This is the first half of my post... I'll try to post the second half tomorrow. I wanted to get part of this out there today, and I'll finish more tomorrow and be fully caught up.
Alright, having finished my read, I feel the most pressing issue for me is this
Nacho wrote:Right now, I think that we have to decide whether hiphop's scummy enough to lynch at this moment because we cannot hold the replacement to his/her predecessor's actions, and we cannot allow the replacement to get off completely scot-free. If the answer is no, then I'd suggest pursuing different angles because the replacement won't be here long enough to give us a good read...
We are 2 weeks into a 3 week D1, please give me the benefit of the remaining week to contribute rather than lynching me immediately based off of hiphop's play.
Regarding hiphop: I cannot answer for him as I do not know what he was thinking as he played through the day, the best that I can do is explain how I see the events thus far and outline where my suspicions lie.
In terms of formatting this post, for the sake of brevity, I will not be commenting on everything, only what sticks out to me. Please feel free to direct me to anything you'd like me to respond to directly.
P1: Random votes, notable here are Die Predigar's
Hello people! Its also my second game here in mafiascum.net. I hope we all can have some fun togheter.
So, to start the RVS and dont get anyone on L-3, Ill
vote Pulindar
This was rightly called out, though in reading Die Predigar again, it looks like a new player not understanding what all the fuss is about.
P2:
Thor wrote:Do you still believe answering others' questions is bad for town?
It depends on the question, I think generally if Player A asks a question directed at Player B, other players should wait on Player B's response before weighing in. I have often seen Players ask specific pointed questions looking for specific responses and then had a third player come along, blurt out what he thought the answer ought to be, letting the player whom the question was directed towards off the hook. However, in the context of this game, with then number of questions flying around, I think there are many questions directed towards everyone.
Here also, [no] (now Sauron) places the 4th vote on Die Prediger, shifting the focus onto himself. I think Die Prediger freaked out a bit at being brought to L-1
1.) Do you think Bandwagons are a scummy thing?
They can be. If a player is on L-3, and other two people join the bandwagon, you can find something scummy in that, [no]? OTOH, it can pressure a scum slip.
I concur that his bandwagon went from 2 to 4 very quickly, but I don't think it automatically scummy.
P3: Pulindar gives us his IC note on bussing/distancing. I appreciate the need for an IC to provide these explanations in these Newbie games, however I would probably have added that distancing and bussing are much more accurately assessed D2 and beyond when we have known alignments and can asses interactions with more than just suspicion and assumption.
silverbullet wrote:If die ended up getting lynched and it was shown he was a townie (Death's show whom that person was, right?) Then I would be somewhat suspicious of you and no
I don't like these if X is scum then I will be suspicious of Y statements, especially early on D1.
I wish [no] had been able to answer more questions before he replaced out. He voted Die Prediger on P2, then unvoted him on P3. When asked by Thor if he was still suspicious of Die, the best we got out of him was
[no] wrote:I don't think I have enough info yet. I am however keeping watch
This makes me want to know why he voted him if he thought there wasn't enough info yet or if he meant there wasn't enough info to lynch.
Thor wrote:Jerako wrote:Not that I think no useful information has come, but that not enough has come forth. I am still analyzing all of you, and I will place my vote when I have a reason enough to do so. It seems like you're trying to pressure me into voting. Why?
Because votes are the best and most easily traceable information.
I like this; I like to keep track of votes (I think my spreadsheet is almost identical to Sauron's) and I tend to view a vote as the best way to indicate suspicion and apply pressure. I don't use FOS's much if at all, but I will move my vote when my suspicions change.
P4: I don't like Die Prediger's
unvote
vote hiphop
for still not posting here - Nacho already has a vote on him. And i dont have anything about Thor to keep my vote on him.
I'm fine with the vote, but the reasoning is off. Once again Die Prediger explicitly avoids placing a second vote on someone. To me this is
Thor from P1 wrote:'Hai guyz, I am not scum becauze I don't pile on votes in RVS'
all over again… He never explained his reluctance to add a vote to someone who already had one. Personally, I like early bandwagons because people react differently at L-2 or L-1 than they do at L-4. I tend to discount the idea of a quicklynch, but I haven't played a game here for a coupled years, so I suppose that may have changed.
P5-6: So far, most of the discussion has centered around Die Prediger's concern about adding a second vote to someone and [no]'s P2 L-1. Of the two situations, I tend to see [no]'s play as opportunistic newbie scum, so I'll have an eye on Sauron going forward.
P7:
Thor wrote:@[no] - who are you voting right now? If you're not voting anyone why is that? (if your answer is that you don't have any good suspects - my next question will be "what are you doing to find scummy suspects?" feel free to answer that one too if you need to.)
At this point I believe neither [no] nor AurorusVox were voting. Was there a reason for singling out [no] here?
P7-8: Questioning of silverbullet by Thor, more of those If X is scum then Y posts. [no] replaces out which derails that wagon before he is able to fully answer Jerako's case against him. This contradiction Jerako pointed out
[no] wrote:but i just played one game there. and i did terribly. also, the rules of those games doesn't allow an automatic lynch once a majority has been reached, you have to wait until 5PM EST (the night phase) to wait for the lynch. until then, it doesn't matter how many votes they have on you.
[no] wrote:Now this is interesting. Where did I state that I didn't know it took 5 votes to lynch, and that when that number was reached, the lynch was cast?
In the first post, [no] explains that in the mafia games he is used to, there are no lynches until a certain date/time even if the required number of votes to lynch has been reached. In the second, [no] implies that he did know it was 5 to lynch and that casting the 5th vote would in fact lynch someone. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't realize what he had done until this was pointed out. This contradiction looks more like a willful untruth and I wish he could have spoken to it before replacing out.
