Mafia 82: International (Game Over)

[Cephrir]

That pact reminds me of certain games I've read involving Pooky.

/confirm. The delegation from Camelot has arrived. Not really, sadly.

[Cephrir]

I'm not really sure whether or not this is a good idea. But even if it's not, it'll be fun.

/treaty.

[Cephrir]

I don't see why you seem to think this agreement-thingy is going to have a such a big impact, OpposedForce. I actually think that the interactions will provide different interactions than you usually see in a mafia game. Hence, interesting. I fail to see how it is at all FoS-worthy though.

[Cephrir]

You claim that the pact will be joined by scum. Therefore, the pact will constitute a foolproof method of finding scum. So what exactly are you arguing about?

Exactly. I hope scum do join the treaty; maybe they'll use it as a bussing tactic. And even if not, I think scum who are in the treaty will be more visible and potentially easier to catch.

But individual thought and freedom of suspicions I can't bear to be infringed by a treaty that encourages bandwagoning.

It doesn't have to be

mindless

. Obviously it would help if whoever wanted to begin a wagon presented an actual case, or at least their reasoning was obvious.

What's funniest is, you don't see the obvious similarities between this treaty and an actual game of mafia. It's pretty accurate to think of this as a microcosm of the game, in terms of the town's objectives.

Good point.

You've been nothing but close-minded in arguing against me. You state that the pact has a fool-proof method of finding scum

He never claimed that.

Scum will find this kind of pact as a golden chance to come in put themselves in a good position. I fully acknowledge that your pact rule had the no trust rule but then why are you making a pact discussing with a certain amount of people? Your pact wants to catch scum and only limited members are going to join (don't misunderstand what I mean by limited members as in not all people are going to join) so why not just discuss with all town members instead of just a couple of members in a group.

/disagree. The whole town will be discussing first of all, it's not like the treaty can make themselves masons. And I don't see how you think scum could take such advantage of this. Here's what I want you to explain: Let's say a scum joins this pact. What advantage could this really give them? It allows them to bus better? I'm fine with that thank you very much.

Also you misinterprented me. I'm not arguing against playing mafia. I'm arguing for the fact that the whole pact thing is going to make it easier for scum and hinder the town.

You keep saying that, but it seems to me you really can't back it up.

Also I don't understand the premise of the pact. Won't you be exluding the rest of the town or vote all together when you decide on a lynch?

No? Five people isn't enough to get a lynch without help?

While people in the pact will be scum hunting they'll also be discussing among themselves (I suppose like a mason group in the day except with risks) and so scum has an oppurtunity to just mislead them while they discuss among themselves.

Except not, because everyone can hear them.

I think the concept of a small group within a group puts people in the limelight, invokes discussion and forces people to take a stance. Whether or not the pact itself achieves anything more isnt relevant.

QFT.

Can confirmation stage end so I can vote for BM

Why would this argument translate into voting for BM. Do you really think a scum would come up with an elaborate plan like this that draws so much attention to themselves? At worst it's a nulltell.

Apologies if I repeated BM a bit, I typed as I went.

[Cephrir]

I fail to see how this is related to wanting to lynch him. surely a fast, unreasoned vote early in the game is less likely to reflect a genuine desire to lynch somebody?

It's kinda different since we've had almost 10 pages of discussion already. Day 1 votes won't be nearly so random as they normally are.

[Cephrir]

It's true, Untitled. We're all out to get you, actually.

[Cephrir]

Vote: Untitled

for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

I mean he's soft-claiming town by including himself in the group who scumhunts. He's labeling himself town, but subtly. I can live with an all out townie claim, even a clever or humorous one. But one under the radar like this rubs me the wrong way.

Um, are you kidding me? Why would someone referring to themselves as town (which townies will do subconsciously and scum will do on purpose) even the tiniest little bit of a scumtell?

Nhat: so, if I'd say "

We

should lynch Untitled." I'm scummy? Or what's the difference?

The difference being scum are willing to participate in lynches, but scumhunting is the job of townies. Like I said, I don't like it because it's so subtle, that's my preference. Your mileage may vary.

Also, because players use "our" and "us", I guess I'd have to chalk that one up to Too Townie.

1) Wow, total fail. You think he's

scum

because he mentioned a desire to

hunt scum

. What ridiculous WIFOM.
2) I think you need to look up Too Townie. But Too Townie isn't a tell anyway, it's just a way for scum to try to get the town to lynch overly protown players. And above all, it certainly does not apply to Untitled at all.

FoS: nhat

[Cephrir]

StrangerCoug looks ok, his explanation for not wanting pre-game discussion seems in tune with his overall play style.

Huh?

Also, same question for Cephrir:

Vote: Untitled for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

I checked your posts and you didn't.

Hum. 'Kay.

exactly, we're still in pre-game and you've already managed to start an argument with several people over something that's pretty much useless for determining alignment.

Not true. Don't think this one needs explaining.

the game had started then my stating an intent to vote you on page 8 might be interpreted as wanting to lynch you.

Votes generally indicate a willingness to lynch someone.

And well... BM said a lot for me. Basically I think his viewpoint during that argument was rather illogical, I don't feel like sifting through the 10 pages of pregame just to QFT BM. Untitled isn't actually as bad as he was in my head though. Man, I do that a lot. So, I'd rather pursue my other suspect-of-sorts.

Unvote, Vote: nhat

[Cephrir]

Votes generally indicate a willingness to lynch someone.

Unvote, Vote: Cephrir

. You know that statement doesn't apply to the beginning of day 1.

This game is an exception.

[Cephrir]

Wait, Im confused. How is this game an exception exactly?

10 pages of pregame to go on.

[Cephrir]

It's a good EA case, but Cass kinda has a point. I was going to say what she did, but then I read nhat's reply and realized he was right. I still find him scummy but I want to pursue EA for... reasons. Not just nhat's case.

Unvote, Vote EA

[Cephrir]

Votes generally indicate a willingness to lynch someone.

Unvote, Vote: Cephrir

. You know that statement doesn't apply to the beginning of day 1.

This game is an exception.

Not thirty-six hours after thread opening (when Untitled made the post in question) it wasn't. Yeah it was page 8, but

7.5 of those pages were BM

a great number of players hadn't done anything noteworthy at all, so why should a protown player be ready to lynch? Hell, why would a protown player want to lynch right now for that matter?

You know what I mean. A vote in this Day 1 is likely to be more thought out than your standard random vote and probably has some actual suspicion behind it.

[Cephrir]

LA over the weekend.

[Cephrir]

You know what I mean. A vote in this Day 1 is likely to be more thought out than your standard random vote and probably has some actual suspicion behind it.

Okay... but why would you feel the need to say this in response to Untitled's 211? It was really obvious that his declaring an ITV on BM wasn't random.

Because he was saying that his wanting to vote BM didn't indicate a desire to lynch. And also, he called the vote "unreasoned" in relation to this, but given what we already had to go on and what we ended up having before D1 started, that didn't make any sense. Post in question for reference:

I fail to see how this is related to wanting to lynch him. surely a fast, unreasoned vote early in the game is less likely to reflect a genuine desire to lynch somebody?

It's kinda different since we've had almost 10 pages of discussion already. Day 1 votes won't be nearly so random as they normally are.

Moving along...

On the topic of vote-hopping, what do you guys think of this? In five posts, Cephrir made 3 different votes.

Vote: Untitled

for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

Also, same question for Cephrir:

Vote: Untitled for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

I checked your posts and you didn't.

Hum. 'Kay.

And well... BM said a lot for me. Basically I think his viewpoint during that argument was rather illogical, I don't feel like sifting through the 10 pages of pregame just to QFT BM. Untitled isn't actually as bad as he was in my head though. Man, I do that a lot. So, I'd rather pursue my other suspect-of-sorts.

Unvote, Vote: nhat

It's a good EA case, but Cass kinda has a point. I was going to say what she did, but then I read nhat's reply and realized he was right. I still find him scummy but I want to pursue EA for... reasons. Not just nhat's case.

Unvote, Vote EA

It's made worse by the fact that every single one of Cephrir's votes were made onto people who already had bandwagons formed on them, with rarely more justification than was already provided by the bandwagon. I'd like to know what people think, because the only other game I'm playing is being moderated by Cephrir, so I'm having a hard time viewing him impartially.

Fair enough, I suppose I have been vote-hopping a bit. I did FoS nhat in the same post in which I voted Untitled, so it's not like that was a totally unexpected vote. And I don't disagree that I've mostly been voting people who have already had bandwagon; early on in large games I usually don't make a lot of cases or original votes. I play worse in large games for some reason. I stand by the reasoning for my nhat and EA votes.

I would like to see a bigger EA bandwagon, FTR.

Cephrir: A lot of his early discussion is about the pact. Announces that he hopes scum joins the pact (this is where I'm getting that scum will infiltrate the pact, BTW). A lot of his discussion about the pact is with Opposed Force. Tells Untitled that "we're all out to get you", then votes him in his next post for craplogic. FoS's nhat for WIFOM and thinking a soft claim is a scumtell, and asks him to look up Too Townie. Decides to vote nhat given that he doesn't want to sift through the game to quote Battle Mage for truth and that Untitled wasn't as bad as he once thought. Attacks Erratos Apathos's voting him because vote = intent to lynch doesn't apply on Day 1 by saying this game is an exception, then votes him two posts later for reasons that I can't exactly make out. Cephrir leans on the scummy side to me.

This is an accurate summary of what I've done in this game, for the most part. Care to explain why you think it makes me scummy? You kinda did something similar with a lot of people actually. So I'll just ask your entire post: why?

[Cephrir]

Cephrir: A lot of his early discussion is about the pact. Announces that he hopes scum joins the pact (this is where I'm getting that scum will infiltrate the pact, BTW). A lot of his discussion about the pact is with Opposed Force. Tells Untitled that "we're all out to get you", then votes him in his next post for craplogic. FoS's nhat for WIFOM and thinking a soft claim is a scumtell, and asks him to look up Too Townie. Decides to vote nhat given that he doesn't want to sift through the game to quote Battle Mage for truth and that Untitled wasn't as bad as he once thought. Attacks Erratos Apathos's voting him because vote = intent to lynch doesn't apply on Day 1 by saying this game is an exception, then votes him two posts later for reasons that I can't exactly make out. Cephrir leans on the scummy side to me.

This is an accurate summary of what I've done in this game, for the most part. Care to explain why you think it makes me scummy? You kinda did something similar with a lot of people actually. So I'll just ask your entire post: why?

You say you hope scum joins the pact, which sounds a bit like something scum itself would say. It's like saying I hope scum kills Battle Mage tonight if he doesn't get lynched (especially since it would imply that I know Battle Mage is town).

Meh. You can think that, I guess.

It is also not clear to me why you are voting Erratos Apathos.

It's not supposed to be.

FOS SC

. Your "full analysis" was 95% summary, 5% you injecting opinions without reasoning behind them.

This.

I find Cephrir suspicious, but not so much for vote hopping as his previous comments about votes intending lynch.

I must have missed the part where you explained why you thought this was scummy instead of wrong (which it's not, either).

[Cephrir]

From what I've picked up, MafiaMann is town, I'm pretty sure I know his role too.

The following people are wondering why you would even say that: Cephrir

[Cephrir]

In my head, I think of Cephrir as nearly confirmed innocent, despite him having done absolutely nothing to put himself there.

That's...weird.

[Cephrir]

BM-I still think he's town, but I haven't liked some of his arguments. It's as though he can't believe anything he does can be wrong at all.

Forgot this when I talked to him about it, but this is why I've called him elitist.

yeh, elitist isnt really the word ur looking for, because as far as i'm aware, if you are elitist, you look for perfection as much in others as in yourself. You are accusing me of simply being arrogant and self-righteous.

BM

Actually, those are better words. Thanks.

And I really need animorpherv1 in here explaining himself. I hate people that make scummy moves and then skedaddle as if nothing happened. That's a cheap way of getting out. I'm sorry.

Pressure vote: animorpherv1

Pressure votes don't work when you say they're pressure votes. Amd I don't think him explaining himself will be a good idea, much as I'd like to know what the heck he's thinking.

[Cephrir]

Don't expect much content for ~a week. I'll be here and reading though.

[Cephrir]

They're not both hypothetical. Cephrir really did say he hopes scum gets in the treaty, which came off to me as his being scum itself. What would you think of me if I said "I hope scum kills Battle Mage"?

But that's not the same thing. Sure, I probably houldn't have said it out loud, but I don't get how that's a tell.

There are not many scenarios that I can think of where town should be hoping out loud that scum does something specific. It's not a scum direction per se, but it still encourages scum to act in a certain way, which probably won't be beneficial to town.

I know I'm going out of context, but this would also encourage specific scum actions: Let's say I'm the doctor and I announced out loud that I wanted to protect nhat. If scum has a roleblocker, he or she might as well block me while scum offs him. If nhat is scum and/or scum does not have a roleblocker, they will get rid of me that night unless a more dangerous (to them) power role shows up.

Noting that X might allow us to find scum better (X being scum in the pact) != declaring who you want t protect when you're the doctor. They are completely different things.

[Cephrir]

9 people are being prodded or replaced = deadline? That's weird.

[Cephrir]

Unvote EA

because deadline is approaching and I never actually wanted to lynch him.

I'll review in a few days when my LA is over.

[Cephrir]

Unvote EA because deadline is approaching and I never actually wanted to lynch him.

This seems to contradict "votes generally mean intent to lynch."

I did specify at the time I voted him that I had another reason to vote him besides the mini-case. To be fair, I suppose I was wording that a bit too strongly. But votes in the early stages of this game, obviously, would still have more basis than in your average random voting phase.

[Cephrir]

lynching me seems to be the best possible choice here. The way i see it [...] you all have really good cases that I can agree with because my posts are amazingly lacklusterly scumbagy.

I'm considering agreeing.

Especially given that the rest of this post, as someone pointed out, is nothing but appeals to emotion.

(Taking things ridiculously out of context is fun.)

[Cephrir]

This wagon will inevitably go to a claim as well it probably should.

Vote: Dynamo

I'm a helper.

SC's 753 is weird.

[Cephrir]

Everyone on the Dynamo wagon: have you EVER seen scum, particularly newbscum, just give up and resign himself to his own lynch like this? I can point to a few finished games when I've seen a townie do it (sykedoc in Mini 577, vendetta in Newbie 615, and CC09 in Mini 617 all come to mind) but never once have I seen this sort of concession come from scum.

I've seen scum do it plenty of times, usually as an attempt to tug at the town's heartstrings in some big old appeal to emotion.

[Cephrir]

I'm pretty sure Sineish made 14. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not.

[Cephrir]

Sineish can be debated, but I do want to throw an

HoS: Netlava

for, depending on how DynamoXI flips, either helping quicklynch him or bussing him.

That attitude can be dumb. I hate when people do that to m. Not that I don't think the vote was scummy.

I must agree with EA here. I might have unvoted last post except I thought Dynamo was dead already.

Unvote

for now, at least.

[Cephrir]

looking at the last couple of pages, I don't particularly think that dynamoxi is scum.

I'm surprised that cephrir's hypocrisy hasn't garnered more attention.

I think I know what you're referring to, and if you want to call that hypocrisy then go right ahead. It'd be a pretty lame argument though.

You say you're "surprised it hasn't garnered more attention". Yet there's no suspicion to go with it, not even an FoS. So, I can't quite tell if you actually find it scummy or not. Feel free to elaborate. FOr now it looks to me like you're pointing it out and hoping someone else will jump on it for you.

[Cephrir]

looking at the last couple of pages, I don't particularly think that dynamoxi is scum.

I'm surprised that cephrir's hypocrisy hasn't garnered more attention.

I think I know what you're referring to, and if you want to call that hypocrisy then go right ahead. It'd be a pretty lame argument though.

You say you're "surprised it hasn't garnered more attention". Yet there's no suspicion to go with it, not even an FoS. So, I can't quite tell if you actually find it scummy or not. Feel free to elaborate. FOr now it looks to me like you're pointing it out and hoping someone else will jump on it for you.

So you think he is distancing from the Dynamo wagon by showing suspicion of you instead, but not following up with a vote?

BM

Well the idea is that I'm confused. So I don't know

what

he's doing there.

[Cephrir]

Still here, still not really wanting to lynch Dynamo, still not bothering to contribute much until we've determined whether to lynch Dynamo.

I'm pretty sure he's town at this point.

[Cephrir]

Ok, I can't see us stopping a Dynamo lynch annoyingly, because some people apparently doubt his alignment. Fair enough, but guys, we have 9 days to do it, so it's still perfectly doable.

[Cephrir]

Better be scum, etc.

[Cephrir]

Not finding Cream scummy for that mostly because I agreed with him.

[Cephrir]

no big surprises there, then.

I agree with cyberbob's point about netlava above, and I still don't like cephrir's inconsistency on day 1. I'd really like to see more acknowledgement of that point.

IIRC I've pretty much done the best I can with this.

[Cephrir]

Netlava wagon was fast but justified.

I'll deal with this game soon, I've already expended my daily effort on Lovers Multiball.

[Cephrir]

@ Cream can you explain why ne is in an indefensible position? I dont understand.

Netlava has explained very thoroughly about that vote he made. He explains it due to poor play. No one believes him. I do believe him, because Netlava could have easily lied and said it was a typo earlier, and gotten away with it, but hey, 'WIFOM!', everyone calls out. There is no way to now argue Netlava out of trouble without resorting to WIFOM. That is why Netlava is in an indefensible position. I'm still examining both the Netlava and Dynamo wagons, because I think at least 2 people who jumped onto both of those wagons are scum.

The fact that you've been against both wagons on scummy players, the first being a townie, is beginning to concern me. I did agree with you about Dynamo but I'm fine with the Netlava wagon. Will be looking at you esp. if Netlava is lynched as town.

[Cephrir]

Cephrir, wouldn't Net being scum be more indicative of Cream scum as he is protecting a partner, or is this a lose lose situation for him?

Good point, I suppose.

[Cephrir]

@Netlava: yeah, what Sineish said. I didn't forget, I just changed my mind.

@all others- the above post by cass is so wickedly scummy it hurts

I don't disagree.

[Cephrir]

Also, Cephir's view of needing to take stance a on person x and stance b on person y seems mechanical and perhaps more indicative of a scum line of thought.

Run that one by me again?

Also, many people seem to find my posts scummy. I'm not sure why this is, but I'm guessing it has something to do with this being the biggest game I've played yet, and I have trouble getting involved in all the discussions and keeping track of everyone in the game (especially with all the replacements ). It gives me the feeling that the scum are simply all lurking somewhere in the backgorund where I'll never even notice them...

Everyone sort of beat me to this, but this really sounds like BS.

[Cephrir]

Okay, Netlava, I get it I think; you just phrased it in a sorta exaggerated way that doesn't make any sense.

I'll probably review and vote Netlava or Cass soon seeing as they both seem to be pretty tight cases to me.

[Cephrir]

Skruffs, why are you avoiding the analogy topic? Please either admit that it's circular logic, or prove to me that it isn't. SC, I don't want an answer from you, let your scumbuddy do the explaining.

...Are we really still on that subject?

[Cephrir]

This looks like a day of competing wagons. Given the choice,

Vote: Cass

[Cephrir]

This looks like a day of competing wagons.

What brought you to this conclusion given the fact that at the time of this post Cass only had two votes - the same number as armlx - and Netlava had (has) seven?

Well, it's pretty claerly the best viable option to me today as she and Netlava are the only ones who a lot of people are suspicious of. And I think Cass is much more likely scum than Netlava. It's prett simple, really.

[Cephrir]

Oh, one other thing about raider. If he did indeed misspeak, it would have been smarter of him to simply come clean and admit it right off the bat. By flatout denying it he's dug himself into a hole from which the only possible escape is trying to HUGELY twist his words. Something that isn't at all believable, I'm afraid.

This.

[Cephrir]

All right, I'm still here. Just to show that I'm reading, I don't really like the Raider wagon. It boils down to BM and Raider bickering because Raider changed his mind. I'm still for the Netlava wagon.
Just so I don't have to lurk any more, does anyone have any questions for me, or want to know my stance on anything?

This post gives me bad vibes.

[Cephrir]

All right, I'm still here. Just to show that I'm reading, I don't really like the Raider wagon. It boils down to BM and Raider bickering because Raider changed his mind. I'm still for the Netlava wagon.
Just so I don't have to lurk any more, does anyone have any questions for me, or want to know my stance on anything?

This post gives me bad vibes.

Openly admitting to lurking?

Yeah, and the first part too. "Just to show that I'm reading" for instance.

[Cephrir]

Prodded, still voting Cass, still preferring raider to Netlava.

[Cephrir]

Oh, I completely missed that. Actually that is enough by itself to make me want to switch. And... nope, he's not too close to being lynched.

Unvote, Vote Netlava

[Cephrir]

Yay, I died! Go town!