the post above yours, clearly I can't just ignore them.
You act like you're bound to whatever Hawkeye and Co. ask you. You do have the ability to say you'd rather not disclose any information for fear of damaging the town. The fact that you're not doing so and instead allowing people to fish you is what bothers me. Strangely, it reminds me of your role in Trek, where you leaked information for credibility that ended up helping the mafia win.
Quote from Alx2 »
The man EDITED A POST to put a votecount in. That's commitment. Obv, the restriction is real. Who the hell in their right mind edits for a fake restriction?
I don't know... someone who's trying to desperately earn townie points? Regardless, he's violated said "posting restriction" at least 2 times now, which any mod would tell you is grounds for a modkill if he did indeed have one.
I'm going to sit here and really try to deduce some things about arim's death. It just seemed to sort of happen and not get as much attention as it probably should have.
Like I said earlier, there's really only two possibilities I can think of:
1) It was a delayed kill
2) The kill happened between posts 636-655
Note: I'm also going to assume that the killer is not pro-town because I can't stretch my mind around that being a pro-town play.
I will openly admit that if it was a delayed kill, the following will end up being pointless, but I'm not going to use the following as the basis of a vote, just as a platform to jump from which to narrow my search. So, since this analysis would really only mean anything if it's option #2, let's look at players that posted between 636-655 (plus ~2 hours if the player first killed arim and then posted after the death scene). That gives me a list of 11 potential suspects from where to springboard if theory #2 is true:
LJ
ZDS
Cyan
Pod
Xyre
Spoon
Raf
CP
Axel
Suth
HE
Now, I'm pretty sure at this point we can eliminate CP (because I think that a multi-voting SK is probably a bit powerful). Also, for the moment I think we can eliminate ZDS unless his claim proves to be false at some later point in the game. This leaves us with the following 9, so lets see what each of their reactions were to when arim died:
LJ - 9th "reply": First post after arim's death - 722 7/9/07 1:13PM EST; Last post before death was 7/7/07 5:04PM EST
Cyan - 6th reply: Thought arim was modkilled
Pod - 4th reply: quotes Xyre about death scene and seems upset that flavor of the kill is all over the place
Xyre - 2nd reply: mentioning it being a hybrid of many Matrix death scenes "...what the hell?"
Spoon - 3rd reply: Posts arim's post-mortum vote record (the votes for him and by him)
Raf - 8th reply: Suspicious of Xyre's reactions to the death
Axel - 1st reply: "Lovely."
Suth - 5th reply: No mention/reference to arim's death 31 min. prior
HE - 7th reply: Spouts questions surrounding arim's death: Who done it? Why?
The responses out of those that will lead me to further game investigation and why:
LJ - Not because of his reaction being suspicious, but because there's really no reaction at all to judge just because of the timing of his posts
Xyre - Being first to complain about the flavor being all over the place
Suth - I'd think that there'd be at least some mention of arim's death
HE - Regarding the questions vocalized surrounding the death
So, the next group of people I'm going to focus in on for the time being are those 4 above and see what I find suspicious about each one. Will report back later.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're town and I'm mafia, you've already lost. You just don't know it yet.
Can you please explain why it was necessary for the killer to post between posts 636-655?
I know where he's coming from with this, it's because Az made both of those bookend posts.
But, woo buddy, is #877 a crash-course in dangerous and poor logic.
Quote from Atlseal »
I will openly admit that if it was a delayed kill, the following will end up being pointless, but I'm not going to use the following as the basis of a vote, just as a platform to jump from which to narrow my search. So, since this analysis would really only mean anything if it's option #2, let's look at players that posted between 636-655 (plus ~2 hours if the player first killed arim and then posted after the death scene). That gives me a list of 11 potential suspects from where to springboard if theory #2 is true:
Even with that said, what in the world makes you think that the killer submitted the PM to Azrael to kill Arimnaes and that he also posted in-thread?
There is so much wrong with this whole line of thinking it makes my brain hurt.
Can you please explain why it was necessary for the killer to post between posts 636-655?
I didn't say that. Notice how I also grabbed names from approximately 2 hours after the death scene to help mitigate that. Those posts are relevant because 636 was a vote count by Az (not death) and 655 was the next vote count by Az (arim's death). I'm also not saying that one of those people had to do it, just that it's more likely. I'm just walking people through my thought process for narrowing down people who I deem worthy of looking at.
Preview edit:
@DYH: To reiterate, I'm not guarenteeing that one of those players are the killer. However, I find it as good a place to start looking as any.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're town and I'm mafia, you've already lost. You just don't know it yet.
Indeed, your entire basis is off. Assuming it was a PM'd kill to the Mod. there would be no reason to assume that the killer also went and posted in the thread at the same time. In fact, the opposite seems more likely. If you just PM'd the Mod. to kill someone, you probably don't want to be around when it happens.
It might be slightly valid if you could obtain a list of every player who was online during the period between those posts, but I do not believe you can do that.
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.
I think we would get the most useful information at the moment from learning Cyan's alignment.
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.
Indeed, your entire basis is off. Assuming it was a PM'd kill to the Mod. there would be no reason to assume that the killer also went and posted in the thread at the same time. In fact, the opposite seems more likely. If you just PM'd the Mod. to kill someone, you probably don't want to be around when it happens.
It might be slightly valid if you could obtain a list of every player who was online during the period between those posts, but I do not believe you can do that.
Notice how I've repeatedly said that I'm not voting anyone for that... I'm merely using it as a springboard for myself so that I can narrow down my suspect list for the time-being. If it happens to let me narrow down on a SK, great, but I'm not saying that it will. In fact, I highly doubt it. There are just some interesting reactions to his death that I think deserve more attention.
Pre-post edit @LJ: I would 100% say Cyan
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're town and I'm mafia, you've already lost. You just don't know it yet.
@DYH: I know Az made both of those posts, it's just not clear to me why did the daykiller have to post in between. atlseal himself failed to provide a reasoning for this.
@atlseal: you didn't say it was necessary for the killer to post in that interval, yet your analysis only included players who posted in that interval. I disapprove of this logic.
@LJustus: I pick Cyan. He's been giving me the most conflicting vibes.
Indeed, your entire basis is off. Assuming it was a PM'd kill to the Mod. there would be no reason to assume that the killer also went and posted in the thread at the same time. In fact, the opposite seems more likely. If you just PM'd the Mod. to kill someone, you probably don't want to be around when it happens.
It might be slightly valid if you could obtain a list of every player who was online during the period between those posts, but I do not believe you can do that.
Although the next time it happens (assuming it wasn't a one-shot) it might be worth taking a quick look to see who hasn't logged in at all since the last time Azrael posted. Might eliminate a few people.
But yes, trying to guess who it is just by seeing who posted in the thread that day is bad. Trying to work it out from reactions isn't terrible though (and I have my own thoughts in that direction), although it's not perfect- it's as possible that the killer shut up and went away for a day as that the killer stayed around to marvel in the thread at their own cleverness.
EBWODP to answer LJ's question: Cyan or Xyre. Or perhaps HE7 just because I don't read him very well, and he's hard to lynch without an investigation when he's scum.
I'm still trying to catch up with my reading, but so far, the other alternatives I would be interested in for further reread (on my part at least) would be Alx and LJ.
What?! Look at the initial post; he is dead. Deceased. Kaputt. Indefinitely horizontal. In mafia games, you see, people are occasionally "killed off," and when that sad event occurs, he or she is no longer allowed to post, on account of rigor mortis and what-have-you.
'Welcome to Mafia Salvation', it said, 'Population: 3,660.' And someone, they never figured out who, had painted on the sign in red letters: '1,831 to lynch.'
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
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
MTGS tradition says that lynching people who are making stupid stats-based arguments catches scum 9 times out of 10
Cyan: Can you guarantee that if you die, there couldn't be a second role (whom you don't have information on) who's similarly connected to you and could muddy the waters as to which one is "clear"?
Re DotA: Re-hashing the balance of DotA in this thread isn't achieving anything. Take it outside.
The reality is that it's generally worth giving a confirmably power role a chance to prove themselves. atlseal's claimed role is borderline confirmable, although the likelihood that he's going to say in the morning he was roleblocked (whether he's town or scum) messes with that. Nonetheless, that at least could mess with how the mafia plays tonight. And you never know, perhaps atl is town and the scum have no blocker or the blocker is tied up doing something else, or whatever.
There's that "treating the town like a foreign country" attitude again. I need to go back and see why I stopped voting Xyre in the first place and see if there's any reason I shouldn't go right back to voting him now.
on Cyan: I still don't see the validity of this wagon.
I still think there's more that can be learned from the timing of arim's sudden death and I'll actually have the time to make the proper chart for myself tomorrow. Who I think should be lynched will come with this assesment.
Sure. But that's totally irrelevant. The mafia will lose if they cash in all of their chips to push one guy to the end game. We don't have to do anything wacky in that scenario... we just play our game, let the scum hand us their chips, and then we outplay them in the end game.
I'll take that all day.
The scum you fear are the ones who play like townies all game and try to get the "perfect victory."
Like... ok, let's use a MTG analogy... if you're aggro facing heavy white, do you drop all your beaters on the board turn 3? Or do you hold some back for the wrath?
if you're the control player, which are you more afraid of?
Good. Because that was the point. The point was 5 townies who would not be lynched. I picked those roles just cuz.
You're twisting language to make it say what you want it to say. I find it deceptive, because on the surface your post is right... but strategically it's oh so wrong.
Because even if we play your game where the first 5 kills are "assumed", you're brushing off lynches, which for the mafia are kills they need to win. Each lynched mafia member is one less mislynched townie AND one more townie they need to kill.
So it's still 2 to 1 even when I play your game.
Yes you did. Do I really need to quote you back at yourself?
Me: "I never suggested NOT lynching a power role with a dubious claim. Never. By bringing this into the discussion and using an example of such, you are implying a position I did not take."
You: "Sure you did. Or at least you suggested not lynching for "3-4 days [. . .] at a MINIMUM!"
Are you going to deny saying that? Because it's right there on the forum.
Wow... that is some fancy stretches of logic you're reaching for there. I hope you didn't pull anything.
The idea that WE are considering lynching him is insane because his claim is NOT DUBIOUS.
Would you have been happier if I had prefaced it by saying "people who are calling his claim DUBIOUS are INSANE!"
Does that work for you?
Actually, I'm not sure I would say insane, but I would def disagree with them.
Oh god... oh god... PLEASE MAFIA.... PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE TRY TO CREATE MISLYNCHES!
Oh man... i am getting wood just thinking about the idea. If they do that, this game will be over so fast, I'll need to start taking enzyte just to feel like a man again.
The mafia would not have 2 roleblockers. Well, I mean, they could, but we're back to that REASONABLE doubt concept that I mentioned earlier.
Obv, when I said "confirmed roleblock" i meant confirmed via flavor and "confirmed" to have been distinct from the roleblocks performed by the dead mafia member.
Shoudl have made that clearer.
The town having 2 roles that roleblock when one of them is a JOAT is not implausible. Similar thing happened on MT not too long ago. Almost got a townie lynched too.
!!!
No! I mean, I don't think he needs to die either, but what I am going against so strongly is using our lynch on him.
if the mafia kill him, we clear out someone who a lot of the town apparently wants dead AND we do it at the mafia's expense!
Unless he really is a JOAT, in which case the mafia will NEED to kill him.
Catching scum is NEVER a waste of an investigation. Especially when the worst case is lynching a townie power role.
Who cares if he's lying about his role, if he's a townie?
There were several roles in a Seol run game on MT that actually rewarded the townie for lying about his abilities.
Oh, uh, a questioner normally is someone who can ask the mod a question. Normally very limited in scope. Somethings it's yes or no, and cannot include players names.. or sometimes it's limited to a specific subject, or range, or can only be done once, or something like that.
Normally, their best use is to confirm roleclaims. Things like "is the chesire cat in the game?"
But it will 1) lock down his kill method 2) Give us something to analyze 3) kill a mafia member.
Like, if we see the same kill method later.. or if it's not that simple, you can count up missing kills too. That often provides either validity or doubt.
Mafia do this all the time, it helps their "townie credibility". Not proof.
Man... you're a negative nancy. Maybe the cop result will catch scum, the doc protection will stop a kill and the vig will take out the SK?
Again... nothing makes me happier than scum who think they can mislead the town. NOTHING!
He's still giving us info. No one says we have to take his word for it till after he's dead.
I am confused... if catching scum is wasting an investigation, what is a good use of one?
What if he's telling the truth and the cop verifies him? And we have a JOAT on our side that is cop confirmed?
I'll take your word for it. It's not really relevant... because you get into power creep at that point, which completley blows up day mafia anyways.
I've sseen a game where something similar happened... Superhero Mafia on tings. Power creep made people get lazy during the day and rely on nights too much.
Also, please remember to post your votecount.
I agree. Stupid stat based arguments are terrible for the town.
I had someone argue that Locus (a ML player) couldn't be scum because he had been scum for 3 games in a row.
Thankfully, I don't make stupid stats based arguments....
:o:eyebrow::isthatso::confused::(:stupid::-/:mad::rolleyes::sweat::thumbsdown::gonk::rolleyes2::confused2::muh::uhh::B::mad1::mad1::mad1::mad1::mad1::mad1::sick::rollout::suckup::smiledown::laugh2::weird:>.>
:chillpill::weird2::rofl::swear::swear::swear::swear::swear::no::no::no::O:crying::crazy::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::argh:
:argh::argh::argh::argh::argh:^_^;:teach::Psyduck::rate0:
MTGS tradition also says that precedent typically beats logic in popular argument.
Mafia MVP BM Mafia
Mafia MVP Matrix Mafia
Mafia MVP BM Mafia
Mafia MVP Matrix Mafia
1. That's sounds a bit flippant considering your circumstances.
2. What do you like about Cyan?
3. Are you seriously saying that you are going to base you next vote off of the "timing" of Arimnaes's death? That strikes me as both poor reasoning and a colossal waste of time.
I can think of a few players on the site who would love the chance to prove your assumptions about this kind of scenario wrong.
RafK is of the opinion that using any kind of statistic to prove a point makes an argument stupid, and he'll go out of his way to misunderstand them.
Mafia MVP BM Mafia
Mafia MVP Matrix Mafia
What do you expect me to say? I've stated what my role is and if I'm going to end up lynched, the best thing to do is let me try to get that one result out in the open. Of course, all of this has been stated already and I didn't feel the need to rehash all those statements.
Oh, don't get me wrong. Ever since he got on my wagon for really weird reasons, I've found him suspicious. However, the case on him at the moment really isn't... I agree with him that a lot of the votes on him have seemed like bandwagoning.
Of course not. If I figure out something that I find interesting about it, then it will play into my vote. What I was saying in that post is that tomorrow (in the same post as where I assess the circumstances surrounding arim's death), I'll be placing my vote in the place I view to be the best bet for a lynch. On that subject, Unvote
No... they're bound to get a few mislynches early in the game, so then if each mafia can force through one mislynch, they win. (Since they only have to get 5 in that scenario)
No... no matter what the mafia need to get the same number of mislynches... 5 in the scenario described. So going from 5 mislynches and 5 kills to 5 mislynches and 6 kills is going up by 1.
I'm saying that his claim is dubious. I am not saying that you said his claim is dubious. That quote right there is saying "Sure you did [suggest not lynching a power role with a dubious claim]."
I would have been much, MUCH happier with that. Why? Because then it's a matter of your opinion. I still would have disagreed with you, but at least you wouldn't be trying to tell me that you said something you didn't.
What do you think the mafia do? Sit around and twiddle their thumbs and only vote for each other? No, they try to coerce the town into voting for other townies. What game are you playing? The whole POINT of mafia is to find out which people are scum by that exact interaction.
If the mafia had a RB, they could have RBed the target instead of the JoaT, that's why it doesn't clear him. Not all mods allow you to figure everything out by flavor... a lot specifically don't put any flavor in.
My point is that the mafia WON'T kill him, because they know we'll kill him in the end anyway.
Yes it is... when you were going to lynch that person anyway and you could have used it to "cut down another tree".
Why would he be lying about his role if he's a townie? If we find out that his rolename is correct, that doesn't mean a whole lot except that he wasn't lying about his rolename. It in no way confirms that he's not mafia.
The rest of the stuff I think I've addressed above, so if you have any questions, feel free to ask.
1 Alx2-Cyan
3 Atlseal-Abbeygargoyle, Alx2, Carrion Pigeons
6 Cyan-Grakthis, Vampyr, Hawkeye7, ZDS, Fadeblue, Xyre
1 Loran16- Athos
1 Spoon-Wizzpig(?)
1 Vampyr-Spoon
2 xyre- Pod, Sutherlands
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)
Are you going to answer my question?
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
Good job with the whole "failing to realize I'm speaking on a general function of the game of mafia and not on this town" thing. Maybe next time I'll say "they" instead of "the town" to make it clearer for you.
Also, all the "hints" that Cyan's throwing out into the open about his role are really, really starting to irritate me.
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
@Hawkeye: Nothing would happen. As I said, it is unlikely that the role I am aware of was initially aware of me.
You'll never hear Kobe Bryant say "Man.. at the end of the game, I don't want the ball... and I def don't want it when Lebron James is guarding me."
You'll hear him say "There is nothing I want more than to be in a tie game with Lebron Jame guarding me, 10 seconds on the clock and the ball in my hands."
Raf won't like arguing with me then. I'm a software engingeer who does work in manufacturing and Statistical Process Control.
when the first mafia member goes down, the rest get progressively easier to spot because of connections that start showing up.
While, again in theory, what you're saying is valid, in reality, it's never the right call. If they are good enough to execute it, they are better off just playing sound mafia.
Now, if they make a mistake and are getting caught, absolutly, they should try to sew confusion or claim something that buys them time. But those are stop-gaps at best. Like, punting on 4th down. It's better than going for it most of the time... but it's still giving the ball up.
You should study opportunity costs. They are real. The loss of a benefit is a tangible loss. The loss of a mislynch is the equivilent of adding a kill requirement.
There was this clip on the Daily Show where the whitehouse press secretary said something, and then 2 months later denied saying it. And Jon Stuart played both clips back to back. And did it repeatedly.
It was funny.
That's what you're doing here. I've just quoted it plainly in a way that anyone can see. Everyone here knows that you said it. The fact that you're now going "Oh, no, that's not what I said..." is just making you look ridiculous.
The repetition thing worked for Jon though...
Me: "I never suggested NOT lynching a power role with a dubious claim."
You: "Sure you did."
Me: "When did I say that ATL's claim was dubious?"
You: "You didn't say that his claim was dubious, but that's not what I said either."
It's really that simple. It's black and white. There is no wiggle room here.
Honestly, I am not sure it matters. But it's curious to me that you're denying something that you're quoted as saying.
IMO, that preface was assumed in the conclusion. But I'll accept that the preface might not have been clear. Obv, there is a line where you say "Ok, even though he's claiming a power role.. I'm not buying it." But we're not at that line with Atl... esp not day 1.
That's simply wrong. I don't have the time or the desire to prove this out to you, because the best proof is example and i'll have to wait till I'm scum for that one, but I'm telling you with 0 doubt, that the best way to play as scum is to play exactly as you do as a townie. To completely forget who is on your team.
That means making good arguments against people who post scummy things. No matter what side they are on. You NEVER go into a game day with a plan to direct the town.
Man.. that one bit me in the ass GOOD on mafiascum once. I thought I was hot **** cause I talked the town into 3 mislynches... and then got baked for it. We won that game via sheer laziness by the town and because Axelrod pulled off some slick **** in distancing himself from the last mafia member.
Ah... good times, noodle salad.
Anyways, the only time you try gambits as mafia is when you're losing.
Oh, totally agree. But SOME do. I'd say, in general, across scum, ML and MT, it's 50/50. Not sure what it looks like on MTGS. The point is, it MIGHT work.
Unless he proves himself out. At which point, they have to kill him.
Personally, I like making the scum play the WIFOM games.
Except you weren't neccesarily going to lynch him anyways. You were giving him a chance to prove himself out and you were going to lynch him if he failed to.
There was a role in a mafia game on MT called Baron Munchousen (sp?), townie liar. He could claim any of the major power roles, and after claiming them, he gained the actual ability. But he didn't have ANY of those abilities to start out with.
Also, rolenames are often a clue to alignment. Especially after you have some dead scum to compare them to.
This argument is a rehash of an argument i've had with multiple players multiple times, and the general summary is this:
don't lynch power roles on day 1 without seriously extenuating circumstances.
When games are balanced, mods consider "lynchable" townies and "unlynchable" townies. Lynchable townies are townies who are plausibly going to be lynched. These are the "trees" the mafia hides behind. Unlynable townies are townies the mafia or SK are probably going to have to kill. When the town lynches an "unlynchable" townies, it throws the town into a major hole that they will struggle to climb out of. It's like losing in the first round of a PTQ.
It is FAR, FAR, FAR more damaging to lynch a power role early than it is to let one mafia member live for a few more days (barring powerful abilities like misdirector or mafia extra kill).
That being said, with two and a half new pages since I last viewed it will be a bit as I look over things, especially with Grak and Suth (look who's come out of the woodwork and started an argument ;)) making posts that put War and Peace to shame.
PM me if you have any to trade or sell.
Games finished:17
Games ongoing:1
Town/Mafia/Other - 13/2/2
Won/Lost/replaced/modkilled- 4/13/3/1
NK'ed(vig'ed)/Lynched/Endgamed(Survived) - 7(2)/5/5(1)
Matrix Mafia Town MVP
Medieval Mafia Mafia MVP
Ye have enemies? Good, good - it means ye've stood up for something, sometime in thy life. - Elminster of Shadowdale
Dude, you might want to remember you were scum in Elegant and your stats were kind of ridiculous. I know that lynch kind of annoyed you, but you were actually scum
It is true, though, that my opinion of stats in mafia is generally dubious. I don't think people generally are susceptible to prediction based on what OTHER people have done. The only math arguments I like are demonstrations of "forced" wins or losses, or else stats of how a particular person has acted in the past.
Cyan: Gotcha. Then if you're a townie, no need to claim it, and if you're scum we don't need you muddying the waters with it
I'm tired of arguing most of these things, but I still have to address this one. The "Sure you did" was not addressing the quote you provided. You can't take one sentence out of 4 posts and then say you proved me wrong. You're taking them completely out of context.
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)
1 Alx2-Cyan
3 Atlseal-Abbeygargoyle, Alx2, Carrion Pigeons
6 Cyan-Grakthis, Vampyr, Hawkeye7, ZDS, Fadeblue, Xyre
1 Loran16- Athos
1 Spoon-Wizzpig(?)
1 Vampyr-Spoon
2 xyre- Pod, Sutherlands
Hey, you! Yeah, you behind the computer screen! You're unconstitutional.
America == Velociraptor
Play IRC mafia. (/join #mafia)
UNVOTE: CYAN
"This is a freebie."
"Cyan, I can think of only two legitimate reasons for you not to have responded to Grakthis' case yet. only one of them is in the best interests of the town. The other is just selfish, but not necessarily scummy. I think that it is time for you to address them.
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
First of all, my being scum in that game had zero to do with my argument. The argument was valid then and it would be in this game as well. I have maintained the stance I had in that game in all the games since where it was relevant. You do not 'just trust' 3-person masonries. You took a mistake in the math as evidence that the point was wrong, when it was irrelevant to the overall argument, and you took a mistake in the math as evidence of scumminess, which was not only wrong but incredibly scummy. I had every right to be infuriated at that lynch.
Second of all, you're still wrong. Statistics are an excellent predictor of what people do, and an even better indicator of what roles do. You just seem incapable of separating the idea of 60% likely not being equal to 100% likely.
Mafia MVP BM Mafia
Mafia MVP Matrix Mafia
I don't see how you could argue it was scummy to successfully lynch a mafia member, btw.
Speaking of fogging, why raise the 3-man masonry argument again for crying out loud?
Good thing for you that I don't believe in mafia multivoters. Although I could be brought to believe in a neutral multivoter if you keep this up.
Well, we can let the town decide that for themselves. It's pretty obvious that it WAS adressing the line I quoted, because there was nothing else it could plausibly be addressing.
I obv don't know what the actual argument was, but if his numbers were correct, then they weren't fogging the issue. They were providing information.
Now, wheather or not that information was valid or misleading should be judged in the same way ANY information or statement or post or whatever should be judged. There isn't a seperate standard for people who provide information in the form of statistics and people who provide information in the form of quotes and arguments.
Both have their place.
Of course, if his numbers were wrong, then he's just as guilty as someone making an intentionally misleading and false argument in any circumstance.
/offtopic @Vamp: I hope that doesn't mean you lost your job unwillingly?
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
In light of current posts, possibly, maybe even probably, although I want Azrael to post in here (even if it is just a votecount) before we jump to conclusions.
Someone who skimmed the rules and saw we could edit up to three minutes after posting (but missed only for tag corrections, etc.)?
Someone who doesn't want to get called out for faking a restriction?
I'm sure there are other potential reasons. Thing is, I'm asking a simple question out loud and you seem awfully sure of the answer.
And let me remind you- he didn't have a postcount in his first post.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
What can I say, I'm a sucker for Occam's Razor.
Which begs the question, where did he get the crazy idea to start faking it from the 2nd post? You should be more receptive to the simple explanations. Like "he forgot".
There's no reason to assume the mod wouldn't be fine with him posting the votecount within a few minutes.
If Sutherlands forgets for like, a day or something, then you might have a point.
I'm split on Sutherlands. His arguments feel honest, but his conclusions are not pro-town. But if his arguments are honest, then bad conclusions (or, just conclusions I disagree with) are not signs of scumminess...
He's not on my list, but he needs to be watched.
Seems a little early to be applying that just yet. Particularly from someone who fake-claimed unnecessarily as scum in his last game.
Which also begs the question:
If you just got your brand spanking new role, and it says "you must put a vote count in every post"- you immediately come out and forget to do it?
I'm a bit skeptical, yeah.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
You're giving me too much credit. I'm playing intentionally.
To respond to the original post in question,
I fail to see where I've done this. When you say I'm "changing my tune", you fail to notice that the game in question, 24 Mafia, was MONTHS AGO. Unless you're honestly arguing that people never change, your argument is meritless. Frankly, I'm sick of getting lynched Day 1 as a townie. That's part of why I'm arguing this differently. So stop with the roundabout attacks (like accusations of "emotional appeals" and irrational arguments) and make sense for a change. This line of attacks on me isn't making me any more comfortable with the idea that you're town.
You act like you're bound to whatever Hawkeye and Co. ask you. You do have the ability to say you'd rather not disclose any information for fear of damaging the town. The fact that you're not doing so and instead allowing people to fish you is what bothers me. Strangely, it reminds me of your role in Trek, where you leaked information for credibility that ended up helping the mafia win.
I don't know... someone who's trying to desperately earn townie points? Regardless, he's violated said "posting restriction" at least 2 times now, which any mod would tell you is grounds for a modkill if he did indeed have one.
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
Like I said earlier, there's really only two possibilities I can think of:
1) It was a delayed kill
2) The kill happened between posts 636-655
Note: I'm also going to assume that the killer is not pro-town because I can't stretch my mind around that being a pro-town play.
I will openly admit that if it was a delayed kill, the following will end up being pointless, but I'm not going to use the following as the basis of a vote, just as a platform to jump from which to narrow my search. So, since this analysis would really only mean anything if it's option #2, let's look at players that posted between 636-655 (plus ~2 hours if the player first killed arim and then posted after the death scene). That gives me a list of 11 potential suspects from where to springboard if theory #2 is true:
LJ
ZDS
Cyan
Pod
Xyre
Spoon
Raf
CP
Axel
Suth
HE
Now, I'm pretty sure at this point we can eliminate CP (because I think that a multi-voting SK is probably a bit powerful). Also, for the moment I think we can eliminate ZDS unless his claim proves to be false at some later point in the game. This leaves us with the following 9, so lets see what each of their reactions were to when arim died:
LJ - 9th "reply": First post after arim's death - 722 7/9/07 1:13PM EST; Last post before death was 7/7/07 5:04PM EST
Cyan - 6th reply: Thought arim was modkilled
Pod - 4th reply: quotes Xyre about death scene and seems upset that flavor of the kill is all over the place
Xyre - 2nd reply: mentioning it being a hybrid of many Matrix death scenes "...what the hell?"
Spoon - 3rd reply: Posts arim's post-mortum vote record (the votes for him and by him)
Raf - 8th reply: Suspicious of Xyre's reactions to the death
Axel - 1st reply: "Lovely."
Suth - 5th reply: No mention/reference to arim's death 31 min. prior
HE - 7th reply: Spouts questions surrounding arim's death: Who done it? Why?
The responses out of those that will lead me to further game investigation and why:
LJ - Not because of his reaction being suspicious, but because there's really no reaction at all to judge just because of the timing of his posts
Xyre - Being first to complain about the flavor being all over the place
Suth - I'd think that there'd be at least some mention of arim's death
HE - Regarding the questions vocalized surrounding the death
So, the next group of people I'm going to focus in on for the time being are those 4 above and see what I find suspicious about each one. Will report back later.
I know where he's coming from with this, it's because Az made both of those bookend posts.
But, woo buddy, is #877 a crash-course in dangerous and poor logic.
Even with that said, what in the world makes you think that the killer submitted the PM to Azrael to kill Arimnaes and that he also posted in-thread?
There is so much wrong with this whole line of thinking it makes my brain hurt.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
I didn't say that. Notice how I also grabbed names from approximately 2 hours after the death scene to help mitigate that. Those posts are relevant because 636 was a vote count by Az (not death) and 655 was the next vote count by Az (arim's death). I'm also not saying that one of those people had to do it, just that it's more likely. I'm just walking people through my thought process for narrowing down people who I deem worthy of looking at.
Preview edit:
@DYH: To reiterate, I'm not guarenteeing that one of those players are the killer. However, I find it as good a place to start looking as any.
It might be slightly valid if you could obtain a list of every player who was online during the period between those posts, but I do not believe you can do that.
If we were given an opportunity to definitely know the alignment of one player, who would it be and why?*
I would probably choose either Grakthis or Cyan because both are excellent analysts who, if confirmed, would be a definite thorn in the mafia's sides.
*Please note: This is not a cop claim - simply a discussion point.
Other than that, I don't think it's worth the trouble of repeating what everyone else said about the holes in your argument.
LJustus: I'd say Cyan.
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
Notice how I've repeatedly said that I'm not voting anyone for that... I'm merely using it as a springboard for myself so that I can narrow down my suspect list for the time-being. If it happens to let me narrow down on a SK, great, but I'm not saying that it will. In fact, I highly doubt it. There are just some interesting reactions to his death that I think deserve more attention.
Pre-post edit @LJ: I would 100% say Cyan
@atlseal: you didn't say it was necessary for the killer to post in that interval, yet your analysis only included players who posted in that interval. I disapprove of this logic.
@LJustus: I pick Cyan. He's been giving me the most conflicting vibes.
Although the next time it happens (assuming it wasn't a one-shot) it might be worth taking a quick look to see who hasn't logged in at all since the last time Azrael posted. Might eliminate a few people.
But yes, trying to guess who it is just by seeing who posted in the thread that day is bad. Trying to work it out from reactions isn't terrible though (and I have my own thoughts in that direction), although it's not perfect- it's as possible that the killer shut up and went away for a day as that the killer stayed around to marvel in the thread at their own cleverness.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
I'm still trying to catch up with my reading, but so far, the other alternatives I would be interested in for further reread (on my part at least) would be Alx and LJ.
We'll make you an offer you can't refuse.
Hosting: Vista Mafia
Hosted: Intrigue Mafia (Mini), Seance #43 (Basic), Conflux Mafia (Normal), Goo Mafia (FTQ), Experiment #26 (Basic)
Ongoing/Completed - 0/41
Town/Mafia/SK/Survivor - 30/6/4/1
NKed/Lynched/Survived - 15/11/15
Now can we get back to lynching atl?
Mafia MVP BM Mafia
Mafia MVP Matrix Mafia