At what point in the game do you start trusting people?
"A dead body goes a long way. Corpses can't lie. Most of the time." *shrug*
"Obviously everyone has different criterion for levels of trust. There is little reason for anyone to absolutely trust each other unless they are masons, scum, or some sort of 'you know X is town' sort of deal. I don't see why you would trust anyone yet, as the biggest topic thus far has been over AsianInvasion's information. Not a wagon, claim, or some sort of other information has been created yet."
"I don't feel your point really has much weight or significance despite the apparent force you're putting into it. Not at the current time."
"As to the class theories, perhaps we could revisit it later when some dossiers are open to examine. I believe there is some sort of correlation, as I doubt the classes would be randomly assigned. To me, the dossiers are too fleshed for something like random class asignment. It strikes me as a purely anti-mod gaming measure."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG: The RPG Character: Zenith RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
"A dead body goes a long way. Corpses can't lie. Most of the time." *shrug*
"Obviously everyone has different criterion for levels of trust. There is little reason for anyone to absolutely trust each other unless they are masons, scum, or some sort of 'you know X is town' sort of deal. I don't see why you would trust anyone yet, as the biggest topic thus far has been over AsianInvasion's information. Not a wagon, claim, or some sort of other information has been created yet."
You don't always need those things to develop trust.
"I don't feel your point really has much weight or significance despite the apparent force you're putting into it. Not at the current time."
I'm not making any points. I'm asking him questions.
"As to the class theories, perhaps we could revisit it later when some dossiers are open to examine. I believe there is some sort of correlation, as I doubt the classes would be randomly assigned. To me, the dossiers are too fleshed for something like random class asignment. It strikes me as a purely anti-mod gaming measure."
Some of the dossier info will just be red herrings. Maybe even most of it.
[COLOR=#990033]"Oh, so there's no reason for the questions, just speaking for the sake of speaking? No reason at all you feel like asking them."[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#990033]"To me, it looks like your pushing on 'Why should we be suspicious of everyone' button. Which I inference from..."[/COLOR]
Quote from Falkonn »
That's cool, people should be suspicious of everyone at this point anyways.
[COLOR=#990033]"...and I agree that right now, trust should be a small market. Might as well ask you- Why should we already trust people? Specifically who? Why them and not others? A generalization of 'You should trust SOMEONE' makes little sense except in the scenarios I already commented about.[/COLOR]
Some of the dossier info will just be red herrings. Maybe even most of it.
[color=#990033]"Of course. However, of the various bits of information we have in our dossiers, I believe class has a decent chance of having relation in some way to a person's ability. Student ID being the least likely of anything to have any real significance. Strike that, gender."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG: The RPG Character: Zenith RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
I replaced out of Greenwood extremely early when the jester thing came up, so if the role was there and on a townie I certainly don't remember. Don't remember the Geass one, was I even in that game? I don't think so?
You remember that the game had a Jester, but not that it had a role where one townie required another to live in order to win. This is extremely inconsistent.
I think that you were just in a hurry to declare AI neutral(probably to keep people from thinking too much about the fact that, if a role requires another player to stay alive, at the very least the other player is probably town), and didn't stop to think about the full ramifications of such a role.
The Code Geass example is..meh. I'm not actually sure it was that game..it was just some game early in my mafia career. I'm pretty sure you were in the game.
Says the man who moments ago was trying to hang his hat on there being lots of examples.
I just said that there are examples. Certainly, there are more examples of it being a town role than a scum one, or even a neutral one. So, you tell me. Why did you automatically assume that he was neutral?
If I had been any more dismissive of you the first time I daresay you would be talking now about a scummy overreaction. You'll see what you want to see. I know you far too well.
That's really not true. I have long been a heavily metagame player, and I'm accustomed to you being very arrogant as town, and very cagey as scum. The latter is definitely more apt here.
At what point in the game do you start trusting people?
I've been wrong before when I thought I was right in mafia quite a few times. I'll trust people that have combined non-scummy gameplay and a gut town read on.
That's really not true. I have long been a heavily metagame player, and I'm accustomed to you being very arrogant as town, and very cagey as scum. The latter is definitely more apt here.
That's odd. I get the opposite impression from his posts; it's almost as if his arrogance has a physical presence of its own.
I'd like to be the hammer vote for all lynches (excepting a lynch on Zionite, obviously). I think it's better to establish this now rather than later because I'm probably going to end up doing it anyway and I don't want people to be too surprised when it happens.
"Oh, so there's no reason for the questions, just speaking for the sake of speaking? No reason at all you feel like asking them."
There's a reason, just not what you're assuming. His answers have no relevance now, nor are there any particularly "wrong" answers.
"...and I agree that right now, trust should be a small market. Might as well ask you- Why should we already trust people? Specifically who? Why them and not others? A generalization of 'You should trust SOMEONE' makes little sense except in the scenarios I already commented about.
I usually trust people because I apparently play the complete opposite way that he does. He doesn't trust anyone until ... something - his answer will give what, whereas I generally do trust people until they give me reason not to.
Because I've seen other people do it before in other games and seemed like a good way of making sure it didn't get swept under the run.
Right, but I've never seen Raf ignore questions and I doubt you have either, so I find it funny that you went out of your way to be aggressive with him.
And yes, when was the last time you saw a case that was based off of a singular instance of fishing.
In an ongoing game. I'll get back to you if it ends in time for me to.
Speaking of which, if I'm so scummy where's your vote?
On poggydude, where I want it. Doesn't mean I can't find someone else scummy.
Anyone know if he's always this aggressive? I don't think we've ever played together before.
On RafK: I haven't played with him as mafia, but I have with him as scum (Canada Mafia, he was SK) and this doesn't appear the same. This seems like townish behavior.
Cyan is off. I can't put my finger on it yet, but he just doesn't read as the Cyan I know.
@AI: I would need to know a reason why before I would agree to you hammering every lynch. Literally any consequence can come from that, so...yeah.
I don't want to know how, but do you know how to get your win con to change? @AI: I would need to know a reason why before I would agree to you hammering every lynch. Literally any consequence can come from that, so...yeah.
It has no relation to my role, I just want to do it because I'll probably be on the majority of lynch wagons anyway so it's best for me to be up-front about it rather than surprise people when I suddenly start hammering. Naturally I'll respect any decisions to wait at L-2, but if I see someone at L-1 I'd need a damn good reason not to end the Day.
It has no relation to my role, I just want to do it because I'll probably be on the majority of lynch wagons anyway so it's best for me to be up-front about it rather than surprise people when I suddenly start hammering. Naturally I'll respect any decisions to wait at L-2, but if I see someone at L-1 I'd need a damn good reason not to end the Day.
Right, but I've never seen Raf ignore questions and I doubt you have either, so I find it funny that you went out of your way to be aggressive with him.
In an ongoing game. I'll get back to you if it ends in time for me to.
On poggydude, where I want it. Doesn't mean I can't find someone else scummy.
Anyone know if he's always this aggressive? I don't think we've ever played together before.
Your right I haven't. This is my first game with Raf.
That ongoing game sounds like a doozy. "Look someone fished at some point in the game...let's lynch them" sound like a bad gameplan to me.
As for the aggressiveness, nope. I'm just feeling feisty today. I'll probably be mellow yellow later in the game.
@MH: Someone's play as SK is generally going to match their town play more than their scum play. Go read a game where RafK was mafia(such as a Song of Ice and Fire) instead.
You remember that the game had a Jester, but not that it had a role where one townie required another to live in order to win. This is extremely inconsistent.
I remember it had a jester because I quit the game in protest when the jester was revealed (the only time I've EVER done that). That was kind of a big deal at the time, of course I remember it. But why would I remember anything about the game after I quit playing in it?
I think that you were just in a hurry to declare AI neutral(probably to keep people from thinking too much about the fact that, if a role requires another player to stay alive, at the very least the other player is probably town),
This is really, really nuts.
Has it even got through to you yet that AI really did claim neutral?
As for how me declaring AI to have claimed neutral would keep people thinking about whether or not Zionite is town, I might as well say your rush to declare my memory is great is designed to keep people from thinking too much about Michael Jackson's death. It would make about as much sense.
The Code Geass example is..meh. I'm not actually sure it was that game..it was just some game early in my mafia career. I'm pretty sure you were in the game.
This is a fantastic example you have here of why I should have assumed AI was claiming town. Because a person in a game you can't even remember, but think I was in, had that win condition and was town. Leaving aside I have an actual example of an actual game I was actually in, where a scum had it as an additional win condition, so maybe you should be saying I should have assumed AI was claiming scum
I just said that there are examples. Certainly, there are more examples of it being a town role than a scum one, or even a neutral one.
So you say, without any evidence to back it up. If there are more examples of it being a town role, I don't know them. And neither do you, apparently.
So, you tell me. Why did you automatically assume that he was neutral?
For the millionth time, because he said he was quoting his win condition, and the only thing he quoted was the bit about needing Zionite alive. I quite reasonably assumed he was quoting his entire win condition (or at least what he claims is his win condition). If my statement that he'd claimed neutral caused him to jump out and say "just kidding, I'm townie", then yay for that. He hasn't done so yet though.
Considering that you were(according to you) working from a perspective of no information, why would you just assume that AI was neutral? Are we really supposed to believe that it was just because he didn't go out of his way to include the town WC when he was telling us that part of his WC was for Zionite to survive? Why wouldn't you probe him on this, rather than just assuming he's neutral?
So i promised a long post and then realized I suck ass at huge posts(unless seriously motivated) so i thought i'd respond to things that I need to respond to.
You never asked a question regarding the reasoning for my vote, so I never gave you reasoning.
Now that you have asked, I will choose to answer.
I will answer.
Early game he's very focused on finding out as much about other roles as he can. He asks AI several questions which may or may not have town consequences. He then says we need to "seriously open up dialog" on our dossiers, and as previously stated I have game info that says dossier info can be used against you. He claims he doubts AI's claim and says AI is running a scum gambit. If poggy actually believed this his vote should be on AI by this point. His last post casts further doubt on AI with a barrage of worthless questions asking for worthless answers that wouldn't tell us anything.
tl;dr: For page 3, this is a good start.
1. AI made this claim and I didn't have a whole lot to discuss with the info given so I asked questions.
2. I said "open up dialogue on transfers" not dossiers, and we should know where we stand on transfers. I'll get to more on that in a sec.
3. My points against AI were solely to keep the town from ignoring the possibilty that AI is lying, i feel there is something fishy with AI but still not sure what.
4. My vote's not on AI because he hasn't done anything too scummy I'm just wary atm.
5. Most of my questions are being asked by others, i dont any of my questions can be dismissed as worthless they are for the sole purpose of figuring out whether or not to trust AI.
6. In general I dont really of you on the AI issue when his post says "keep zionite alive"
Also, I have a confession: I requested a full dossier transfer with manders, I thought wincons would be traded and hoped a dumb scum would give me some insight into his abilites, it was a freaking awful play and most likely will not be repeated.
More might be coming, feel free to ask me anything that i may have missed
I'm playing my role in the simplest way I can think of, while being upfront about it. So long as things are going my way, I will accelerate the game to endgame. Once things aren't going my way, I will reevaluate my plan. You'd probably do the same thing as me in my position, though you may not have claimed as early (and therefore you probably would have been lynched once you had).
I'm going to declare both Cyan and RafaelK town for now.
Also leaning town on poggydude.
MandersHex doesn't strike me as her usual town self.
Everyone else should post more.
I'm playing my role in the simplest way I can think of, while being upfront about it. So long as things are going my way, I will accelerate the game to endgame. Once things aren't going my way, I will reevaluate my plan. You'd probably do the same thing as me in my position, though you may not have claimed as early (and therefore you probably would have been lynched once you had).
Eh, I probably would have kept quiet on that simply because I wouldn't have known what to do and I'd be paranoid about scum knowing that. I probably would have just gotten it changed w/o ever telling anyone.
I'm going to declare both Cyan and RafaelK town for now.
Also leaning town on poggydude.
MandersHex doesn't strike me as her usual town self.
Everyone else should post more.
Reasons for all would be nice, especially Cyan as I'm disagreeing with you and me as I beg to differ.
I thought that zionite's reasons against me were too ridiculous to warrant your barn, therefore i suspected you were voting me mostly for my dossier trade so i thought it would be a good time to bring it up.
Also, @AI- I am not really fine with the person whose claiming to not be town to be the hammer, I'd much rather having someone who is most likely townie do the hammer.
Poggydude:
a full dossier trade with manders? She didn't accept?
I find that VERY hard to believe given what she traded with me. Either you are lying or manders has something to hide. I'm leaning on you are lying. Your responses are less than impressive as well.
I honestly don't know what to do with this right now. I'm not sure as to what this means but Manders has plenty reason to accept trades, so there's some other reason she didn't want a full dossier trade. I don't know what it is. It could be a mafia reason or a town reason, but it's not going to be opened for discussion right now. We can leave it for later.
unvote
Ok i'm done leading the town. Cyan you do it for a while.
Eh, I probably would have kept quiet on that simply because I wouldn't have known what to do and I'd be paranoid about scum knowing that. I probably would have just gotten it changed w/o ever telling anyone.
I'm pretty sure that's incorrect. If I were forced to full-claim later on down the road and hadn't already revealed my win con, I'd probably be auto-lynched because no one would believe me. Now that you know up-front that I have an unusual role you'll have some idea of what to expect.
Reasons for all would be nice, especially Cyan as I'm disagreeing with you and me as I beg to differ.
Cyan is typically not this aggressive as scum. His arguments against RafaelK are a bit of a stretch but I find that to be more in line with town-Cyan than scum-Cyan.
Meanwhile, you're playing very conservatively which is quite unlike your town play.
Also, @AI- I am not really fine with the person whose claiming to not be town to be the hammer, I'd much rather having someone who is most likely townie do the hammer.
Really. What difference do you suppose that would even make given that I intend to be on most lynch wagons?
What I find curious is that MH would refuse a trade with anyone, while offering full disclosure trades(that's what the one she offered to me seemed to be) with at least myself(and possibly others).
I sense inconsistency of the scum variety. Unvote, Vote MandersHex
I thought that zionite's reasons against me were too ridiculous to warrant your barn, therefore i suspected you were voting me mostly for my dossier trade so i thought it would be a good time to bring it up.
So nice of you to make that decision for me!
No, your trade request had very little to do with my vote, although I do think it's fishing to request a full trade when you know nothing about that player.
I had already stated you seemed self-aware. Zi just beat me to the vote.
I'm not sure as to what this means but Manders has plenty reason to accept trades, so there's some other reason she didn't want a full dossier trade. I don't know what it is. It could be a mafia reason or a town reason, but it's not going to be opened for discussion right now. We can leave it for later.
Why are you arguing with a hypothetical? That's just silly.
Cyan is typically not this aggressive as scum.
You could not be more wrong here. He was insanely aggressive in both Indiana Jones and Anita Blake mafias, where he was scum.
Meanwhile, you're playing very conservatively which is quite unlike your town play.
Oh, really? By stating suspicious feelings on at least 3 people so far? By flat out saying Cyan is off and I don't like it?
Man, if that's conservative, I'd hate to see when I'm all out.
Really. What difference do you suppose that would even make given that I intend to be on most lynch wagons?
Look, man, by allowing you to hammer every lynch, we lose the possible info we could gain by allowing the lynch to go through naturally (i.e. a scummy hammer) so, sorry, but I have to say no since you have no role related reason to interrupt the natural flow of the game.
Manders claimed to have 3 people, me Cyan and poggy. I traded a small amount of info with her. Cyan claims he traded a full deck. Poggy claims he attempted to trade a full deck and was refused.
Unless Cyan is lying we have reason to believe Manders is being inconsistent. Why would she go full disclosure with Cyan and not Poggy? There's certainly no game reason since it was Night 0. If she was afraid of info being spread too much she wouldn't have traded any of us.
@manders: Well, I thought this would be best left for tomorrow but it looks like it's going to happen now.
I unvoted because if this inconsistency between your choices toward Cyan and Poggy is true, Poggy shouldn't be our main focus.
What I find curious is that MH would refuse a trade with anyone, while offering full disclosure trades(that's what the one she offered to me seemed to be) with at least myself(and possibly others).
I sense inconsistency of the scum variety. Unvote, Vote MandersHex
I also sense inconsistancy,as there is really no reason (that i can see), in this inconstancy, i would like an reason for this until i get a good answer Unvote, Vote MandersHex
Of course once I get a good answer I will reconsider
So nice of you to make that decision for me!
No, your trade request had very little to do with my vote, although I do think it's fishing to request a full trade when you know nothing about that player.
I had already stated you seemed self-aware. Zi just beat me to the vote.
What I find curious is that MH would refuse a trade with anyone, while offering full disclosure trades(that's what the one she offered to me seemed to be) with at least myself(and possibly others).
I sense inconsistency of the scum variety. Unvote, Vote MandersHex
1) You're lying. We did not trade all information. A lot, sure, but I was hoping you would be town. Obviously it's time for me to stop trusting you until you give me a reason not to.
2) Nice attempt to smear, but I could not have made a request to more than one person. No one can.
3) This is as bad a case of reaching as you just attempted on RafK, and you are reminding me exactly of Indiana Jones.
Ooooh, look at that reactive vote. What's wrong, feeling cornered?
And you requested that we trade Class, Group, Birthday, Sex, Student #. I'm not sure you even CAN trade any more information than this.
Even if you can, it doesn't explain why you initiate multiple trades, but refuse one requested of you. Unless you are only sharing information for a calculated reason. Which is what a scum does.
Also, in the past, I have been fairly accurate in gauging your alignment. I suspect that pattern will continue here.
"Each night you may choose a person who you would like to trade any or all of the following info with (Any or All Stats {i.e. Class, Code Name, etc.}, Flavor, Abilities, and/or Limit Breaker). If they accept you will receive that person’s agreed upon data and vise-versa."
So to answer your question cyan, no you can trade more than you offered
Also Manders, if you truly think Cyan is scum I think we should wait until tomorrow to sort it out. Cyan commonly dies night 1 as town anyways, so just let the scum deal with it.
Sorry, didn't realize that you you said you didn't initiate multiple trades.
But it doesn't change anything. You initiated a trade with me, which is really not a tell for you. You accepted one from Zionite, but refused one from Poggy. This is woefully inconsistent, and I don't see any compelling reason why you would accept Zionite and not Poggy. You are generally guarded with information as town. As town, I would have expected you to not accept either other trade offered to you.
Also, I have to believe that some scum would try and trade information with me, in this type of setup. Most likely, every scum will try to trade with someone every night. The other person that I traded with was AI. It's pretty clear that he's not mafia. While this doesn't make you scum in any foolproof sense, it's good enough. Especially when you are simply not acting like you do as scum.
In other games where you were scum(that I was in at least), it became obvious fairly quickly. I think that is the case here.
Manders claimed to have 3 people, me Cyan and poggy.
Incorrect. I claimed 3 people contacted me to trade. I contacted Cyan. Zuzu petals is the 3rd one, and he's already revealed that.
I traded a small amount of info with her.
True, as did Zuzu petals.
Cyan claims he traded a full deck.
Cyan is lying through his teeth.
Poggy claims he attempted to trade a full deck and was refused.
Yep. I would have refused you, too, if you requested a full transfer.
Unless Cyan is lying we have reason to believe Manders is being inconsistent. Why would she go full disclosure with Cyan and not Poggy? There's certainly no game reason since it was Night 0. If she was afraid of info being spread too much she wouldn't have traded any of us.
You have such sound logic here, yet end up with the wrong conclusion. Dude.
No, if I had something to hide, I wouldn't have accepted any transfers.
For God's sakes, Zi, you know my ability! Of all the partial transfers to decline, yours would have been it! I have NOTHING to hide!
@ Cyan: No, not cornered at all. Feeling very sure of my read on you.
Yes, we did transfer all stats. I left out flavor because it sounds really scummy, but I really like you when you're town and was hoping that was the case here. Apparently it is not, and that makes me sad.
Really? Because that would make me scum. Why would knowing someone is scum make you sad?
That was a terribly insincere statement. And I'm sorry, did you just say that you left out trading flavor because YOUR flavor sounds scummy? Guilty conscience much?
@ Cyan: No, not cornered at all. Feeling very sure of my read on you.
Yes, we did transfer all stats. I left out flavor because it sounds really scummy, but I really like you when you're town and was hoping that was the case here. Apparently it is not, and that makes me sad.
My "group affiliation" out of context makes me sound super scummy but I will still give it up with more information to put it into context. I would like to know from zionite if mander's ability makes him town or scum or impossible to tell. Because mander's flavor sounding scummy may mean that she's scum
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
"A dead body goes a long way. Corpses can't lie. Most of the time." *shrug*
"Obviously everyone has different criterion for levels of trust. There is little reason for anyone to absolutely trust each other unless they are masons, scum, or some sort of 'you know X is town' sort of deal. I don't see why you would trust anyone yet, as the biggest topic thus far has been over AsianInvasion's information. Not a wagon, claim, or some sort of other information has been created yet."
"I don't feel your point really has much weight or significance despite the apparent force you're putting into it. Not at the current time."
"As to the class theories, perhaps we could revisit it later when some dossiers are open to examine. I believe there is some sort of correlation, as I doubt the classes would be randomly assigned. To me, the dossiers are too fleshed for something like random class asignment. It strikes me as a purely anti-mod gaming measure."
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
I'm not making any points. I'm asking him questions.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Some of the dossier info will just be red herrings. Maybe even most of it.
[COLOR=#990033]"To me, it looks like your pushing on 'Why should we be suspicious of everyone' button. Which I inference from..."[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#990033]"...and I agree that right now, trust should be a small market. Might as well ask you- Why should we already trust people? Specifically who? Why them and not others? A generalization of 'You should trust SOMEONE' makes little sense except in the scenarios I already commented about.[/COLOR]
[color=#990033]"Of course. However, of the various bits of information we have in our dossiers, I believe class has a decent chance of having relation in some way to a person's ability. Student ID being the least likely of anything to have any real significance. Strike that, gender."
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
You remember that the game had a Jester, but not that it had a role where one townie required another to live in order to win. This is extremely inconsistent.
I think that you were just in a hurry to declare AI neutral(probably to keep people from thinking too much about the fact that, if a role requires another player to stay alive, at the very least the other player is probably town), and didn't stop to think about the full ramifications of such a role.
The Code Geass example is..meh. I'm not actually sure it was that game..it was just some game early in my mafia career. I'm pretty sure you were in the game.
I just said that there are examples. Certainly, there are more examples of it being a town role than a scum one, or even a neutral one. So, you tell me. Why did you automatically assume that he was neutral?
That's really not true. I have long been a heavily metagame player, and I'm accustomed to you being very arrogant as town, and very cagey as scum. The latter is definitely more apt here.
I've been wrong before when I thought I was right in mafia quite a few times. I'll trust people that have combined non-scummy gameplay and a gut town read on.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?u=52729
That's odd. I get the opposite impression from his posts; it's almost as if his arrogance has a physical presence of its own.
I'd like to be the hammer vote for all lynches (excepting a lynch on Zionite, obviously). I think it's better to establish this now rather than later because I'm probably going to end up doing it anyway and I don't want people to be too surprised when it happens.
I usually trust people because I apparently play the complete opposite way that he does. He doesn't trust anyone until ... something - his answer will give what, whereas I generally do trust people until they give me reason not to.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
I don't want to know how, but do you know how to get your win con to change?
This is good to know. I'm not sure why some assumed you would.
Fair enough.
You're not suspicious of everyone in the beginning of a game?
Right, but I've never seen Raf ignore questions and I doubt you have either, so I find it funny that you went out of your way to be aggressive with him.
In an ongoing game. I'll get back to you if it ends in time for me to.
On poggydude, where I want it. Doesn't mean I can't find someone else scummy.
Anyone know if he's always this aggressive? I don't think we've ever played together before.
On RafK: I haven't played with him as mafia, but I have with him as scum (Canada Mafia, he was SK) and this doesn't appear the same. This seems like townish behavior.
Cyan is off. I can't put my finger on it yet, but he just doesn't read as the Cyan I know.
@AI: I would need to know a reason why before I would agree to you hammering every lynch. Literally any consequence can come from that, so...yeah.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Yes.
It has no relation to my role, I just want to do it because I'll probably be on the majority of lynch wagons anyway so it's best for me to be up-front about it rather than surprise people when I suddenly start hammering. Naturally I'll respect any decisions to wait at L-2, but if I see someone at L-1 I'd need a damn good reason not to end the Day.
Wait, so you want to hammer just because you can?
Well, that's a first.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Your right I haven't. This is my first game with Raf.
That ongoing game sounds like a doozy. "Look someone fished at some point in the game...let's lynch them" sound like a bad gameplan to me.
As for the aggressiveness, nope. I'm just feeling feisty today. I'll probably be mellow yellow later in the game.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?u=52729
I remember it had a jester because I quit the game in protest when the jester was revealed (the only time I've EVER done that). That was kind of a big deal at the time, of course I remember it. But why would I remember anything about the game after I quit playing in it?
This is really, really nuts.
Has it even got through to you yet that AI really did claim neutral?
As for how me declaring AI to have claimed neutral would keep people thinking about whether or not Zionite is town, I might as well say your rush to declare my memory is great is designed to keep people from thinking too much about Michael Jackson's death. It would make about as much sense.
This is a fantastic example you have here of why I should have assumed AI was claiming town. Because a person in a game you can't even remember, but think I was in, had that win condition and was town. Leaving aside I have an actual example of an actual game I was actually in, where a scum had it as an additional win condition, so maybe you should be saying I should have assumed AI was claiming scum
So you say, without any evidence to back it up. If there are more examples of it being a town role, I don't know them. And neither do you, apparently.
For the millionth time, because he said he was quoting his win condition, and the only thing he quoted was the bit about needing Zionite alive. I quite reasonably assumed he was quoting his entire win condition (or at least what he claims is his win condition). If my statement that he'd claimed neutral caused him to jump out and say "just kidding, I'm townie", then yay for that. He hasn't done so yet though.
Considering that you were(according to you) working from a perspective of no information, why would you just assume that AI was neutral? Are we really supposed to believe that it was just because he didn't go out of his way to include the town WC when he was telling us that part of his WC was for Zionite to survive? Why wouldn't you probe him on this, rather than just assuming he's neutral?
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
1. AI made this claim and I didn't have a whole lot to discuss with the info given so I asked questions.
2. I said "open up dialogue on transfers" not dossiers, and we should know where we stand on transfers. I'll get to more on that in a sec.
3. My points against AI were solely to keep the town from ignoring the possibilty that AI is lying, i feel there is something fishy with AI but still not sure what.
4. My vote's not on AI because he hasn't done anything too scummy I'm just wary atm.
5. Most of my questions are being asked by others, i dont any of my questions can be dismissed as worthless they are for the sole purpose of figuring out whether or not to trust AI.
6. In general I dont really of you on the AI issue when his post says "keep zionite alive"
Also, I have a confession: I requested a full dossier transfer with manders, I thought wincons would be traded and hoped a dumb scum would give me some insight into his abilites, it was a freaking awful play and most likely will not be repeated.
More might be coming, feel free to ask me anything that i may have missed
I'm playing my role in the simplest way I can think of, while being upfront about it. So long as things are going my way, I will accelerate the game to endgame. Once things aren't going my way, I will reevaluate my plan. You'd probably do the same thing as me in my position, though you may not have claimed as early (and therefore you probably would have been lynched once you had).
I'm going to declare both Cyan and RafaelK town for now.
Also leaning town on poggydude.
MandersHex doesn't strike me as her usual town self.
Everyone else should post more.
@ Cyan: Please answer Zionite's last question, especially since I asked a similar question awhile ago that you never answered.
@poggydude: What is the reason for your confession? What did you hope to accomplish with it?
Eh, I probably would have kept quiet on that simply because I wouldn't have known what to do and I'd be paranoid about scum knowing that. I probably would have just gotten it changed w/o ever telling anyone.
Reasons for all would be nice, especially Cyan as I'm disagreeing with you and me as I beg to differ.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Also, @AI- I am not really fine with the person whose claiming to not be town to be the hammer, I'd much rather having someone who is most likely townie do the hammer.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Why are you not? I mean don't you want to discuss your lynches to make sure you are getting them right? Acceleration seems really poor.
I'm not asking why she's worried about the player, I'm asking why she's worried about that player's reads.
I guess a better phrase would be:
"Why are you worried about the opinion of a player who..."
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
a full dossier trade with manders? She didn't accept?
I find that VERY hard to believe given what she traded with me. Either you are lying or manders has something to hide. I'm leaning on you are lying. Your responses are less than impressive as well.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
I honestly don't know what to do with this right now. I'm not sure as to what this means but Manders has plenty reason to accept trades, so there's some other reason she didn't want a full dossier trade. I don't know what it is. It could be a mafia reason or a town reason, but it's not going to be opened for discussion right now. We can leave it for later.
unvote
Ok i'm done leading the town. Cyan you do it for a while.
I'm pretty sure that's incorrect. If I were forced to full-claim later on down the road and hadn't already revealed my win con, I'd probably be auto-lynched because no one would believe me. Now that you know up-front that I have an unusual role you'll have some idea of what to expect.
Cyan is typically not this aggressive as scum. His arguments against RafaelK are a bit of a stretch but I find that to be more in line with town-Cyan than scum-Cyan.
Meanwhile, you're playing very conservatively which is quite unlike your town play.
Really. What difference do you suppose that would even make given that I intend to be on most lynch wagons?
Smart kid.
At the very least it's a talking point. I suspect that how I play on subsequent Days will depend greatly on whether town or scum is lynched today.
I sense inconsistency of the scum variety. Unvote, Vote MandersHex
So nice of you to make that decision for me!
No, your trade request had very little to do with my vote, although I do think it's fishing to request a full trade when you know nothing about that player.
I had already stated you seemed self-aware. Zi just beat me to the vote.
Because he's still a part of the game. Are you proposing we ignore him?
Why later?
Why unvote?
Why are you arguing with a hypothetical? That's just silly.
You could not be more wrong here. He was insanely aggressive in both Indiana Jones and Anita Blake mafias, where he was scum.
Oh, really? By stating suspicious feelings on at least 3 people so far? By flat out saying Cyan is off and I don't like it?
Man, if that's conservative, I'd hate to see when I'm all out.
Look, man, by allowing you to hammer every lynch, we lose the possible info we could gain by allowing the lynch to go through naturally (i.e. a scummy hammer) so, sorry, but I have to say no since you have no role related reason to interrupt the natural flow of the game.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Unless Cyan is lying we have reason to believe Manders is being inconsistent. Why would she go full disclosure with Cyan and not Poggy? There's certainly no game reason since it was Night 0. If she was afraid of info being spread too much she wouldn't have traded any of us.
vote mandershex
I unvoted because if this inconsistency between your choices toward Cyan and Poggy is true, Poggy shouldn't be our main focus.
My bad, your statement was unclear.
I also sense inconsistancy,as there is really no reason (that i can see), in this inconstancy, i would like an reason for this until i get a good answer
Unvote, Vote MandersHex
Of course once I get a good answer I will reconsider
k sorry but that is why i confessed.
1) You're lying. We did not trade all information. A lot, sure, but I was hoping you would be town. Obviously it's time for me to stop trusting you until you give me a reason not to.
2) Nice attempt to smear, but I could not have made a request to more than one person. No one can.
3) This is as bad a case of reaching as you just attempted on RafK, and you are reminding me exactly of Indiana Jones.
Unvote, vote: Cyan
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
will wait for cyan's response
And you requested that we trade Class, Group, Birthday, Sex, Student #. I'm not sure you even CAN trade any more information than this.
Even if you can, it doesn't explain why you initiate multiple trades, but refuse one requested of you. Unless you are only sharing information for a calculated reason. Which is what a scum does.
Also, in the past, I have been fairly accurate in gauging your alignment. I suspect that pattern will continue here.
So to answer your question cyan, no you can trade more than you offered
unvote
But it doesn't change anything. You initiated a trade with me, which is really not a tell for you. You accepted one from Zionite, but refused one from Poggy. This is woefully inconsistent, and I don't see any compelling reason why you would accept Zionite and not Poggy. You are generally guarded with information as town. As town, I would have expected you to not accept either other trade offered to you.
Also, I have to believe that some scum would try and trade information with me, in this type of setup. Most likely, every scum will try to trade with someone every night. The other person that I traded with was AI. It's pretty clear that he's not mafia. While this doesn't make you scum in any foolproof sense, it's good enough. Especially when you are simply not acting like you do as scum.
In other games where you were scum(that I was in at least), it became obvious fairly quickly. I think that is the case here.
Totally down to hammer MandersHex.
Incorrect. I claimed 3 people contacted me to trade. I contacted Cyan. Zuzu petals is the 3rd one, and he's already revealed that.
True, as did Zuzu petals.
Cyan is lying through his teeth.
Yep. I would have refused you, too, if you requested a full transfer.
You have such sound logic here, yet end up with the wrong conclusion. Dude.
No, if I had something to hide, I wouldn't have accepted any transfers.
For God's sakes, Zi, you know my ability! Of all the partial transfers to decline, yours would have been it! I have NOTHING to hide!
@ Cyan: No, not cornered at all. Feeling very sure of my read on you.
Yes, we did transfer all stats. I left out flavor because it sounds really scummy, but I really like you when you're town and was hoping that was the case here. Apparently it is not, and that makes me sad.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Really? Because that would make me scum. Why would knowing someone is scum make you sad?
That was a terribly insincere statement. And I'm sorry, did you just say that you left out trading flavor because YOUR flavor sounds scummy? Guilty conscience much?
Probably because you're scum.
My "group affiliation" out of context makes me sound super scummy but I will still give it up with more information to put it into context. I would like to know from zionite if mander's ability makes him town or scum or impossible to tell. Because mander's flavor sounding scummy may mean that she's scum
Vote: MandersHex
No, you're welcome to read what he says. But his opinions hold no intrinsic significance, as would any other players'.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]