Mini 892 - Mayor Mafia (GAME OVER)

[xRECKONERx]

Col is wroooooooooooooong. /KevinSpacey

I'm not buddying up to nhammen: I just sincerely trust his judgment.

[nhammen]

To everyone concerned with my reaction to the claim: I said "I can believe this", not "I do believe this". But, if there is any chance of it being true, we should wait until tomorrow. It is only Day 1 after all. There is plenty of time. And lynching a power role Day 1 is a bad start to the game. It will give him an investigation, or he will be roleblocked. Either way, we get information. If we still don't believe tomorrow, we can always lynch him then.

In my opinion, a claimed cop should never be lynched day 1, unless there is role based information that he can't be trusted. If he's scum, he still has buddies and they can be lynched. This is a lesson I learned in my 2nd newbie game. But now that I think about it, Incog is the player that convinced me of this, and he was scum in that game. Hmmm... So was he wearing his IC hat when he said that or his scum hat? I still think it is a VERY bad idea to lynch a claimed cop on Day 1.

[kyle99]

To everyone concerned with my reaction to the claim: I said "I can believe this", not "I do believe this". But, if there is any chance of it being true, we should wait until tomorrow. It is only Day 1 after all. There is plenty of time. And lynching a power role Day 1 is a bad start to the game. It will give him an investigation, or he will be roleblocked. Either way, we get information. If we still don't believe tomorrow, we can always lynch him then.

In my opinion, a claimed cop should never be lynched day 1, unless there is role based information that he can't be trusted. If he's scum, he still has buddies and they can be lynched. This is a lesson I learned in my 2nd newbie game. But now that I think about it, Incog is the player that convinced me of this, and he was scum in that game. Hmmm... So was he wearing his IC hat when he said that or his scum hat? I still think it is a VERY bad idea to lynch a claimed cop on Day 1.

Alright, I guess we can wait till tommorow. Based on the last couple of posts, my top suspect right now is xRECKONERx. Who do you think is most scummy right now?

[charter]

Nhammen:

Not lynching a claimed cop or whatever day one is debatable, but in my opinion bad mafia strategy. You end up lynching someone not as scummy, and basically never lynch scum day one, all they have to do is claim a power role. And then, what if he claims a guilty tomorrow or somehow manages to get us to lynch a townie before he goes down (though I don't think me and DDD would let that happen)? What if they're a mafia cop (probably not applicable in a mini, but still) or another power role? You can't give out free passes just because someone claims a role. If someone were to overtake Monkey in scumminess, which it seems you're (nhammen) trying your hardest to do with your recent play, then that's a different story.

And it sure seemed like you believe him, because you unvoted him, but then said it might only be temporary. But now you say a claimed cop should never be lynched day one. So clearly your unvote wasn't just temporary, you have no intention of voting Monkey again. Pretty big contradiction. Also gives me pause on a Monkey lynch, since if you're scum, you would probably unvote a claimed power role if they aren't scum with you, not wanting to be on a town power role lynch. Though, if you're town this is a likely possibility as well.

I'm currently debating if these contradictions, plus a lot of theory discussion and non commitment and leaving many roads open, make you scummier than Monkey. You also make a very juicy partner with MIC, who is a common denominator in about all scumpairs I can think of right now.

I would like those supporting nhammen for mayor to please explain why.

[SerialClergyman]

I agree with a lot of what charter says here.

About the only bit I disagree with is that I am not totally averse to letting him live another day or so, I tend to find that eventaully they can't keep up the role info and eventually trip up.

But in general, there is little reason to believe or support the claim. The claim itself was done in such an odd offhand way it looks dicey.

As for Nhammen, I didn't like the 'oh shit' comment and I didn't like the part above talking about the IC advice. I'm sure he's an intelligent enough lad to think past what an IC told him in his first game, and I'm sure he's able to parse the information whether it came from scum or town. The whole thing just felt a little forced.

Ugh, I'd lynch kyle, reckoner, DDD, MM, nhammen and Socrates atm. I'm officially a convert of Hoopla's mayor plan.

charter - convince me to lynch monkey in this specific circumstance?

[SerialClergyman]

Also, is Col Cath going against his town meta? I vaugely remember him being an unvote to power role claims guy..

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Was in Pittsburgh most of the last two days, will re-read early tomorrow and have thoughts.

[nhammen]

Not lynching a claimed cop or whatever day one is debatable, but in my opinion bad mafia strategy. You end up lynching someone not as scummy, and basically never lynch scum day one, all they have to do is claim a power role.

point taken... didn't think of that.

And it sure seemed like you believe him, because you unvoted him, but then said it might only be temporary.

It was temporary specifically because I wasn't, and still am not sure. If I completely believed him, it WOULDN'T be temporary.

But now you say a claimed cop should never be lynched day one. So clearly your unvote wasn't just temporary, you have no intention of voting Monkey again. Pretty big contradiction. Also gives me pause on a Monkey lynch, since if you're scum, you would probably unvote a claimed power role if they aren't scum with you, not wanting to be on a town power role lynch. Though, if you're town this is a likely possibility as well.

Hmmm... true. All I can say is that I have been very indecisive over this issue. The only other time this has happened in a game I've been in is in that newbie game. I have not read enough in Mafia Discussion to decide how to correctly react to this situation. So my opinion has varied wildly. At first I wanted responses from Monkey, and then after I got these, I had to try to make a decision, and so I thought back to the only other time that this has happened.

I'm currently debating if these contradictions, plus a lot of theory discussion and non commitment and leaving many roads open, make you scummier than Monkey. You also make a very juicy partner with MIC, who is a common denominator in about all scumpairs I can think of right now.

I was actually seriously thinking of voting him in my last post. He has connections with pretty much every scummy player. And his own arguments have sucked.

As for Nhammen, I didn't like the 'oh shit' comment and I didn't like the part above talking about the IC advice. I'm sure he's an intelligent enough lad to think past what an IC told him in his first game, and I'm sure he's able to parse the information whether it came from scum or town. The whole thing just felt a little forced.

Everyone keeps having these high opinions of my ability at this game. I mean I'm glad that people think this about me, but I just don't see it. Maybe I'm way better than I think I am. This is only the second time I have been in this situation, and I've not seen this discussed in Mafia Discussion, so I didn't know what to do here.

[nhammen]

Arg! missing comma: "because I wasn't, and still am not

,

sure."

[SaintKerrigan]

@ nhammen: Personally, I would rely slightly less on what MD suggests you should do, and forge your own ideas on what you should do. For instance, in my first mafia game scum claimed cop on Day 1, and we still ended up lynching her (largely because she was very scummy). I'm not currently inclined to believe MM's cop claim, and unless someone does something scummier than what Charter and I have pointed out (re: Post #222) or the point is sufficiently disproved, I think I'll keep my vote on him.

What's important is that you do what

you

think is right, not necessarily what others say you should do.

[nhammen]

Yeah, it's just a situation I am not too familiar with. Ummm... with that said however, I have to point out that if Monkey is scum, then MIC's attack on Saint looks very much like distraction tactics away from Monkey. And if Monkey is not scum, then we shouldn't be lynching him. Either way, I think at this point

vote MIC

is the way to go.

[Col.Cathart]

Not much time now (new job, cannot slack anymore ), so more from me later today, but just to quickly answer this question:

Also, is Col Cath going against his town meta? I vaugely remember him being an unvote to power role claims guy..

Really? None of that happened in Commie Mafia (I was claiming there, and I was never voting myself ) or in any other game with you (or in any game at all for that matter), so you probably confused me with someone else. Here's an example:

viewtopic.php?p=1763260#1763260

Read Porkens's claim and post #492. Yeah I was still a newbie, but I'm still pretty much like that.

[MichelSableheart]

Sixth support count of day 1:

charter (0)

kyle99 (1)

Hoopla

Moai Interceptor Cannons (1)

MonkeyMan576

Debonair Danny DiPietro (0)

SerialClergyman (0)

Hoopla (1)

SerialClergyman

* Socrates (5)

Socrates, Debonair Danny DiPietro, charter, Col.Cathart, kyle99

MonkeyMan576 (0)

xRECKONERx (0)

nhammen (3)

nhammen, Moai Interceptor Cannons, xRECKONERx

Col.Cathart (0)

SaintKerrigan (0)

Not supporting anyone (1)

SaintKerrigan

With 12 players alive, it takes 7 votes to elect someone as mayor.

an * marks who would become mayor if the day ended right now.

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

Sixth vote count of day 1:

charter (0)

kyle99 (1)

xRECKONERx

Moai Interceptor Cannons (1)

nhammen

Debonair Danny DiPietro (0)

SerialClergyman (0)

Hoopla (0)

Socrates (0)

MonkeyMan576 (6)

Socrates, Hoopla, Col.Cathart, charter, kyle99, SaintKerrigan

xRECKONERx (0)

nhammen (0)

Col.Cathart (0)

SaintKerrigan (3)

Debonair Danny DiPietro, Moai Interceptor Cannons, MonkeyMan576

Not voting anyone (1)

SerialClergyman

With 13 votes available, it takes 7 votes to lynch someone. However, noone can be lynched before a mayor is elected.

[Moai Interceptor Cannons]

O hai gaiz. I'm back, and stuff seems to have happened while I was holidaying in the Amazon. Either I have gone mad, or you all have gone mad. As such, I present you with the following consolidation post on every matter relevant to this game in its current time from my point of view. You may refer to this post as '

What MIC Thinks Of Everything So Far

'.

ARTICLE 1
CONCERNING MUPPETS OR SOMETHING

Monkey was unfairly pressured. His offense was not deserving of the intensity of the attack Charter directed at him. He cracked. Like what I did in this one game on one of my alts where I was town and asked if the RVS was over and got pounded on the basis of 'testing the waters' or whatever it was.

All else failed. He was desperate to prove Charter was wrong.

He resorted to AtE. What's important isn't the actual intention of Charter's post in Muppets, but rather what Monkey

believed

was its intention. Come on, think. Nobody would purposely throw onto the table an argument they thought was wrong. Then he claimed. That was his last resort. Because there was too much pressure.

ARTICLE 2
CONCERNING THE COP CLAIM

If I recall correctly one of the people who reviewed this setup absolutely hates cops. Still,

I don't think Monkey's scum

(yes read this sentence again if you want), but I'll read Monkey's other games just to be sure. Reactions to the claim, I will analyse sometime in the near future.

ARTICLE 3
CONCERNING MY 'ATTACK' ON KERRIGAN

I usually get away with not sticking reasons on my votes that early in the game. See my vote on Monkey? No problems. But when I switched and Charter asked me for reasons, I complied. What a big mistake that was. Remind me to deny all future requests asking me to explain my votes. If I thought my vote was worth explaining, I would've done so in the same post. And to all you opportunists and Nhammen and Charter who will read this and want to bash me for it, I love you too. This happened in my last game too - I simply put a vote on someone early on in the day, someone asked me to explain, I did and people suddenly thought I wanted to lynch them. No I do not vote people because I want to lynch them. I want to lynch scum.

I do not know who the scum are

. The period of time in between the start of a day and the end of a day exists for us to discover this mystery.

It was not at all my intention to 'attack' Kerrigan. I simply thought his post was indicative enough of scum mentality to warrant a

page four vote

.

ARTICLE 4
CONCERNING NHAMMEN'S INQUIRIES

"And his own arguments have sucked."

This is funny because

my arguments make near-perfect sense to me

and I seem to be having a hard time getting you to understand. You see when I write all these words for you, my expected reaction is 'oh, I see', so

it confuses me when you continually come up with these questions

.

"1 - Gut votes are crap."

I love gut votes. 68% of my votes will be based around gut feelings, 99% if we're talking D1. The only way a D1 vote would

not

based on gut feelings is if scum slipped - which is not very often. If the scum never slip, gut is necessary (and effective) to find them scummy.

"2 - So after Charter asked you to explain your vote, you decided to find a reason? Am I understanding what you are saying incorrectly here?"

There is a difference between a reason

in my head

and a reason

I have to present in-thread to other people

. Post 66 set off my scumdar. There was a reason in my head. I voted him. A reason in my head is for my use only. It's made of brain signals. I usually only present an actual argument when I want to convince people that someone is scum. I could've ended it with 'it felt dishonest'. Maybe I should've. But I didn't, I explained it further. I turned brain signals into words. My words that eventually came out in-thread are what you interpreted as an attack on Kerrigan. Which it really wasn't (see above). Also see the bottom line of post 71. I was only half joking there.

"So Serial wanted to preempt the push for him to be mayor. How is this different from Saint?"

I don't even understand this question.

"And if Monkey is not scum, then we shouldn't be lynching him. Either way, I think at this point vote MIC is the way to go."

Would you mind explaining to me the logic behind me being scum if Monkey isn't? Because if this reasoning flies then defending players is now considered a scumtell regardless of the alignment of the defended player. Which I am really going to laugh hard about post-game.

ARTICLE 5
CONCERNING ALL THE PLAYERS

Charter - This guy is just wrong a lot IMO. Obvtown though.
Kyle - This guy looks town~

ish

so far. Could be town.
Danny - This guy

seriously

needs to post moar. No idea.
Serial - This guy's moved up on my town list. Not so sure now.
Hoopla - This girl needs to post less mayor theory and more of everything else. Could be scum, not too sure.
Socrates - This guy is really hard to read. Not too sure.
Monkey - This guy needs to be analysed meta-wise. But leaning town.
Reck - This guy needs to post moar

content

. But probably town.
Nhammen - This guy's lack of focus is worrisome. But probably town.
Cathart - This guy is playing fishy and staying under radar. Could be scum.

*Disclaimer: GUT IN EMPLOYMENT*

Kerrigan - This guy I could be wrong about. But leaning scum.

GLOBAL DISCLAIMER: I am uninformed and could be entirely wrong.

ARTICLE 6
CONCERNING MY OPINIONS ON THE MAYOR

The ideal qualities would be town, excellent scumhunter and convincing. But I'm talking about 90+% catch rate here. Which is unrealistic. And no one here fits that anyway.

So I'll settle with town and unconvincing.

That way we can play like the mayor is completely irrelevant, as normal of a game a possible. See Reck's vote on Kyle? Went completely unnoticed. Like it wasn't even there at all. If Reck was mayor it'd be like the mayor isn't even there at all. I like it. This mayor position just makes the game more swingy, which means an extra dimension of skill and care is needed. And I'm too lazy to want to worry about that shit.

ARTICLE 7
CONCERNING THE PLACEMENT OF MY VOTE

You guys are seriously tempting me to want to lynch Monkey. If he flips town I will be proven right all along and you can start listening to me and we can all stop being silly. But of course that's horrible logic. Don't tempt me even more

please

. Oh hi, opportunists and Nhammen and Charter, I still love you guys. My vote on Kerrigan is pretty useless right now. There is nothing to argue with him about. But voting Cathart won't do anything either considering you people's immense hatred of gut-driven suspicions. And I'm waiting for Hoopla to say stuff. I could unvote, but that's entirely pointless.

So I'll just leave it on Kerrigan.

ARTICLE 8
CONCERNING DEAR CHARTER

Here. Have a nice picture of a

unicorn with a rainbow in the background

.



This game is making my sanity level drop several kilometres on the Richter scale. I am not overreacting

A

T

A

L

L

. Opportunists and Nhammen and Charter, I will love you forever.

Please marry me.

This post was brought to you by Konami Digital Entertainment. Buy some shoes.

I am an adbot smart enough to bypass the spam filter.

[SerialClergyman]

Really? None of that happened in Commie Mafia (I was claiming there, and I was never voting myself

You're correct - my bad.

vote nhammen

[SerialClergyman]

I know that MIC's post is going to ping charter's scumdar on the most basic of levels. To be honest, i'mn ot sure what to think, but I suspect there's a playstyle that grates on me somewhere in there.

Either way, here's what I'm thinking at the moment. If we're not going to lynch monkey, we should assume he's town for a while. If he's not, we'll catch him later.

So if he's town, then most of the actual dicey things that MIC has done are gone too. He makes a good point - defending someone like money can't be a scum tell either way - it's buddying or defending, and at the moment if you can't theorise which one it is, it's unfair to hedge your bets and say it's a scumtell either way, because defending people, even seemingly scummy people, is not a scumtell.

So, at least for a little while, if we assume monkey town and MIC town, then the person who sticks out is nhammen to me.

[xRECKONERx]

That just made my morning hangover go away.

This nhammen wagon reeks of scum tbqh

[Hoopla]

Monkey's claim is fishy to me - it appeared to me to be a sign of desperation, not knowing how to escape the suspicion he's gathered. This could be interpreted either way, but his anxious nature around his wagon is something I would expect less from a town player.

I don't think we should lynch him though. Monkey is more likely to claim cop as cop, than claim cop as scum. I think the value of a potential investigation can be quite damaging for mafia, and if he is truthful, he will likely absorb the night kill (saving us a lynch).

If Monkey is mafia, we have him captured. There is not much difference between lynching him D1 than on D2. In both of these scenarios we have 2 other scum to hit out of everyone else. So if there is little difference in the scenarios if he is mafia, we might as well choose the option that benefits town more if he is town - which is an investigation or night kill. Unless mafia have a roleblocker they run a serious risk in leaving Monkey alive.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Ugh, I'd lynch kyle, reckoner,

DDD

, MM, nhammen and Socrates atm. I'm officially a convert of Hoopla's mayor plan.

Why?

~~~

Anywho, I'm extremely skeptical of Monkey's claim because of the way it just seemed to flash out of nowhere. Elsewhere, Hoopla directed the comment at charter, but MIC's last post pinged very hard on my scumdar as well. I guess the question is; is MIC or someone else scummy enough that putting off a Monkey lynch is actually beneficial in favor of them actually beneficial?

[MonkeyMan576]

As far as the claim, I thought I was at level 1 and I don't believe in letting scum have the chance to lynch me before having the chance to claim...

[Col.Cathart]

As far as the claim, I thought I was at level 1 and I don't believe in letting scum have the chance to lynch me before having the chance to claim...

Bullshit.

Either you're lying, or you didn't read the rules.

The day wouldn't end, even after reaching the majority of players, before the Mayor will be chosen. We're still far from doing it, so you would have plenty of time to defend yourself even after hitting L-0.

I'm happy with my vote.

Cathart - This guy is playing fishy and staying under radar. Could be scum. *Disclaimer: GUT IN EMPLOYMENT*

Ok, gut is gut, I understand. Can you expand your point about my 'fishy play' and 'staying under the radar'? Because I don't think, I'm doing that, so I want to know, why are you accusing me of it.

[MonkeyMan576]

As far as the claim, I thought I was at level 1 and I don't believe in letting scum have the chance to lynch me before having the chance to claim...

Bullshit.

Either you're lying, or you didn't read the rules.

The day wouldn't end, even after reaching the majority of players, before the Mayor will be chosen. We're still far from doing it, so you would have plenty of time to defend yourself even after hitting L-0.

I'm happy with my vote.

The rules don't say a player can't be lynched before deciding on mayor. AFAIK. Maybe you should rethink your position.

[Col.Cathart]

Game specific rules
22. This game contains the special role of mayor.

23. At the beginning of the game, the players decide who gets this role. This decission works as a normal lynching decission, except that votes should read Support: Player Name and Unsupport: Player Name.

Day 1 can't end through a lynch before a mayor has been chosen.

If, at the end of the day, no player has received the support of the majority of players, the player with the most support will become mayor. If there is a tie, the first player to have reached the highest amount of support will become mayor. If noone has received any support, a random player will become mayor.

[kyle99]

As far as the claim, I thought I was at level 1 and I don't believe in letting scum have the chance to lynch me before having the chance to claim...

Bullshit.

Either you're lying, or you didn't read the rules.

The day wouldn't end, even after reaching the majority of players, before the Mayor will be chosen. We're still far from doing it, so you would have plenty of time to defend yourself even after hitting L-0.

I'm happy with my vote.

The rules don't say a player can't be lynched before deciding on mayor. AFAIK. Maybe you should rethink your position.

23. At the beginning of the game, the players decide who gets this role. This decission works as a normal lynching decission, except that votes should read Support: Player Name and Unsupport: Player Name.

Day 1 can't end through a lynch before a mayor has been chosen.

If, at the end of the day, no player has received the support of the majority of players, the player with the most support will become mayor. If there is a tie, the first player to have reached the highest amount of support will become mayor. If noone has received any support, a random player will become mayor.

[MonkeyMan576]

Okay, well I didn't know that. It doesn't specifically say that players can unvote and vote someone else. The situation was convoluted enough that I think a claim was warranted.