Mystery Mafia 2- Game Over! But who won!?

[vollkan]

Hey everyone,

I'll read up and post my thoughts shortly.

[vollkan]

Reading thus far:

The first posts are absolutely bizarre. Mnowax dayvigs FL, then threatens those who question him…and justifies his actions solely on the basis of wanting to show his power. Eugh. This is terrible play.

I am amused to see that Alab advocates a policy lynch and turned out scum. Once more, we see that those who would lynch the anti-town (rather than the scummy) are not to be trust.

I like Hur’s first post; logically outlines why the dayvig should be town.

Damnit. Daquain goes and advocates a policy lynch if mnowax kills once more.

Patrick’s first post opens with the same reasoning as Hur’s – that a scum unlimited dayvig would be entirely broken. His suggestion that we use mno as our lynch is very clever (but, it also begs the question as to why – if scum dayvig would be broken – it is not broken for town to deprive scum of a night phase).

Apparently mno has limited knives. I don’t agree with Hur that this trashes the arguments for him being protown. See, my expectation would be that, if a scum dayvig could only make 2 kills, he wouldn’t use them D1 and certainly not in such a stupid fashion (esp. wasting one on a partner). That sort of power would best be used by scum later on in the game, to throw the numbers askew.

I don’t like Lord Hur’s post 131. Basically, I agree with him that it was farfetched to say he was protown, but to ramp up an FoS solely on that basis (effectively a suspicion of the

possibility

of buddying up) is very tenuous.

I agree with Patrick’s analysis of Alabaska in 133 and I particularly like the way he spots Greasy shifting positions.

[vollkan]

I'm here, finishing my reading. I decided against interim on-the-fly posting, since there was nothing meaningful in my previous attempt.

[vollkan]

I don’t like Lord Hur’s post 175. He is really kind of undercutting the lynch by making it sound like there is no choice, which, in turn, suggests he is trying to reduce his own responsibility for it. He could easily change votes but, instead, he persists in holding a vote that he is clearly unhappy with. This persists in 237, where after considerable time he now even says he doesn’t like tajo’s play but “we're stuck with Greasy Spot's lynch.” He had the capacity to change the lynch, but instead he chose to not take any action.

The next day there is a lot of vote casting and anticipatory vote-casting (eg. Patrick’s 286), but very little discussion on why votes should be cast, or even broader discussion. That’s worrying.

Hur’s post 337 (his first for D3) is pretty odd. See, he says Nightson (Remus) is the last of his early suspects remaining, but second guesses himself because the previous attacks based on Ashmite’s non-activity had bad results. BUT, then he gets to VRK and says that he doesn’t find any of VRK’s posts scummy, but, nonetheless, he finds VRK most scummy and that he “could appear a lot less scummy if only he posted more.”

Pat says he is slightly suspicious of remus and VRK, but no reasons are given for why.

I do not like Hur’s 348, chiefly the penultimate paragraph where he concocts the idea that VRK FoSes in order to conceal a OMGUS. Not only is that sheer assumption with no basis, but VRK had actually given reasons for suspecting Hur. Thus, it wouldn’t have been OMGUS even if VRK had voted.

Lord Hur also gets a kick from me for this: “The worst part is, as it IS a hunch (I know it because I'm town, even if I also know you have no reason to believe me), remus could actually be scum, and if he does turn up scum, and if people follow your reasoning, I'm going to be lynched tomorrow.” As VRK said, it’s a blatant appeal to emotion AND, moreover, it is totally unacceptable to rely on hunches.

He then, in 370, strawmans the fact that he was making an emotional appeal about fear of death by arguing that no player wants to die. This misses the point that Hur was making appeals to his mortality.
He also has this stupid idea that there is a “scumtell about certainty”, which I’ve never heard of and I cannot see the sense in. I also don’t like the way he so casually drops his anti-VRK line before voting remus; his reasnos for not pursuing VRK are pretty much meaningless in terms of VRK’s alignment.

Bomb goes off. I come in.

I think Hur’s argument in 383 has some merit. There must have been a “clawer” scum alive, which would leave either Hur or Patrick by elimination (obviously, only Hur can justifiably ignore himself). Thus, Patrick retaliates and rightly dismisses a lot of what Hur says as mere puff.

I don’t follow why Hur says Patrick is SK and, yet, his whole initial argument was based on a werewolf flavour.

Interesting point from EK that Patrick failed to address the point. Tbh, I’m not sure how decisive this point is. Would town really be more likely to make the logical links?

And, as Patrick says, he contemplated the matter anyway

On Lawrencelot’s 422, I cannot for the life of me understand this sentence “First of all, he feels less protown to me than lord_hur does, although his posting didn't really seem scummy to me.” The word ‘feels’ is an abomination in this game but, moreover, this makes no sense. If not from his posting, how do you conclude Patrick is scummier? I realise you make other reasons, but then why list this one at all; it just seems like a rhetorical flourish. I don’t understand Law’s second reason. And the third reason makes too many assumptions regarding the insane cop.

Farside’s attack on Hur is pretty flat…I get her point (Hur not scumhunting), but it’s not really positive evidence of scumminess.

Abridged for people on the go

Put simply, I don’t like Lord Hur. One of him or Patrick seems to be scum, unless I am missing something, and I would pick Hur in a heartbeat as the scum of that pair.

[vollkan]

I don’t like Lord Hur’s post 175. He is really kind of undercutting the lynch by making it sound like there is no choice, which, in turn, suggests he is trying to reduce his own responsibility for it. He could easily change votes but, instead, he persists in holding a vote that he is clearly unhappy with. This persists in 237, where after considerable time he now even says he doesn’t like tajo’s play but “we're stuck with Greasy Spot's lynch.” He had the capacity to change the lynch, but instead he chose to not take any action.

Changing votes with so many people in 4 days? I did not think it was possible. Plus Dasquian was looking pretty town to me and has said the same thing a couple days before. That said, I could have made a mistake, I agree. I am not used to strict deadlines like this game's.

Er no. Even if you were so inexperienced, I find it hard to swallow that you would just give up. Any reasonable player would nonetheless make an effort. Worst-case scenario would be that you unvote and have to revote Greasy Spot.

Also, I am not sure why what you thought of Dasquain should have any bearing. Did you think for yourself, or just follow somebody who you thought appeared town? I, for one, can't seriously envisage myself following anybody who I was not certain was town and, even then, only if I had no reasoning of my own.

Hur’s post 337 (his first for D3) is pretty odd. See, he says Nightson (Remus) is the last of his early suspects remaining, but second guesses himself because the previous attacks based on Ashmite’s non-activity had bad results. BUT, then he gets to VRK and says that he doesn’t find any of VRK’s posts scummy, but, nonetheless, he finds VRK most scummy and that he “could appear a lot less scummy if only he posted more.”

What's odd in this? I reread the thread, and found that VRK had not voted a single time... Pretty uncommitting, and as the other leads were pretty thin, I expressed my suspicion.

What's odd is that you are inconsistent.

You don't treat inactivity as a scumtell for Nightson, but you do so for VRK.

I'll quote the relevant passages:

As for me, of all my suspects since the beginning of the game, only Nightson (now remussaidow) is left, and lack of activity didn't work as an argument for ashmite84, plus remussaidow has picked up a lot, even if his attack on mnowax is still not convincing me... Not that good of a lynch candidate right now imho...

<snip>

VRK : no activity for ages, didn't commit himself to *any* vote yet. None of his posts appeared as scummy to me yet (except when he said he would hammer Greasy Spot, and didn't show up to do it), but with this little activity, it's hard to form an opinion.
<snip>
Right now, I'm suspecting VRK mainly. He could appear a lot less scummy if only he posted more...

** VEL-RAHN KOON, PLEASE PLAY THE GAME (seriously, it is fast paced and easy to read, you got no excuses) **

How is that not inconsistent?

I do not like Hur’s 348, chiefly the penultimate paragraph where he concocts the idea that VRK FoSes in order to conceal a OMGUS. Not only is that sheer assumption with no basis, but VRK had actually given reasons for suspecting Hur. Thus, it wouldn’t have been OMGUS even if VRK had voted.

Err that's about the only point VRK conceded to me.

Firstly, he didn't "concede" it to you. He did say: "That's about the fairest thing you've said so far", but let's have a look at the whole point in context, shall we? I think you'll find that you are dead wrong about this.

As a side note, I can't help noticing that you made your first vote in this game right after I attacked you for lack of commitment on this point, and your vote on remus while you FoS me looks like a way to attack me without it looking too much like an OMGUS move...

I think this deserves a FoS : Vel-Rahn Koon

That's about the fairest thing you've said so far. Although with the FoS it looks like you're trying to express suspicion without committing to voting for me. Scummy.

I could care less that you attacked me for my lack of play. It was perfectly acceptable for you to do so because I had not been playing. But to be fair, you yourself said in post 337 that

VRK : no activity for ages, didn't commit himself to *any* vote yet. None of his posts appeared as scummy to me yet (except when he said he would hammer Greasy Spot, and didn't show up to do it), but with this little activity, it's hard to form an opinion.

So with one post, which accuses you of being possible scum based not on your play, but on a confirmed cop's possible tell, I've suddenly become scummy enough for you to NOT commit to a vote, but an FoS which you can back out of if support doesn't materialize. You should be FoSing tajo...

And you say that I'm OMGUSing? Nice try! Hypocrite = joo. /FAIL

NEXT!!!

So, not only does he criticise the fact that you voted without pointing out any suspect posts (which, in addition to the inconsistency, makes you FoS totally unjustifiable), but he actually entirely rejects your assertion that it was OMGUS.

Lord Hur also gets a kick from me for this: “The worst part is, as it IS a hunch (I know it because I'm town, even if I also know you have no reason to believe me), remus could actually be scum, and if he does turn up scum, and if people follow your reasoning, I'm going to be lynched tomorrow.” As VRK said, it’s a blatant appeal to emotion AND, moreover, it is totally unacceptable to rely on hunches.

WTF? Seriously? I did not say I was relying on MY hunch, I was just saying I knew that that tajo's sentence was only a hunch because I know my only alignment.

That said, I agree about the appeal to emotion (and also, as I've said before, that it's the single worst argument in my opinion).

Sorry, I misread this. I thought you were saying that you had a hunch remus could be scum.

He then, in 370, strawmans the fact that he was making an emotional appeal about fear of death by arguing that no player wants to die. This misses the point that Hur was making appeals to his mortality.
He also has this stupid idea that there is a “scumtell about certainty”, which I’ve never heard of and I cannot see the sense in.

This seriously baffles me. You... know that scum know people's alignment from the start (as well as each of them's roles), don't you? For example, shaft.ed got a very specular win (which he posted in that scummy awards thread) with was solely based on a scumtell about certainty. Basically, one scum was assuming one player was town in his reasoning, while he would have had no reason to know that if he were town.

Okay, I see what is going on here.

There is a "scumtell about certainty" (if you want to call in that) in relation to posts that make

implicit assumptions

as to people's alignments.

eg. In a game where there are 4 players: A, B, C and D, and the town is sure the situation is 3 town vs 1 scum. If A said: "Well, either C or D must be scum", then the post assumes B is town. That could be seen as scummy.

Remus, however, did NOTHING of the sort. He said: "highly doubt I'll get lynched today, VRK, and even if I do, you're ******* nuts. I'd love to OMGUS you just to help you look more like an ***, but I'm too goddamned sure you're town"

Notice something? "I'm too goddamned sure" is NOT a subtle, implicit assumption. He's basically saying: "I have a really strong impression that you are pro-town." I can't see how you can spin that as scumminess. Scum might slip up and make an assumption, but that's totally different to explicitly stating an opinion.

I also don’t like the way he so casually drops his anti-VRK line before voting remus; his reasnos for not pursuing VRK are pretty much meaningless in terms of VRK’s alignment.

I need a translation for this.

Sure. I see that I was unclear there.

You said:

I have been pondering between voting for VRK or for remus. But now, if I take into account all my analyzing and :

- the fact that VRK's play and arguments, as much as I don't like them both, have the merit of pressuring people, which is usally quite good for town to get extra info ;

- the fact that VRK has lost each and every of his games as town (7), so his bad arguments could actually be genuine (not the best argument, I know, but I think it counts) ;

The fact that VRK's arguments have pressured people and the fact that he has lost as town are both irrelevant in terms of his alignment in this came. You are right to say that the second point is "not the best" because, in fact, it is very weak. The mere fact he has lost games as town in no way implies he has poor reasoning.

Given that, you basically are just arbitrary in the way you decide between VRK or remus, but you dress it up as if you were making a reasoned judgment.

I don’t follow why Hur says Patrick is SK and, yet, his whole initial argument was based on a werewolf flavour.

SK = lone killer. He can be using knives, guns or claws (and be a werewolf, in that last case).

Right. I figured that might be what you meant, but you said, initially:
"We know that there are two anti-town forces : those who claw/dismember people (werewolf for short), and those who shoot people (mafia). "

"those who" implies a plurality.

Question: if we lynch one of Patrick and lord_hur, and that person comes up town, should we lynch the other or look for scum in the players that joined today? (assuming nothing extraordinary happens) This has to be answered before we lynch one of them, because if the question is "don't lynch the other" then the second question is "why would we lynch one of them today?". Man I have no idea if I'm making any sense right now...

You are making sense here. The reason for lynching one of them is the presumption that, based on the NKs, one of them must be scum. If that presumption is dubious, then we shouldn't lynch either. I don't see how (absent some weird delay mechanics or something) it could be dubious, though.

Farside’s attack on Hur is pretty flat…I get her point (Hur not scumhunting), but it’s not really positive evidence of scumminess.

It's been my experience that I see more and more scum hiding under the radar and not scum hunting. It typically is more accurate then not. Only very few people I play with don't scum hunt and it is a null tell.

Any specific examples?