MTG Salvation

@Vezok I think you misunderstood me. My proposal was to keep anyone from getting information. And was made at a point when I thought the logs were guaranteed to go up for auction.

I'm saying if that item does go up (and it revealing what it is doesn't change the equation) that town elects one person to bid on it. And if someone else bids against them we mass claim. Otherwise we play as normal till D3 at which point I suggest we mass claim. Preferably we should not let that item be bid on at all though. At least not early. Same with the blacklist one.

Quote from yurkin »

Grape's #44 how will u decide who's trustworthy?

I won't on my own, but the normal ways. Town reading people. Anyway since it's only the top 3 vote getting items it probably won't come to having to nominate someone to get it.

@Proph I agree that's a noble goal, but I think in a game this mechanics heavy some mechanical discussion is a must. Just not at the expense of also looking at behavior. I also missed Kami being excited in the signup thread, so that weakens my reaction to the flavor post a bit. Thought it was more spontaneous than it was.

And Vezok is a semi RVS. I strongly disagree with his proposal and think it's slightly anti-town, but I know I disagree with him on how best to handle mechanics fairly often so it's hard to discern his alignment from that disagreement.

I suspect it's either a list of all item abilities or a list of everything that will later be revealed for auction. And the blacklist one I suspect has something to do with secret items. Either way they both seem to be items that would primarily provide information about other items and that is not something I want the scum team to get their hands on.

And I don't currently believe the person who voted for it is scum. Could very easily be someone naively wanting a list and not realizing how much more valuable that is in an organized team's hand then in one random person's hands. Either way I think it's hurting town to have that item go up for auction. I might be completely off base (this is pure speculation after all) but the downside potential is really high.

And yeah that is completely different to my definition of policy voting. Policy voting (to me) is voting for someone because you want them out of the game regardless of alignment. For example shadow policy votes people for self voting regardless of his alignment or what he believes their alignment to be.

It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood, it's a beautiful day for a neighbor, would you be mine?

Could you be mine?

Welcome to signups for Secret neighbors mafia, this is an open Micro for 7 players. Phases are planned to be 1 week with 24 hour nights, but if there is consensus that can be changed.


In the borough (in)
1. Man of Infinite Posting Restictions tomsloger
2. Wheatley in Space Rodemy
3. Everyone's Favourite British Mafia Council Member Ecophagy
4. Lightsaber Spinner Vezokpiraka
5. Lazy Mafia Secretary Bur
6. Trustworthy Wolf shadowlancerx
7. Ernie's Best Friend Ganderin_Dan

Just around the corner (replacements)
1.
2.
3.

Uptown (spectators)
1. Spirit of April Fools' Day
2.
3.

Reviewed by Bur and Silvercrys

Ahhh right it's just the 3 top vote getting items, not all of them. Then I strongly suggest that no one else votes for the logs.

*eyes everyone disapprovingly*

N.B. My opinion on the logs goes for the blacklist as well. I don't want those in the game until after a mass claim and I don't want to mass claim yet.

First things first I'm already angry at whoever put a vote on the auction house logs. My main bit of pregame spec was that either we as a town refuse to bid on it and consider mass claiming if someone does, or put a late bid on it and have someone who the majority trusts buy it. I feel like that item does way way way more damage in the hands of scum then good in the hands of town.

Proposal: when that item becomes available for bidding someone trusted reveals their bid number and no one bids against them. If someone does we mass claim auction house numbers.

@Shin and Wisp I don't think policy vote means the same thing here that you think it means. Either that or you two really shouldn't be playing together.

@Terry <3 you too. A golden sarchophagus wouldn't be the worst way to go out, but I feel like I'd want something more humble. Maybe mortared into a wall of the crypts under the church cask of amontillado style.

Vote: Vezok I don't think a mass claim D1 helps us at all. I think D3 might be a good idea though. Let scum sweat the wine for a couple nights (and feel like they either have to do non provable things or appear town aligned) knowing they'll have to claim soon.

Gut town reads on Shin and Kami. For bad reasons. Also Hi Shin!

Please play here soon Gemma!

Also Nancy was replaced by Dota. DV self replaced as Nobue. So there was still some D1 bussing but nothing like what it would have been in the other team

I agree I did some things I'm not proud of. I was definitely using my push on you as a means of catharsis, but I wasn't attempting to use it to advantage in the game. If anything I thought it made me less likely to win, but I did it anyway. Just it was a petty, selfish thing.

@Rhand yeah I hoped that by doing that myself I'd diffuse other people doing it. But at that stage I really thought Vezok wasn't going to last long and I was setting myself up to bus. At some point it really became clear (to me, buddies were on it from the start) how bad it was for my slot to bus and I just dropped it. Also I just didn't have a ton of time to play D2 and tried to cover for not going back by complaining about the lack of flips.

TLDR I wanted to get out in front and set the narrative of your reads. Also thanks for the kind words.

Question to the void in general: can a role madness set up be a normal game? I thought this was reasonably well done in terms of nights not devolving into chaos with a pretty limited set of targeted abilties. Obviously the janitor crosses a line that is controversial (I'm anti janitor after playing a flipless + stump game for my second game and hating every second of it), but outside that I thought this was pretty tame for a 13 player role madness game.

On an unrelated not I got incredibly salty when DBS claimed her role and flavor and it matched with the previous game. I felt a mislynch slipping away from me and reacted very poorly. Especially when combined with my previously mentioned salt. Sorry again DBS. That said I do think that's probably not ideal design to have a role have the same flavor, same alignment, and very close to the same abilities as in prequel.

Ohhh on the topic of limited extra KP (DBS's donate being the only possible one though with Kazin and AE it could turn into a ton of extra kills in a very convoluted specific situation) we had a ton of insurance against vigs (Vezok's BP vest and my ability) for such a limited Vig option. Huge part of why DV believed for a long time Az was a serial killer despite the lack of kills. I'd actually forgotten the Vezok was partially trueclaiming and had the vest at all. Until DV said something in the scum chat I thought it was entirely fabricated.

Is there a spec/dead thread? I'd love to read it if there is.

@Shadow Thanks! I definitely felt like my play was better here than it had been before, and hearing it from you is nice. Though I do think I coasted a bit on D2 and early D3 (and had a stupid role and one of the more influential players hard town reading me from the jump which helped a lot).

@Azrael there was so much time spent worrying that we couldn't count on you and that vanilla'ing on D4 was a giant risk. It seemed crazy for you to make up that role, but it also was nerve wracking to trust outing one of us and going into 3v3v1 relying on you.