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

[bionicchop2]

oh hai. I seem to have some reading to do!

[bionicchop2]

Correction!

I read the first 3 pages and realize it is pointless to read more. I will read the last 5 pages and go from there.

[bionicchop2]

I changed my mind. I am going to read from the beginning all the way through even though most of the original players are dead. There is too much going on with game mechanics for me to feel comfortable not reading the past events. This is top priority for me right now, so I should have a read completed today. Analysis is a different story, but I will have at least a basic understanding of what is going on.

[bionicchop2]

OK, reread is complete.

I think the most important occurrances at this time are:

1. The hypoclaim. Anybody unsure of what this is needs to immediately read day 5.

2. The events prior to night 4 (those who went home drunk) - Landlord, Lawrence, Litral

3. deaths and new arrivals.

=======

1. It has been posted a few times and analyzed. Fonz obviously wanted to make it known he blocked Tony, which is why he presented this idea. There is plenty of WIFOM to be had posthumously. I will do this elimination again even though some have done it. I think some mistakes were made and I need to think it through myself.

A.

Tony ---> Lawrence

- Tony says he could not be blocked since he has no night action. This also means he could not block or protect Lawrence. This scenario is not the cause of the no kill. It reveals nothing about the alignment of either.

B. Forbidden --->

MafiaSSK

- Forbidden did not block a kill, but may have saved a kill target. SSK was not a likely kill target as the most likely lynch candidate for D5, but I won't try to guess scum kill attempts.

C. Farside ---->

Litral

- same as scenario B. Litral was not blocked, but may have been saved.

D. Elvis ----> Tony - (possible) We don't have any reasons to eliminate this yet.

E. Lawrence ---->Landlord - (possible) We don't have any reasons to eliminate this yet.

F. Fonz ----> TM (possible) - most likely due to the knowledge Fonz did block Tony.

G.

Litral ----> farside

- Litral did not have any known blocking or killing abilities. This means Farside can only have attempted a kill if a doctor saved.

H.

MafiaSSK ----> no one

- obviously not an option

So, what does all this mean? Well unless everybody else in the list says definitively they are not a doctor, role blocker, or anything else which may have stopped a kill, it does not do much. I don't think we want to go that route either because it would require outing any protective roles. The simplest explanation would be Tony attempted a kill, but was blocked. Barring any additional information, this is the route I would go.

=======

2. I am looking at this event fairly straight forward (out-guessing all out-guessing of the mod!). I think they went home for the remainder of the day phase. I am open to this having more meaning, but for now, there is not enough information and the speculations would be to wide.

=======

3. N2 Deaths: Dasquian
D3 deaths: Kison (bomb), VRK, Remuss, mnowax
D3 joins: (elvis,

Litral

, Tony {Jenter}, Forbidden {Dahill}, Lawrence, Farside)
D3 Lynch: Lord Hur (maf)
N3 deaths: Volkan (stabbed)
D4 joins:The Fonz, MafiaSSK
D4 death: Patrick (smashed - 'vig' by forbidden), no lynch occurred
N4: NO DEATHS
D5 deaths: MafiaSSK (John F. Kramer) lynched
N5 deaths: The Fonz (stabbed), Litral (bashed over the head)
D6 joins: Surye, Korlash, BionicChop (Rep. Afatchic),Mr. Flay, Killa Seven

- When all original players died - there was no signs of anybody who would be mauling people. (Vengeful vigilante possible - last kill of this type was the night after he died if you count the dismembered)
*Patrick states same theory during his lynch.
**There may also be forces outside our control - mauling may be the result of modkill for violation of posting restrictions?
***This obviously comes with the bonus knowledge that Patrick was town. Patrick was the proper lynch / kill on D4 for reasons of closing that chapter out.

- Night 3 stabbing (Vollkan) - someone who replaced in day 3. (elvis,

Litral

, Tony {Jenter}, Forbidden {Dahill}, Lawrence, Farside)

- No shotgun deaths since Lord was lynched, only stabbing or bashing deaths. I think the bashing deaths are from someone who purchased a pint of beer or a bottle of rum (similarity to smashing from empty glass). This would be Tony or Lawrence. Since Litral was acting scummy, I see this as a potential vig kill. I think 1 scum group has been eliminated (shotgun deaths) but a new group is around (stabbers). The only flaw is this would seem to give a huge disadvantage to those who were in Lord Hur's scum group (which is still unclear. I would have assumed red was all the same, but somebody stated BM does multi scum groups as the same color).

SUMMARY: Somebody who joined D3 is responsible for the stabbings. The only night without a stabbing, Tony was blocked. Barring any additional evidence, the most likely reason is Tony is scum / killer. Here is where the WIFOM comes in. Why would Fonz not have blocked Tony again? Maybe he did. If he did, maybe Tony had a partner who submitted a kill for Fonz. Tony may have also been framed. We have seen town day cops - what is there to say there is not a scum role cop who found out Fonz was a RB? With those thoughts in mind, Tony is still top suspect.

Likely scenarios (in order, assuming no doc save since we have been given no information to suggest this happened):
1. Tony had his kill blocked
2. Those who went home (Landlord, Lawrence) were kept from night actions
3. There was an intentional no kill

========

elvis' logic looks good to me. Vote: TonyMontana while I reread.

Yeah, nice, put me at L-2 while you reread. ¬¬

I have done my reread and I am going to put you at L-1 and ask for a claim. We need maximum time to digest anything you say.

Vote: TonyMontana

[bionicchop2]

23+ are new to the game as of D6. Nobody from before page 15 is still alive, which is really odd. Caveat: I'm not reading those pages unless I have to.

There is nothing critical there. All it really shows is there are unusual game mechanics. We basically started a new game on day 3 with a jump start on 2 suspects (Lord Hur and Patrick).

Anybody got an alternate theory that doesn't involve ashmite killing 72 hours after his lynch?

While I still think ashmite could be responsible (nothing is ever impossible), I have also noted the additional kills may be mod generated.

Still, they'll have to be in the 14-20 set, because 21 & 22 are both dead (and Town).

agree

Lawrencelot defended lord_hur on the crucial Day 3B

With the lack of shotgun deaths, I do not think we will link anybody to Lord. If Lawrence turns out to be the stabber, I think it will be independent of his defense of Lord Hur.

Landlord is BM or BM-controlled.

Possibly. The account only posts in this game which would support this argument. Either way, the account is voting. If it is BM controlled, then it can't have a win condition and we should completely ignore it.

I still like TonyMontana for scum, but not for the hypoclaim reasons previously mentioned. The drunkenness thing makes it equally likely that the remaining scum group was drunk to the point of insensibility, which only really points the finger at the three L's. For what should be obvious reasons, I only believe one of them capable of being our killer... Vote: Lawrencelot.

I lean the other way (Tony over Lawrence) but don't disagree with your assessment. My reason for leaning to Tony is I know what a role blocker does and I know a role blocker targeted Tony. This minimizes guess work for me. The drunkenness could mean much more, but it is my 2nd best guess as to the reason behind the no kill.

[bionicchop2]

EBWOP: bionicchop2 has some good points regarding who is alive when, but I'm having a hard time imagining that for 1 coin you could buy a 1-night Vigilante kill.

For zero coins mnowax had unlimited kills for the first 2 pages of the game, so this does not seem too far fetched to me.

[bionicchop2]

My reason for leaning to Tony is I know what a role blocker does and I know a role blocker targeted Tony.

Not even I

knows

for certain that fonz actually blocked me.

Are you just trying to argue semantics here? The role blocker said they targeted you. I am not sure the point of your statement here.

[bionicchop2]

EBWOP: Lawrencelot or farside22 could have bought 12 instakills

each

. That's enough for either of them to kill the rest of the game's players at that moment in time, sealing the Win for their faction. Extremely improbable.

For zero coins mnowax had unlimited kills for the first 2 pages of the game, so this does not seem too far fetched to me.

Maybe he did, maybe he didn't; MNOWAX was awfully erratic to base your balance analysis on. If he did, this'll be my last BM game, because I'm tired of his screwball setups, but I promised him I'd play one more.

I see your point with the 12 instakills. We really don't know how it works though. What we do know is forbidden bought a glass and then voted to kill patrick and it happened - using the glass. I don't know if more glasses could have been bought or what the effect of holding multiple glasses would have been.

As for mnowax, I wasn't trying to figure out the balance, just to outline that the ability to kill in this game is not restricted to the norm.

[bionicchop2]

The fact that there is possibly a doc AND an RB does not work against the plan- it makes it harder for the scum to know who to shoot at, since they don't know which was the actual stopper.

This made no sense. Of course the scum would know who stopped the kill. Except if both his target and himself was targeted in the hypo, it's a pretty clean cut case isn't it?

Well you miss that multiple people claimed to have 'targeted' you - meaning if you were scum you wouldn't know for sure which person was responsible.

[bionicchop2]

I think the best option for finding Mr. Stabby right now is:

vote: Lawrencelot

[bionicchop2]

Bio what makes you think Lawrencealot is Mr. Stabby?

He was in my '2nd tier' of reasons for the no kill on N4 related to the drunken homestay. With Lawrence and Landlord being the only 2 affected, it can only be lawrence if this is the reason. The stabbings started on N3 and Landlord joined during day 4.

If Lawrence is not scum / killer, then we are probably in the 3rd tier of possibilities and will not be able to find scum using the information of the no kill. The 3rd tier includes intentional no kill and it also includes a blanket protection by the moderator (or even landlord)

EBWOP:

I targeted mafiaSSK, and everyone else but myself.

This quote caught my eye on my final skim the previous day. I saw it as too much of a long shot to be worth speculating on when Tony being blocked was a far simpler explanation for the non-events of n4.

There are 4 players left who joined prior to the first stabbing: elvis, Forbidden, Lawrence, Farside. Out of those, Lawrence is most likely the culprit from my perspective.

[bionicchop2]

Obviously, that doesn't mean anything to town, so shall I claim or what? Claiming my role could help town, but it could also help mafia.

With shortened day periods, I can't see any way claiming before L-1 would be a bad thing since you are likely heading there. It will give us more time to digest.

[bionicchop2]

BM seems to have 1 or 2 scums in each new installment of people and No I am not going to say "Oh there was only one kill" that just could mean a forgetful scum or someone trying not to get caught.

I would agree and suspect scum did join in the last group too. The smaller groups are hit or miss, but it seems like the big groups (starting group and the group that joined day 3) all had scum in them (or killer if the stabber is acting alone). I wouldn't see only 1 kill as a reason to think no new scum joined. We don't know if each new scum joining earlier acted as individuals (that seems way too difficult to win in this setup) or as a group.

[bionicchop2]

unvote

.

I think I understand the role based on your description. I do also see how it can be dangerous for town as well as helpful. I wonder how BM would handle double actions on you - say you were protected and killed. It seems like you would only duplicate the successful action (protection).

[bionicchop2]

First, if you are telling the truth, we'll likely catch scum based on getting a second pick today. If you aren't, we lynch scum directly. It feels win win to me.

oooohhhh. Didn't think about that. He would get to lynch somebody else today.

[bionicchop2]

i wonder if lawrence gets that power over day events

He said he did (going home drunk).

[bionicchop2]

I just realized if I don't vote Lawrence and I still feel like voting somebody who joined day 3, I will have to scum hunt out of 3 women.

***scumdar explodes***

[bionicchop2]

no-one even considered that "Insane Day Cop" was just a rolename for pop and he wasn't, in fact, insane.

I would imagine there are certain standards which a moderator is not going to tinker with. Insane Cop as a standard role name for an actual Insane Cop really can't be messed with or it would throw the whole game off.

[bionicchop2]

because follow the cop is a stupid game, and even more so is follow the

dead

cop.

Even more so would be ignoring evidence handed to you. Are you saying if there was a logical reason to believe someone was investigated by an insane cop, the clues left about that investigation should be ignored? I am not sure what you are getting at with this angle here.

More importantly, I am not sure what you gain from analyzing populartajo at this point. Anybody he would have investigated or been linked to is dead. The earliest players who are still alive joined on day 3. If it was just an aside comment, there isn't much of a reason for me to debate the issue. If you think it ties into something relevant to the active players we can resume.

[bionicchop2]

It was an aside comment.

OK. I think we can both agree it isn't worth debating any more then.

[bionicchop2]

bonus!

forbidden - not sure if we want whoever is responsible (assuming it wasn't just a mod thing) to claim.

[bionicchop2]

The list from the no-kill night and how it oculd have happened:

1)Lawrence is scum: too drunk to make the kill
2)I protected a kill on TM
3)Farside protected a kill on litral

4)Fonz block TM-scum

Updated:

1)Lawrence is scum: too drunk to make the kill
2)I protected a kill on TM

3)Farside protected a kill on litral

4)Fonz block TM-scum

So either I protected a kill on TM, or lawrence is scum and was too drunk to kill.

I thought I would let you know that actually do not have protective powers. I could not have protected TM from a kill. So the only option is lawrencelot is lying scumbag.

I am not convinced it is this simple anymore. I am not completely against a lawrence lynch because if he is telling the truth he can gain a 2nd lynch (and if lying, we get scum obviously), but I kind of believe his claim.

I think this post by farside might reveal a little bit:

Okay I looked into what bugged me and I was wrong. I would like to hear from those who haven't posted since entering the game there thoughts on what and who. BM seems to have 1 or 2 scums in each new installment of people and No I am not going to say "Oh there was only one kill" that just could mean a forgetful scum or someone trying not to get caught.

The last sentence seems like she may have intentionally not turned in a kill. I think she was also trying to get focus off of those who joined day 3 since she knew it would eventually lead to her being found. I can't figure out if she had a partner who joined with her though.

My focus on D3 joiners was because it was clear someone who joined that day was stabbing. A mafia player from that day was found. I am not sure we should remain limited to those players now and ignore those who joined day 6 (and 3 of which are not posting - Surye, korlash and K7). We also have Landlord who we eventually need to decide if his living is detrimental to the town.

[bionicchop2]

If she actually did forget to send in the kill or choose not to, why breadcrumb it?

If she's scum and chose not to kill, she WANTS us to think mafia was active so that we keep following the results of the hypoclaim. She wouldn't want us to give up on the hypoclaim.

I don't think it was intentional (I also don't think she forgot). I think she was doing a 'look over there' type thing and subconsciously may have slipped about not killing.

It is also possible I am over-thinking a little bit.

[bionicchop2]

(and 3 of which are not posting - Surye, korlash and K7)

I think I'm posting just fine... Now K7 on the other hand... (although he always does that)

I wasn't intentionally calling you out or pointing to you. I would agree - in most games your posting would be fine. This game I think calls for posting above the normal due to the varying deadlines.

[bionicchop2]

You have 2 days, 14 hours, and 45 minutes to make a decision.

With this in mind, I am not going to start a new scum hunt off on some tangent. I think I agree at this point to follow through on the lynch of Lawrence. For some reason I though we had a fresh seven days. I don't think we should 'vote' on who (if he is a copy cat) he lynches as a result of his role. While we definitely should express who we are suspicious of, I think he should be allowed to decide on his own. This will prevent scum from having an influence over who he lynches.

vote: lawrencelot

[bionicchop2]

I also thought it was weird that lawrence didn't want to kill me. Barring some weird game mechanics (which is possible with BM), then either him or me is scum. So yeah, if he's town I would expect to get killed.

Could you outline the logic which brought this about, because I don't quite follow it.

If we assume farside was not the only killer who joined d3, then the other(s) would be found in you, Lawrence and Forbidden. Why did you narrow it down to just you or lawrence while excluding Forbidden? You also seem to be 100% sure one of you two are scum. In reality there may be no more killers from day 3.

I would just like to know your reasoning on this.

unvote lawrence; vote elvis

. I can switch back to Lawrence if deadline creeps up and nobody is changing, but I really have an odd feeling about this statement from Elvis.

[bionicchop2]

I don't know where you get your logic.

Possible no kills from hypo claim:

Tony ---> Lawrence

Forbidden ---> MafiaSSK

Farside ----> Litral

Elvis ----> Tony

(you have claimed to have no saving abilities)

Lawrence ---->Landlord

Fonz ----> TM

Litral ----> farside

MafiaSSK ----> no one

Only Forbidden saving SSK is left.

If we look at it from a drunken standpoint, only Lawrence is possible as too drunk to not kill from those who joined day 3.

Therefor, if Lawrence is not a killer, either farside acted alone or you / forbidden are scum. My question is why you eliminated forbidden from the possibilities?

[bionicchop2]

I didn't think it likely that scum would want to kill SSK. He was almost lynched the day before if not for deadline. He was lynched the next day. The town wanted to lynch him.

1)Why would a doc protect SSK?
2)Why would scum need to kill him?

What would either of your 2 questions have to do with Forbidden possibly being scum? If you are missing my original point, why would / should Lawrence assume you are scum if he is not? If he is not scum, there are many possibilities on who else is.

[bionicchop2]

What are these many possibilities? Other than Forbiddan protecting SSK, what are the other possibilities?

You are focusing on the no kill (you are also forgetting that landlord did a EBWOP to say he targeted everybody). If it was not a result of Lawrence being drunk, then it could have been anything from Farside not killing intentionally to a mod inflicted no kill meaning the no kill is no longer a source of information. This means that Lawrence would have no idea who scum would be (if town) and have no reason to automatically assume it is you. Nothing in what you have said makes Forbidden not scum.

[bionicchop2]

Ok, may I get this straight? You are pushing me as possible scum because elvis didn't mention the possibility of me guarding SSK in her run down of possibilities? Because there are a lot of things wrong with this and I don't want to waste my time going through them if I'm wrong.

No you don't have it straight. I am pushing the fact Elvis is making too many assumptions which implies extra knowledge. Why is it her or Lawrence? Why is she so sure somebody else from D3 is mafia? If she is so sure, then she would have to be 100% sure lawrence is scum if she excludes you. Since she is not sure if he is 'buddying', then she isn't sure he is scum. She is using faulty logic on many levels and I am just pointing out that the actions of that night will fail to be a source of information if Lawrence does not turn out to be scum.

[bionicchop2]

I feel like I am taking crazy pills.

This all stems from Elvis's statement.

I also thought it was weird that lawrence didn't want to kill me. Barring some weird game mechanics (which is possible with BM), then either him or me is scum. So yeah, if he's town I would expect to get killed.

This is the statement I have been questioning.

Why is it her or Lawrence? Why is she so sure somebody else from D3 is mafia?

Do you not get it? Because we have eliminated everyone else in the hypoclaim from being blocked or protected.

My point is that farside could have been the only D3 mafia. She may have a partner in d3 too, but we don't know. If forbidden saves MafiaSSK (she now says she did not), then she could have saved from farside killing. You seem very sure that farside had a partner who joined the same day as she did when there is no evidence for or against that. Why does there have to be another mafia player who joined day 3?

We can debate it more tomorrow if you wish. I think your logic is flawed (and I hope you understand what I am trying to say), but the more I think about it, your flawed logic here does not make you scum. There is no reason you would limit the focus to either you or Lawrence as scum if you were in fact scum.

We have a deadline in about 14+ hours. If farside did have a partner during D3, the most likely partner is Lawrence. I don't see us having a chance to hunt scum elsewhere before the day ends.

unvote elvis;vote lawrence

[bionicchop2]

BM has to be somewhere smiling to know that the simplest explanation for a no kill in his game is that someone was too drunk to kill

I think we went beyond Occam's Razor once Tony turned out to be town. That was the simplest solution and now we are deep into speculations about oddities from normal mafia play.

[bionicchop2]

My point is that farside could have been the only D3 mafia.

IF she was the only mafia, why didn't her kill go through? Nobody blocked farside and none of the players were protected -- unless you think farside tried to kill SSK and was stopped by forbiddandoc. If that were true, forbiddan should not be voting lawrence now.

If I knew the setup and potential reason why her kill wouldn't go through, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that we didn't have a doctor save. If we did, Tony would not have been lynched since a doctor would have made a case as to why the role block might not have been the cause of the no kill. Nobody hesitated much, so it was pretty telling. That meant barring game mechanic abnormalities, nobody was prevented from making a kill in any standard form of game play. Then we expand to include Lawrence being drunk as a possible reason. Knowing BM and this abnormal game setup we are playing, I am willing to accept that as possible.

As you say, forbidden is voting Lawrence. Even before she claimed not-doc, this is an indicator she did not save a night kill which completely eliminates the hypo-claim (again except for Landlord).

So from my perspective, Lawrence is possible scum, but the next logical step is NOT elvis as obv. scum. If you eliminate Lawrence from the equation (hypothetically he is lynched and shows as town) then you have - nothing prevented farside from killing, nothing prevented forbidden from killing and nothing prevented Elvis from killing. This makes the no kill on that night an invalid source of information which is my point.

[bionicchop2]

I believe the deadline is in 11 hours. Those not voting should really consider placing there votes somewhere.

[bionicchop2]

Well, deadline has passed. Not sure if we have a no lynch or if we can still vote to get a lynch. I also don't know if landlord unvoting lawrence to vote for the moderator is valid (I assume the unvote still counts). I think it makes Korlash's vote #4.

The following people are wanted for questioning for completely ignoring the deadline and doing nothing to progress the game:

Landlord
Surye
Killa Seven
Korts (has been active, but went MIA near deadline)

[bionicchop2]

From: bionicchop2
To: Battle Mage
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:59 am
Subject: MM2 - night 7
kill: no one
distort: Korts

[bionicchop2]

My first game as scum and I get to join with all my partners already dead + I get killed by other scum group.

[bionicchop2]

How, though? Did I drop any obvious cop-tells or something?

I can't remember my exact thinking. I figured no cops were in the group we were scum hunting in and something about your play had a hint of power role.

[bionicchop2]

From: bionicchop2
To: Battle Mage
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:59 am
Subject: MM2 - night 7
kill: no one
distort: Korts

OMG, THAT REMINDS ME.

DUDE, WTF??

Why did you never kill anyone!? I thought i was wierd, but you completely baffled me. xD

BM

Well, joining on my own and seeing how the previous groups were lynched until all people in the group were basically gone. My scum group had gone 2 days without any living players and no shotgun kills. I needed town to focus on the stabbings from the earlier group and not see a new shotgun kill pop up. I also did not know who else would join (I could then start with new killings if a bigger group joined). I figured my best shot was to genuinely scum hunt. Maybe I should have lurked more so farside wouldn't tell her goons to off me
OMG, THAT REMINDS ME.

DUDE, WTF??

Why did you never kill anyone!? I thought i was wierd, but you completely baffled me. xD

BM

[bionicchop2]

errrrrrrr....

OMG, THAT REMINDS ME.

DUDE, WTF??

Why did you never kill anyone!? I thought i was wierd, but you completely baffled me. xD

BM

Well, joining on my own and seeing how the previous groups were lynched until all people in the group were basically gone. My scum group had gone 2 days without any living players and no shotgun kills. I needed town to focus on the stabbings from the earlier group and not see a new shotgun kill pop up. I also did not know who else would join (I could then start with new killings if a bigger group joined). I figured my best shot was to genuinely scum hunt. Maybe I should have lurked more so farside wouldn't tell her goons to off me