Mafia 102: No-Frills Game Thread(Town wins!)

[SerialClergyman]

Confirmedededed

[SerialClergyman]

Confirmedededed

/confirmered.

I am obviously empirically better than you.

[SerialClergyman]

vote sando

yessssss...

[SerialClergyman]

My only problem with charter's approach is that it's a little against the spirit, but ostensibly it looks pretty good to me.

No lynch

[SerialClergyman]

err

unvote, vote No Lynch

[SerialClergyman]

What's there to comment on? Mafia seems screwed, honestly, with this ratio.

scummy for someone not voting no lynch.

[SerialClergyman]

Scummy for someone not voting no lynch? My sweet life, Sir. Do I even have to say anything here? It looks slightly defeatist, but you have the wrong reasons here. What next? "You are FoSing them, why don't you vote them? I think you're scum!"
No maybe that isn't the best example. Well, I was expecting that to flow together right so I could just note 'not to mention it makes you seem to eager for an NL by pushing him.', but i'm tired atm.

Nope - scummy because he suggests that the town are screwed due to the ratio of town to scum, which to me looks specifically like he's referring to the no lynch + investigation plan that he's not actualy voting.

a) I don't agree that the scum are screwed based on the setup
b) I don't see any reason to suggest that they are as town. I get whinging scum rather than gloating town from that comment.
c) If someone had that viewpoint I'd be expecting them to be voting No Lynch, which he wasn't.

[SerialClergyman]

....I think the point was that we do both.

Discussion doesn't come out of a vacuum. If we KNOW we're going to no lynch, talking won't mean much. You need the threat of an imminent lynch to force the hunting. I'm happy with discussion, and I'm happy with lynching people, but discussing amongst ourselves if we all know the result will be a no lynch is just wasting time, imho.

[SerialClergyman]

Speaking of which, etheral cookie just did it again. He just agreed that it's hard for the scum and that a no lynch play will make it even harder on them but

isn't

in favour of a no lynch.

I like the no lynch plan charter, but I like epic page 5 scumreads more.

unvote, vote etheral cookie

[SerialClergyman]

SerialClergyman, can you please do me a great big favor and answer any of the questions I've asked you?

What do I think of Ether? Read above.

Why is ostensibly good enough for me? Because barring major complications it's a good plan. We have limited information and it's certainly not fullproof but I like it. I liked it more before I read Kaiv's post above which also made a lot of sense, however. If you assume sane cop, I see no reason not to No Lynch, really. A cop investigation is like a lynch but if you're wrong noone dies, and instead you get a confirmed innocent. So if we had 16 people and lynched 3 times, we'd be on 10 people. If we had 3 investigates, we'd be on 13 people AND any mishits are confirmed townies. It's just better than lynching, even if the chance to hit scum is the same.

The only problem is sanity. Perhaps one possibility is for the cop to self-investigate, but that will only catch a paranoid cop.

[SerialClergyman]

Sorry, I obviously meant town in that quote.

The condensed version of why Etheral COokie is scummy -

He:
1) Thinks that the scum will struggle.
2) Thinks that the no lynch plan will make it even harder for scum
3) Is not voting for and is actually against a no lynch.

Doesn't make sense as town. Also, sounds like scum whinging rather than town gloating when discussing the situation.

You're welcome to have your reservations about voting EC for whatever reason, including lack of experience, but he's done enough for my vote atm.

[SerialClergyman]

I think EC is anti-town, not scum. I was agreeing up until 3. I'm sure there are others against it :\

Not agreeing with it is fine IF you think it won't be effective. If you think it's a good idea that would help the town win and are against it, how do you justify that position?

[SerialClergyman]

EC, you agreed that the no lynch would make it easier for the town in this post.

Think about it. Sixteen players, thirteen of which are town. That's 81.25%. Unless my math's off (not my forte, honestly), mafia's quickest route to victory is five consecutive days with mis-lynches coupled with five consecutive nights with successful kills, at which point three goons endgame three townies. That's one tall feat, and even then it's worst case scenario for the town—it'd require a massive meltdown, months of utterly demented scum hunting.

And it's even tougher when you factor in no-lynches, which would, what, double the number of days it'd take?

I agree with this. Why would I want to vote No Lynch in the first place? All it's going to do is prolong the game. Why not place some pressure on people, and see what we can get of them? Voting No Lynch and watching the scum kill one every night would be amazingly boring and slow, and wouldn't give us much to figure out who they are.

[SerialClergyman]

Sup. Prod is 72 hours, and I have 5 games, some of which are at more critical junctures than the 9th spammy page of D1. So relax, I'll get here soon.

[SerialClergyman]

Lessons in activity.
1) 48 hours is not unreasonable to wait for someone to post.
2) Look at people's sigs before you accuse them of being inactive.
3) Count how many posts someone has before you accuse them of being inactive and compare that number to (off the top of my head) kaiveran, sando, charter, le chat, CSL, Team Aether, X_~, staple, muh316 and probably more. I'll even let you take off the last couple of posts which are clearly placeholders if you like.
And the most important lesson of all:
4) Having 60 posts in the 9th page, literally 1/4 of all posts in a 16 person game not including the mod, is

seriously anti-town

. You are spamming the thread, making re-reads and scumcatching harder.
5) Please check out the /invitational game here if you feel my activity on D1 here so far is a problem.

Irritating sojourn aside, actual content coming up next.

[SerialClergyman]

charter is probably town but was quick to confirm sando for no real reason, and that guy is sneaky (and quiet).

crypto is probably town, but either way we'll be almost certain to be able to tell later, so certainly not lynchworthy.

There's been some rubbish statements put forward, like 'scum are more likely to attack with good reason' and 'she seems scummy because she's tryign to defend herself properly'. Ugh. I'd hate to think what you guys assume town do - OMGUS and scratch themselves by the sound of it.

If the cop is sane, no lynch is demonstrably better. If you lynch someone, you either get dead townie or dead scum. If you investigate someone, you either get confirmed innocent townie or effectively dead scum. As i said- demonstrably better. Plus - confirmed town is how you win games. If we have 4 confirmed town to endgame, it doesn't matter if we lose every other town player wihtout hitting a single scum - that's a garunteed win.

But - as has been said, sanity issues (especially in the light of the balance of the game) makes this strategy a no-go, I think.

As for EC, my suggestion to you if you feel as you wrote at one point that I'm using bad reason and manipulating your words, is that if you don't agree with a no lynch, you shouldn't take a paragraph written about how powerful a no lynch is and quote it with the words 'I agree' underneath .

Haven't been impressed by Pomegranite. Seems to both see No Lynch as a valid strategy (lets discuss, get to near lynch then see if we want to no lynch) then say that the no lynch idea was extremely scummy.

More CSL posts please.

unvote, vote hiphop

Seems most likely atm, but I'm prepared to lynch most people. Some highlights not mentioned by others:

When asked if happy about his vote,

At the moment yes. Will I push for his lynch no.

I would comment on your case, but crypto said some people, referring to me I believe, are quoting more than they should, and I really value the guy's opinion.

meta me if you think I am scum.

Joins me on the EC bandwagon on Oct 10th, saying somebody give this guy (me) some cake.

Gives a scum list with 4 players on Oct 11th, including me at number 1 on the list and the person he's voting (EC) down at 3.

Votes staple, not one of the 4 he listed previously, on Oct 12th.

[SerialClergyman]

To be fair to him, I started the argument by making a pretty snide list of activity rules, and possibly he wanted to voice that he didn't agree with them.

To be fair to ME, I was accused of being scum for not posting for 2 days on D1 when there's plenty of other people who have posted much less of significance and much lesso ften than me.

And yes - the point of lookign at that game isn't to look at the activity rules, it's to look at the fact I had 3 posts in the entirety of D1 and yet still rocked the kasbah while being town.

charter - as for Sando, he's a really good friend in real life, we used to live together and still see each other heaps, I've known him for over a decade. And so you can imagine, if he's scum and wins, my life will be forfeit

Seriously though, his post was good but it's also his only one of content and I disagree about the no lynch stance. I don't see him as a particularly townie read (although not scummy either.) I was surprised you had such a strong reaction from one post.

[SerialClergyman]

Where did I say that no-lynch was extremely scummy? I just reread that post and didn't find that bit.

4. I'm sure that there's at least one scum between the people who followed charter on the no-lynch bandwagon at the beginning of the day. It was extremely scummy.

So help me God if you claim there's a sizable difference between a no lynch being scummy and the no lynch wagon at the beginning of the day being scummy I'll kill a kitten.

[SerialClergyman]

unvote, vote Pom

[SerialClergyman]

Pretty sure you were accused of posting in other threads while ignoring this one, not of being inactive.

Which is, of course, irrelevent unless I'm inactive. Someone who is active and posting in other threads is fine, I assume. So my problem was with the fact I was called inactive at all for not posting in thread for a couple of days at a non-critical juncture on D1. Wouldn't you agree, sir 3 content posts in 6 days?

Other things: When people quote people, say who you're quoting, blank quotes make your posts nightmares to read.

I go by a 'in the last 20ish posts I'll just quote, otherwise name' philosophy.

I'm voting for Pom because she tried to say that she supports a no lynch in theory but at the same time said that one of the ~three people who voted for it had to be scum. I'd still be happy voting for most people though.

I'd totally be happier if crypto only posted in graph format from now on.

HI RAYFROST! CAN HAZ BUTTSECK WIT AVVY?

Take this to 4chan please.

Early reports from my gut suggest staple is likely to be the VI scapegoat lynch.

[SerialClergyman]

I'd totally be happier if crypto only posted in graph format from now on.

Upon reflection, that came out a bit more dickish than I meant. While I think you post too much for other people to get into the game and don't focus your suspicions enough, your graph was really interesting and a lot of work. If you post more of those throughout the game I'd be very grateful.

[SerialClergyman]

You know as well as anyone that it is scummier to be actively lurking, ie be around but not post unless forced to, than to just be inactive. Passing active lurking off as not scummy because you're not technically inactive is a very weak argument.

a) It's still totally ridiculous to say that there's a problem with not posting in a couple of days.
b) What does it matter what someone else does aside from posting? (not counting obvious V/LAs). Are you saying it's scummier to be posting in another thread than it is to be reading the thread and not posting?

[SerialClergyman]

crypto, I am of the school that looks to pick about 5 people as town on D1 and be prepared to lynch any of the rest, almost irregardless of scumminess. I've picked up on about 2 or 3 I wouldn't lynch, and everyone else is fair game. So if you're keen on a wagon on EC I'll join you, but for now I'm happy resting on Pom.

[SerialClergyman]

SC, that last post wasn't intended to be snide (well, a little). It seems like you've lost some interest in EC, at least as far as your posts go. I am curious about your line of thought on him.

No worries - I didn't take it as particularly rude. I think EC is scummier than the bulk of the group. I can see how it's possible she didn't realise the implication of quoting a paragraph and agreeing with it when it wasn't entirely her view, but it seems unlikely ot me. Plus her explanation didn't read as town to me.

[SerialClergyman]

Sorry EC. I had you in my mind as a female - I should have checked. My bad.

[SerialClergyman]

I was ready to vote bigmc since he strted lining up lynches. Then pom spoke up on his side and I had one of those happy crystalising moments. I had a much longer post that was lost when the site went down but essentially I'm sticking with my read on staple as town vi lynchbait and bigmc went straight for it.

All abord the wagon!! Choo choo!!

Sando, as if vote the person set to be tomorrows lynch ahead of time by filthy scummy bigmc. You'll get much more kudos if you get on the wagon andstart bussing.

vote bigmc

[SerialClergyman]

Sando - don't tell me I touched a nerve, did I?

What are your thoughts about bigmc's alignment?

---------------------

Super Accurate* Vote Count(as of post 450):

RayFrost - 2(mask man, crypto)
Staple - 4(le Chat, bigmc109, muh316, Pomegranate)
crypto - 1(X_~)
X_~ - 1(EtherealCookie)
muh316 - 1(Sando)
bigmc109 - 4(Staple, charter, Empking, SerialClergyman)
charter - 1(hiphop)

Not Voting:Kaiveran, RayFrost

*Not guaranteed to be accurate.

[SerialClergyman]

This. Bigmc and mug both make opportunistic and scummy attacks, but then bigmc says if staple
flips town he'll go after muh. Super scummy points to bigmc and if that's true then provisional townie points to muh. And pom came out in favour of bigmc, so add that to the list. And charter is in favour of a bigmc lynch and seems very town to me.

And then you chose to vote muh instead of bigmc which earns you provisional scummy points.

Now we just need to get some coal in the engine of this wagon. All aboard!

[SerialClergyman]

.. who said anythign about a timeline?

I'm not claiming you voted muh after bigmc set up the second lynch. I'm claiming that you had (have) a direct choice between the two and you chose (and are still voting) the wrong one (in my eyes.)

Given my reasoning at the moment puts scumbigmc trying to chainlynch townmuh after townstaple, the fact that you continue to push for muh's lynch over bigmc makes you scummy by default.

[SerialClergyman]

1) rubbish - I also said

And

charter is in favour of a bigmc lynch, but that didn't mean it happened after everything I wrote before it. The 'and then' was to indicate why I started on you.

But whatever - this whole line of discussion is a bit of a red herring I think. The key thing is you are still favouring one over the other.

2) Well, bigmc's townflip would certainly put a crimp in my theory, as well as muh's scumflip. I'm saying that for me, my reasoning suggests that people who would choose to vote muh over bigmc are more likely to be scum. If bigmc flips scum, you are definitely likely to be a buddy of his. You can choose to do as you like, and disagree with my reads as much as you like, I'm letting you and everyone else know what I'm seeing in this game.

[SerialClergyman]

I don't care about the 'and then' point and am dropping it.

As for the second point, I'm not going to get drawn in by your little barbs or silly questions. Your perogative is to find scum, presumably, and that doesn't mean having little deals about who to lynch under what circumstances. Currently I have a theory of the game that makes you scummier than average, time to convince me otherwise if you're that worried about it, not try to push the point beyond recognition.

[SerialClergyman]

Oh, you think I misrepresented you? Well ok, you keep pushing that line.

My theory isn't ludicrous at all, it's about as good as you'll get on D1. Two scummy votes on the VI, one of them then threatening to turn on the other the next day - easy vote for bigmc. If I'm right about bigmc being scum, those trying to push the alternate wagon are more likely to be scum. That simple. Happy to be sitting where I'm sitting.

[SerialClergyman]

crypto - lining up lynches in D1 on townflips is absolutely a scumtell. Saying if A turns up scum we should lynch B is fine, because you're looking at scumteams. But saying if A is town, we should move on to B is an easy way to get a couple of mislynches, andin this case they were two juicy targets. It looks to me like bigmc went for lynchbait number one and signalled his intent to turn on lynchbait number two (and co-voter of staple) the next day.

Yes, when someone does something I think is scummy and the people against him I think are town and the people for him I think are scummy, it absolutely has an impact on the read. Charter being anti-bigmc and Pom being pro-bigmc is good news for my read.

As for being a follower -

Early reports from my gut suggest staple is likely to be the VI scapegoat lynch.

[SerialClergyman]

This is a horrible argument. When Sando voted, BMC had hardly any suspicion on him. Muh was the clear choice.

Sando has had plenty of time to change his vote and hasn't. He's in the camp I find scummy along with Pom (although that's obviously dependent on a bigmc scumflip)

[SerialClergyman]

Disagree totally on lining up lynches, especially D1. Absolute scumtell.

I'm also too cool to FoS . But your position is noted for when we know bigmc's alignment.

[SerialClergyman]

Gotta run, so will answer quickly -

a) charter looks town to me. Following townreads is another solid play of mine early.
b) It wasn't arbitrary. Staple looked town to me. Some reads are better than others, and obviously I think his play is unhelpful, but that doesn't make him scum.
c) There is no contradiction in the 466 quotes, which is why I didn't say anything about them. Have a look again - I'm saying Pom supported bigmc, and given I had a scum read on Pom before that started that made me happier with my read on bigmc.
Short version - if Pom attacked bigmc I'd be more worried about my read, and possibly more inclined to view Pom or bigmc as town. As it was, my two biggest scumreads agreed with each other, and I sit happy in my theory.

[SerialClergyman]

The best way to explain it is that staple has done very little that would benefit him if he was scum, but lots of universally recognized 'scummy' behaviour. So he's a bit lurky, obviously low scumhunting etc etc. This is not helpful to the town, but hardly pushes a pro-scum agenda either.

So this happens in many games, and in many games he is lynched. Most people think, even if they don't outwardly say it, that even if he's town he was useless anyway and the wagon is rarely looked at because anyone would have voted that guy.

So it's a situation scum love. They have an easy mislynch on their hands. They aren't afraid of a decent defense from the target, aren't afraid of being challenged as to why they are voting him and aren't afraid of any post lynch backlash. It's lynchbait pure and simple.

But if you can identify the case, you can look at those who jumped in and maybe pick someone out. I think bigmc is that someone.

[SerialClergyman]

Just meta'd bigmc. His game as scum he went straight for the vi on day 1 and got him lynched, flipping town. His actions are straight out of his scum playbook.

Charter, don't leave. There's more to do here. We should get more votes as people understand and the inactive get active.

Get on that wagon and ride it to awesomeland, everybody!

[SerialClergyman]

It doesn't push a pro scum agenda. It doesn't make him look more town or get a town player lynched, it's just bad play. This actually says little about his alignment.

Were you in the game where bigmc was scum or town? In the game he was scum he pushed the lynch of the VI hard all through day 1. It's eerily similar.

[SerialClergyman]

I guess what I'm saying about staple is for the very reason you just gave, there's no reason for town OR scum to act how he's acting. It's bad either way. So how do you get one alignment or the other from that? The answer is you shouldn't. His behaviour isn't typical of scum, it's typical of a player playing particularly poorly.

[SerialClergyman]

This is the link and bugger you for making me find it when I'm posting on the phone at work.

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... highlight=

look at him pushing green something. Grenn dude? Hoever is lynched day 1

---------------------

Super Accurate* Vote Count(as of post 500):

RayFrost - 2(mask man, crypto)
Staple - 4(le Chat, bigmc109, muh316, Pomegranate)
crypto - 1(X_~)
X_~ - 1(EtherealCookie)
muh316 - 1(Sando)
bigmc109 - 4(Staple, charter, Empking, SerialClergyman)
charter - 1(hiphop)

Not Voting:Kaiveran, RayFrost

*Not guaranteed to be accurate.

[SerialClergyman]

Crypto - you JUST SAID that towns are keen to lynch such players. So why would that be useful as scum? Would you do it as scum?

[SerialClergyman]

Now you're getting it!

[SerialClergyman]

You know what's cooler than wagoning rayfrost?

Wagoning bigmc. Epic truth.

[SerialClergyman]

I would, except BMC asshattery is much more likely to achieve something for the town.

[SerialClergyman]

Why is that?

[SerialClergyman]

crytpo - why is bigmc town?

[SerialClergyman]

You mean the game where he acted exactly as he's acting now?

And not doing anything scummy, even if it was true, doesn't make him actively town, just neutral, yes?

[SerialClergyman]

Well, have a read. In the game I linked earlier as scum he went straight for the staple-like player as well. He was one of the first to vote him and pushed the case on him for the entirety of D1. So if your reasons are meta, I'd say you're defintitely in the wrong camp.

My case doesn't have any relevence in working out whether he's town. If I made a bad case against him, which I don't think I did, it still shouldn't suggest that he's town.

Pom was also anti-staple, and agreed with bigmc significantly. Why isn't that a pro-town thought process?

[SerialClergyman]

Whoah. Shit just got real.

As far as I can tell, that's solely and completely not true in a number of ways. For reference, GreenDude is the name of the VI that bigmc pushed and tried to lynch on D1 in his only game as scum on site.

Look, I have a lot more exposure to his play than you do. He pursued a crappy newbie without a second thought. Here he is pursuing a scummy, somewhat inexperienced player, not a newbie, and he has shown plenty of trepidation about mistaking newbie town for newbie scum, which is a natural evolution after deliberately lynching newbie town when he was scum last game.

Firstly - of the two, staple joined the site on Sep 2009, GreenDude joined on Jun 2009. So in terms of experience, I'd say they were atl east around equal, not 'crappy newbie' vs 'somewhat inexperienced non-newbie player'.

Secondly, what trepedation has been shown by him towards staple's lynch? I'll give you a few quotes to explain what I mean:

I will admit Staple's first few posts don't come across as very scummy (I know I said in my PBPA before they did, but I think I was a little OMGUS-y from the no lynch thing), but ever since that they've had scum written all over them. How the hell do you not find him scummy? Defend your position with more than "the bandwagon seems scum-driven".

Everything since his 8th post has reeked of scumminess.

I refuse to consider he's town until he stops "screwing up". He has yet to do ANYTHING to defend himself well.

I have to say, I'm pretty amazed at the amount of people who are letting Staple's play go. I can see how the Staple wagon seems oppurtunistic; he's really the first to appear overtly scummy, and if he is town, I wouldn't be surprised if scum are jumping on it right now. But the point is that just because some people aren't providing the most unique analysis for their votes does NOT mean Staple's scumminess goes away.

Using AtE is suspicious because it means he has no other arguments besides "I'm town guysssss." Notice how he completely stopped suspecting X_~ (actively, at least) and started suspecting me as soon as I got into this with him. That's OMGUS if I've ever seen it.

ALL of them are good reasons when taken in combination. Add to that the OMGUS vote on me, and I see a strategy/playstyle much more likely to be used by scum than town. btw, when I said he could be scum or town, I think it was pretty clear that I didn't mean it was a 50/50 chance. I think he's scum.

And I'm sure there's more. So where's the soul-searching, worried about making the same mistake person that you're painting a picture of?

Also - what you're saying now is a direct contradiction of the last time you tried to clear bigmc based on meta. Can you explain this:

As someone who was in BMC's last game with him, I can say that he was much more indecisive then than now.

and he has shown plenty of trepidation about mistaking newbie town for newbie scum, which is a natural evolution after deliberately lynching newbie town when he was scum last game.

[SerialClergyman]

Rubbish, I've read the game - he just never waivered at all. He attacked Green as soon as green had a couple of votes and never left, often posting cases and saying things very similar to those quoted in my last message.

FOr example:

GD's post did nothing to alleviate my suspicions, it made me a lot more suspicious. I'll be damned if I unvote him.

GreenDude

I've laid out this argument so many times that I don't feel the need to repeat it. My #1 suspect.

Well the 1-4 scale seems to be popular, so I figure I'll give my own.

(scum; suspicious; neutral/no reading; town)

1: GD
2: DRK, RD
3: Reck, SC, LF, MME, benmage
4: IK, Spyrex, crypto

Also, I don't understand how GD simply stating "claim = watcher" (yes, that was the extent of his post) alleviates him of all suspicion.

There are more, of course. In all scum lists, he never mentions anyone he is seriously considering as an alternative.

Now - that in a meta sense isn't exactly a smoking gun, but it's very similar to his play here and before I read it I predicted he'd go for the VI and lo and behold he does.

But you're constantly painting a picture of the other game that is NOT TRUE. I encourage anyone to go have a look here and decide for themselves.

His play is more decisive in general. And his Staple case seems to hold more conviction than his GreenDude case did. Early on he was wary of mis-lynching a newbie because in his last game he himself, as scum, had urged a lynch on a newbie who flipped town. That instance of wariness doesn't make him indecisive.

This is pretty much rubbish and an unsatisfactory answer to my question. You said that he was both more indecisive then than now, and that he has shown plenty of trepadation in this game compared to last. They are essentially conflicting statements.

However - I will give you that he didn't jump on the EC wagon. That's a very solid point in bigmc's favour.

bigmc - happy birthday.

Your reasons for voting staple aren't really the issue. Staple's play was bad, but scum have no reason to act like that just as town don't. Your vote was opportunistic and very similar to how you acted in a previous game as scum - not to mention a willingness to turn on someone who voted with you on the wagon if you were wrong. That's scummy.

@ all - we just picked up another vote! It's like trying ot crawl through honey over here with the move and the inactives, but this wagon has momentum, we're all going places and we're open to accepting busses from fellow scum, so free your conscience and get your votes on!

[SerialClergyman]

How come you utterly refused to move onto another BW and actively attacked people for not following you and begged people not to do what you earlier stated was your D1 school of thought? You seem to have changed gameplan today, any reason why?

Fair question. Mostly I've ocnvinced myself of a bigmc case, which kinda sucks because I have a bad habit of tunnelling, but I rarely see a better D1 lynch than this one, so might as well fire up and get things done. Also - when I see scum when looking for town I have a better accuracy rate, so I'm rolling with it.

I have had a town read on charter since about 3 posts in. I've genuinely tried looking for town reads elsewhere without luck, so c'est la vie.

crypto - Woot! I knew that pointing out we'd accept busses would gather a few more into the fold

But seriously, gogo wagon. Let's get this done.

Mod - if it's not too much trouble, could you add a line in your vote counts saying how many needed to lynch? IE 12 people alive, 7 needed for lynch? That'd be a big help. Thanks.

[SerialClergyman]

Actually I disagree. When I started pressuring him he naturally fell back to the reasons he was voting Staple and stuck to them. That's exactly what I'd expect scum to do, because the whole point of lynching the VI is that there's stacks of vaugely anti-town things to point to.

The flow of the game, the position on the wagon, the target and the willingness to deflect off onto another wagoner on a town flip, the meta... it just fits very nicely.

[SerialClergyman]

bigmc - I think the 'gung-ho' attitude is just something you pick up when you know you're into a good lynch. D1, you'd be doing incredibly well if you lynched someone who was 50% likely to be scum, usually, so when you get a candidate around that position you might as well fire people up and get it done. Also it's harder for the scum to influence.

crypto - Note the waivering about other players but being sure on a staple lynch.

As for your 574 post:

I think that his lack of presence on an EC wagon is a slight tell in his favour. I think scum would be morel ikely to hop on the case I was pushing than resist against it, but it could have been too early to take sides at that point.

Iso 6 to iso 7 could be a minor scumtell or just a clarification of the thought process.

Iso 10 isn't sterling logic, but his point isn't unreasonable.

Interesting point about his experience not matching his expectation to scumhunt. I'd say it was possibly a scumtell.

So - let it be said I don't find PBPAs very convincing. You can make anyone scummy with a PBPA. On the other hand, you wouldn't expect to find much of anything D1 so whatever floats your boat. I wouldn't have been overly impressed by that case if you put it to me in a vacuum, however.

[SerialClergyman]

crypto - how do you expect to find scum when you ask every player in the game to comment on a post of yours then unvote and move on after only a couple of responses?

[SerialClergyman]

Well, typically the game of mafia involves the town actually doing something to determine whether or not other people are mafia or not. Sometimes that means checking whether someone else's meta case is a scummy misrep or is actually backed by other games - search function is at the top of the page.

But because this thread is stalling and because I really do want bigmc lynched, I've gone and found the other games, at least one of which is ongoing, where bigmc's alignment has been shown and you'll note the different playstyle and aggressiveness in them.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=425

[SerialClergyman]

But if you're VLA there's a chance that literally every townie in the game will fuck about barely posting, not supporting a good wagon or scumhunting on their own, just stuffing more filling into their pie hole!

[SerialClergyman]

I have word from Sando (who I know in RL), whose internet has been down for a few days at home. He says that he is definitely still playing the game and it will be fixed soon.

[SerialClergyman]

Ojanen! Come join my sexy wagon.

[SerialClergyman]

Why aren't you on the vote count, pyro?

Btw, you should post: Vote: bigmc

But bolded.

[SerialClergyman]

Nah, too many pro-bigmc are anti-Pom. I'm sticking with the coolest wagon of the day to see if deadline gees up the rest of the people.

[SerialClergyman]

Sorry for not getting back to you charter, was busy in a few games.

I agree about Pom, but I'm reading the currents and I don't like the deflection.

[SerialClergyman]

Self-preservation, which is normally a scumtell but this close to a deadline it's more null. I don't know, to be honest.

[SerialClergyman]

facepalm

I hope I haven't been wrong all along ><

[SerialClergyman]

^ I like this post.

[SerialClergyman]

To be honest, I'm not liking that Ojanen didn't place a vote. As a catchup post it's decent, although very centric to the players currently getting votes, and then no clear stance.

After all, she criticises EC for:

I hated EtherealCookie's play and hope his replacement can provide some kind of stance on Pom wagon vs. bigmc wagon/something else soon.

While at the same time barely making that stance herself:

bigmac is also scummy, although I think I would support Pom lynch over bigmac lynch, there's slightly more elements with hints of possible townish motivation

*suspicious glare*

(PS, bigmc has every right to bring up the fact it's not him in the quote, it's not immediately obvious to the casual observer. On the other hand, I think it's a clear mistake/typo and there's nothing scummy about it.)

[SerialClergyman]

Good game. My guesses after I died sucked, but I picked up bigmc. Would have bet my mother on crypto being scum. Charter is always amusing to play with. I tried so hard not to think you were scum until you said the cop shouldn't claim because they might be paranoid or naive - because outing them in that scenario is totally useless to scum rofl

[SerialClergyman]

Also, this setup was pretty friendly to the town.. 3/16 with a cop + jailkeeper.

I don't know muhc about setups, but that seems pretty tough tbh.

[SerialClergyman]

I had you amongst the contenders, all of which were wrong. And only for thel ast day or 2, I always had you as a black horse. I totally can't read you at all ><

I wasn't really following more than skimming though.

[SerialClergyman]

Meh, confirmable before night or after night is pretty similar if you already have another confirmable townie - scum will be guranteed to hit a confirmable either way, and you risked losing 3 confirmed innocents. But I take your point.

[SerialClergyman]

Trumpet, you said in the afterlife thread that you aren't pleased that I didn't kill the confirmed townie. I knew that it was quite likely that I would be investigated last night, and, if not, tonight. Therefore, I felt my only chance was to try to pick the cop off at night, seeing as how killing crypto wouldn't be much use to me other than one less townie. Better going for someone who has a chance of being cop. Wasn't this the ideal play in my situation?

I agree this was the correct play. The cop needed to go before his claim.

[SerialClergyman]

Damn you Ojanen - campaigning for my death then replacing out

kill speculation is one of those things that as town, you Just Don't Do, so we can probably get away with a lot.

As someone who has been killed a lot recently, this is VERY IRRITATING. Town should seriously look at this stuff more. At the moment, scum can kill the direct threat ASAP and noone even touches the night kill for fear of WIFOM.

Sexy code from Ojanen, lame that Scigatt doesn't allow it. Hoopla's hr code had the town gobsmacked, that one was pretty close too. I'm playing a game where you can't code or breadcrumb and you do lose some of the strategy, in my opinion.

[SerialClergyman]

I would have thought that 3 scum, doc, cop and 7 townies would be pretty pro-town as well though.

But honestly I know jack about balance, I'm going by what 'looks' right.

I'd also point out that going from 2 scum --> 3 scum doesn't really mean a linear increase. There's more interaction between the group. I'd definitely say an extra member is not +50% power for scum.

[SerialClergyman]

Memorable welcome btw, referencing the bigmc wagon fighting with Pom's one

I should have known you were scum from the MOMENT you didn't come join my sexy wagon!

[SerialClergyman]

Serial, I still don't think I was contradictory about my BMC meta read. I thought that overall he was more aggressive/decisive, but that he was more wary/cautious/indecisive about the one player he knew was a newbie—which sort of made sense given his experience and sort of didn't (which, for what it's worth, wound up being a major factor in my belayed flip-flop about him). Maybe I didn't explain it properly. Anywho.

No worries mate, only my opinion in the end. You got yourself protected which was a big part of winning the game, so all power to you