If one of the votes is to come into question, I'd say it was Kosa's.(1)
Low post count(2), defensive at my lack of confidence in him from yesterday(3), and pinging a lot of radars(4), he deserves a closer look.(5)
1) "I want to delegitimize votes on me but there's only two, one of which is from the claimed neutral that's being the most protown player around. So I guess I gotta do the other one."
2) I have the same post count as you. The. Same. 25 (well, 26 as of this post). As if that didn't invalidate this point completely, there's also another thing: people should freaking stop using post counts as the meanings of anything, because players can have low posts counts and still lay out their opinions thoroughly. Despite my low post count, my views on lots of players and the gamestate are well-documented. Unlike you, btw, who's constantly going through game mechanics instead of player analysis.
3) Uhh what?
4) "I'll use the views people had on him a week ago and ignore everything else that's happening on the game to justify my stance."
5) If you really think so then do it, instead of subtly leaving the suggestion there in hopes someone else picks it up and does the job for you. I'll be glad to tear right through it.
And redirected Proph to D_V on the same Night? Wow, talk about OP. I wish I could scan mods' minds about their game design inventions because geez, neutrals surely are a bit over the top nowadays.
Right now I don't know where to go... If a lynch must happen on the three wagons I'd say go with Kosa, I'm sorry to say this, but your performance in STMU 4 left me a little disappointed. There were glimmers of hope towards the end, but you can't watch from the sidelines forever.
Erm, what? I was town in STMU. Are you asking for a policy lynch?
And btw in that game I literally pinned you on your first non-RVS post and correctly towncleared two people in the same breath to boot. I just don't have the leadership qualities (nor the willingness, in most cases) to lead the town. Plus I suffer a chronic case of overthinking every single stuff in Mafia, even the ones I know I have 99% chance of being right, so w/e.
@Tom: I think nothing. I'm not informed enough to determine what relevance that has, if any, in the setup.
Screw it, we have 24:22 left in the day can someone please link me 3 games of kosa/dv playing scum/town so I can see if anything makes more sense after reading them.
Analysing my scum meta is useless for three reasons:
1) As I've already told you, I play town as self-consciously as I would play scum. I'm not doing it as hard as I did back then, but I still do. I elect a persona early D1 and play that persona to the end. Obviously, at the beggining I got ran up virtually every single time because people noticed I behaved a bit erratically from game to game, but eventually everybody got used to it. Despite being run up early in tons of games, IIRC I was only mislynched once, D1 of Basic #70, for claiming VT out of nowhere (I was VT).
2) My last scum game dates from 2014. But most importantly;
3) My forum title isn't an hyperbole. I played around 30~40 games here in MTGS between 2012~2014 and I rolled scum in three. ******* three. The last of which I had to replace out still in RVS due to a nervous breakdown promoted by the sudden end of a 3-year long relationship and last college semester combo. I literally have more games as neutral than I have as scum.
Still, if you want to, those were WWE Mafia and Bioshock Mafia (I got MVP in Bioshock).
---
We have what now, 23 hours left? Geez.
Here's the thing. I don't think it's a good idea at all to rush a lynch in 23 hours (a third of which most people will be sleeping). I've touched the subject before, but let's for example say we decided to lynch Silver. We go ahead and muster the votes to put him at L-2. He claims cop. Oops.
There's no time available for a CC. So now we either lynch him and risk losing the cop, or scramble to find another lynch target whom, in turn, might also claim town PR.
I'm just not ok with this. We miss a lot in wagon analysis and our collective decisions won't be the best informed possible.
I propose we just go ahead with no-lynching. Yes, a big part as to why I'm proposing this is because I'll benefit from it, but I won't be the only one. And considering the aforementioned scenario, I really believe a no-lynch is better than a quicklynch for a flip's sake. We don't have clear scumspects and a lot of players aren't exactly exemplary in activity, so well. Those are my two cents.
[quote from="Kosakosa »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/forum-games/mafia/757305-trigger-happy-havoc-mafia-day-1-new-world-order?comment=678"]1). When both primary wagons are voting each other, typically means at least one of them is a scum wagon.
2). I am the other person who said that. I also said I don't think you are both scum.
3). I want excuses to vote Cythare, but he did say he wouldn't switch until he reread the game.
1) Yeah, but there's enough V/LA people to cast doubt on whether the wagons are stalled because D_V is scum or because we're both town and scum is afraid of committing to a wagon that won't happen due to the impending deadline.
2) Fair enough.
3) I see that. I thought she said she couldn't switch votes but actually she can't unvote. I retract my statement.
The way you stated that last sentence was odd, though. You were the one telling me yesterday to push my scumspects, make cases blahblah. Why are you waiting for an excuse to vote Cyt instead of, you know, casing and voting her if she's scum to you?
Tom (and I remember seeing someone else also hinting at this) is pushing too hard the "oh there's no way they both are town, the probability is too small" line. This reeks as an attempt to chainlynch.
Then Cyt also joins the wagon after saying he couldn't switch votes.
1) "I want to delegitimize votes on me but there's only two, one of which is from the claimed neutral that's being the most protown player around. So I guess I gotta do the other one."
2) I have the same post count as you. The. Same. 25 (well, 26 as of this post). As if that didn't invalidate this point completely, there's also another thing: people should freaking stop using post counts as the meanings of anything, because players can have low posts counts and still lay out their opinions thoroughly. Despite my low post count, my views on lots of players and the gamestate are well-documented. Unlike you, btw, who's constantly going through game mechanics instead of player analysis.
3) Uhh what?
4) "I'll use the views people had on him a week ago and ignore everything else that's happening on the game to justify my stance."
5) If you really think so then do it, instead of subtly leaving the suggestion there in hopes someone else picks it up and does the job for you. I'll be glad to tear right through it.
And redirected Proph to D_V on the same Night? Wow, talk about OP. I wish I could scan mods' minds about their game design inventions because geez, neutrals surely are a bit over the top nowadays.
If Mind somehow is scum, I wouldn't put past me that #1068 is a forced interaction.
Anyways, I'll sheep Proph. Shock is always scum
Vote Shockwave
Erm, what? I was town in STMU. Are you asking for a policy lynch?
And btw in that game I literally pinned you on your first non-RVS post and correctly towncleared two people in the same breath to boot. I just don't have the leadership qualities (nor the willingness, in most cases) to lead the town. Plus I suffer a chronic case of overthinking every single stuff in Mafia, even the ones I know I have 99% chance of being right, so w/e.
@Tom: I think nothing. I'm not informed enough to determine what relevance that has, if any, in the setup.
(My role is great though you just wait for it)
Analysing my scum meta is useless for three reasons:
1) As I've already told you, I play town as self-consciously as I would play scum. I'm not doing it as hard as I did back then, but I still do. I elect a persona early D1 and play that persona to the end. Obviously, at the beggining I got ran up virtually every single time because people noticed I behaved a bit erratically from game to game, but eventually everybody got used to it. Despite being run up early in tons of games, IIRC I was only mislynched once, D1 of Basic #70, for claiming VT out of nowhere (I was VT).
2) My last scum game dates from 2014. But most importantly;
3) My forum title isn't an hyperbole. I played around 30~40 games here in MTGS between 2012~2014 and I rolled scum in three. ******* three. The last of which I had to replace out still in RVS due to a nervous breakdown promoted by the sudden end of a 3-year long relationship and last college semester combo. I literally have more games as neutral than I have as scum.
Still, if you want to, those were WWE Mafia and Bioshock Mafia (I got MVP in Bioshock).
---
We have what now, 23 hours left? Geez.
Here's the thing. I don't think it's a good idea at all to rush a lynch in 23 hours (a third of which most people will be sleeping). I've touched the subject before, but let's for example say we decided to lynch Silver. We go ahead and muster the votes to put him at L-2. He claims cop. Oops.
There's no time available for a CC. So now we either lynch him and risk losing the cop, or scramble to find another lynch target whom, in turn, might also claim town PR.
I'm just not ok with this. We miss a lot in wagon analysis and our collective decisions won't be the best informed possible.
I propose we just go ahead with no-lynching. Yes, a big part as to why I'm proposing this is because I'll benefit from it, but I won't be the only one. And considering the aforementioned scenario, I really believe a no-lynch is better than a quicklynch for a flip's sake. We don't have clear scumspects and a lot of players aren't exactly exemplary in activity, so well. Those are my two cents.
1) Yeah, but there's enough V/LA people to cast doubt on whether the wagons are stalled because D_V is scum or because we're both town and scum is afraid of committing to a wagon that won't happen due to the impending deadline.
2) Fair enough.
3) I see that. I thought she said she couldn't switch votes but actually she can't unvote. I retract my statement.
The way you stated that last sentence was odd, though. You were the one telling me yesterday to push my scumspects, make cases blahblah. Why are you waiting for an excuse to vote Cyt instead of, you know, casing and voting her if she's scum to you?
unvote
Tom (and I remember seeing someone else also hinting at this) is pushing too hard the "oh there's no way they both are town, the probability is too small" line. This reeks as an attempt to chainlynch.
Then Cyt also joins the wagon after saying he couldn't switch votes.
I'll reread the game.
Cmon. English is renowned for its ability to transform anything into a verb. It can verb anything! See? Right?