Mini 837 - Stratego Mafia! (Game Over!)


User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #6 (isolation #0) » Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:11 am

Post by Synx »

/confirm

Pawn to c4.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #41 (isolation #1) » Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:41 pm

Post by Synx »

Hoopla wrote: Does anyone think it's worthwhile talking about the set-up at this stage?
No, this is super scummy, let's focus on scumhunting instead of setup analysis at this point.
Sajin wrote: You are obvious scum. I will be waiting 72 hours before I fully explain this (should be obvious why).
Honestly, your case sucks. How can anyone be obvious scum, the game just started.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #56 (isolation #2) » Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:41 am

Post by Synx »

AlmasterGM wrote: Why is this super scummy? This is a game of the informed versus the uninformed. Unless this game has an extremely twisted setup where the mafia doesn't want to kill the town, the mafia already knows its objective, so discussing it further isn't helping them at all. Moreover, in a game such as stratego, where victory centers around a single piece that can be captured even if the odds are stacked against you, it is highly beneficial for us to try and determine what powers the mafia may have.
A few reasons. In general, I feel that discussing the setup on day one instead of scumhunting is a scumtell. I also feel that it only hurts the town by giving the mafia more information regarding the setup -- they presumably don't know it anymore than we do.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #95 (isolation #3) » Tue Aug 25, 2009 4:32 am

Post by Synx »

Now, really guys, can we stop the setup discussion? Judging by the different ideas floating around, nobody really knows, and speculating is entirely anti-town

Ortolan, your case on ElectricBadger is good, good work kid; fence-sitting, ridiculous setup discussion and tentative language all in one post. Followed by what I feel is a pointless vote on Kast, yea this dude is scummy. Sooo...

vote: ElectricBadger

I breadcrumbed because I enjoy the mental stimulation of doing so, and I pointed it out because I saw no reason not to. The odds of finding what it means are ridiculously small.
This post is pretty ridiculous, breadcrumb for a pro-town reason, not for "mental stimulation"
This is one thing I do find interesting. Everyone else who thinks speculation is bad simply doesn't speculate. Kast, on the other hand, makes a huge deal out of rebutting my claims and arguing why his speculation is correct ... while at the same time saying we shouldn't speculate.
It looks to me like Kast just cannot stop from spilling all of his thoughts out everytime he posts, which isn't necessarily a bad thing but it can lead to some hypocrisy.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #107 (isolation #4) » Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:19 am

Post by Synx »

Kast wrote: Please point out the hypocrisy. My posts regarding setup discussion have been completely in line with each other and with my behavior in all other games on site (both as scum and town).
Setup discussion is helpful. Setup discussion at the expense of other scumhunting is anti-town.
I have a problem with the bolded statement. Setup discussion on day one is never NOT at the expense of other scumhunting, and therefore it is always anti-town. Setup discussion, in my opinion, is only helpful late game when we have seen flips and know how the game mechanics work.
ElectricBadger wrote: this is a ridiculous assertion.
ElectricBadger wrote: I did what now? When did I claim a PR? If you saw a tell for one, why would you point it out?
ElectricBadger wrote: I don't understand all the definitions of the terms used here, no
ElectricBadger wrote:
What argument have I not addressed?
You have literally responded to almost every question/point with a question and a serious lack of content. ElectricBadger, this question is for you. Do you agree or disagree with this statement: "Scumhunting day one is pointless because there is no evidence to go on" ?
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #133 (isolation #5) » Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:38 am

Post by Synx »

unvote

vote: dramonic


I don't like any of dramonic's post history. He has been very wishy washy on most subjects. He placed a vote on EB after the case on him came out explaining "I like this case" basically. Many of his posts are setup speculation. He doesn't seem to want to take a position on anything that has been said so far.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #233 (isolation #6) » Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:22 pm

Post by Synx »

Mod: I am on vacation with shoddy internet until monday, V/LA. Sorry!
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #238 (isolation #7) » Sun Sep 06, 2009 8:49 pm

Post by Synx »

Synx is the only logical choice as I think DDD is town.
I'm sorry, why do you think dramonic is town again?
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #285 (isolation #8) » Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:51 am

Post by Synx »

I think the bandwagon clearing-off of dramonic is somewhat damming, and I am going to leave my vote on him for the time being.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #288 (isolation #9) » Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:50 am

Post by Synx »

dramonic wrote:While theorically that's nice and all, unless the wagon builds back on me your vote is not serving a purpose really.
I would be willing to switch to avoid a no lynch, obviously.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #303 (isolation #10) » Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:24 am

Post by Synx »

Welp, guess I should claim.

My role is Miner - 3. Each night I can target target a player in an attempt to "diffuse" them. If I target scum, their kill will effectively be canceled for the night. Unfortunately, I won't get any confirmation that my diffuse worked or not, but it shouldn't be too hard to assume it would if there is a no kill.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #316 (isolation #11) » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:47 pm

Post by Synx »

Almaster is probably not scum, I targeted him last night because I thought his votes were bandwagon-like.

Mafia edit: I guess he could be scum and have had his partners do the kill
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #324 (isolation #12) » Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:25 am

Post by Synx »

Miner/3/Defuser

And once again:

My role is Miner - 3. Each night I can target target a player in an attempt to "diffuse" them. If I target scum, their kill will effectively be canceled for the night. Unfortunately, I won't get any confirmation that my diffuse worked or not, but it shouldn't be too hard to assume it would if there is a no kill.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #328 (isolation #13) » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:17 pm

Post by Synx »

You guys are right, it doesn't specifically say scum, I just assumed that. Without risking a modkill, the PM paraphrased states that: each night I can attempt to defuse one player. If that player attempts to kill someone, they will fail.

Having realized that, I think it's obvious that Almaster isn't an SK.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #349 (isolation #14) » Sat Sep 19, 2009 11:05 pm

Post by Synx »

Wow, nice bandwagon. Guaranteed there's a scum on that wagon. Jesus.

I'm not scum, I'm town, I think I've explained myself enough and if you still want to lynch me, fine, but I really think the best move is to take a look at the bandwagon, which I will be laying my thoughts done about tomorrow/monday.
ortolan wrote:Synx, can you explain your spelling error?
No, that was how it was spelled in my PM.
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #359 (isolation #15) » Mon Sep 21, 2009 6:29 am

Post by Synx »

ortolan wrote:I would like to see Synx's thoughts about his bandwagon.
Scumbos aplenty!
Gorrad wrote: Honestly, Synx's claim looks like scum botching a safeclaim. I would be FAR from surprised if Synx was the bomb whose role PM mentions that he can be "diffused". In fact, I'm rather sure he is.
I'm not sure why you think this. Because I "assumed" that my role only works on scum?
User avatar
Synx
Synx
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Synx
Goon
Goon
Posts: 159
Joined: June 16, 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA

Post Post #363 (isolation #16) » Mon Sep 21, 2009 7:47 am

Post by Synx »

Gorrad wrote:Synx, now this is interesting. I said that the miner's role should only work on Bombs, I said NOTHING about it working on scum. Are you saying that the mafia are all bombs?
I was questioning your logic behind thinking it's a botched fake-claim.

Return to “Completed Mini Theme Games”