Mafia 69: noXkill - Game over!

[Dead Rikimaru]

Traditional terminology:
Capo di Tutti Capi (the "Boss of All Bosses", namely Matteo Messina Denaro for the Sicilian Mafia and Renato Gagliano for the Sacra Corona Unita)
Capo di Capi Re (a title of respect given to a senior or retired member, equivalent to being a member emeritus, literally, "King Boss of Bosses")
Capo Crimine ("Crime Boss", known as a Don - the head of a crime family)
Capo Bastone ("Club Head", known as the "Underboss" is second in command to the Capo Crimine)
Consigliere (an advisor)
Caporegime ("Regime head", a captain who commands a "crew" of around ten Sgarriste or "soldiers")
Sgarrista or Soldati ("Soldier", made members of the Mafia who serve primarily as foot soldiers)
Picciotto ("Little man", a low ranking member who serves as an "enforcer")
Giovane D'Onore (an associate member, usually someone not of Italian ancestry)

FIRST VOTECOUNT

Not voting

(4): Twomz , cicero , Jenter Brolincani , Hjallti

Needed for a lynch: 3 votes

If by deadline no one has 3 votes player with more votes is lynched
If two players have same number of votes lynch is decided by duel

[Twomz]

No Lynch might be a valid strategy, but then again, if the last scum doesn't kill anyone, it would lead to a tie.

Jenter, POST!

[cicero]

You shoulda killed someone last night, twomz. ya pussy.

[Twomz]

If I were a vig I woulda killed people by now. Stupid townie role not being useful beyond a vote .

[Jenter Brolincani]

Hi.

I say Twomzie scumzorz. He's being very fishy this morning.

[cicero]

Wow. Thanks for that. Could you add some content? Why is Twomz scum? Because all I see is a lazy player - possibly scum - going where the wind blows.

[Hjallti]

Cicero, my reaction to you was because you actually claimed I was active when I was not (except if you saw I just was active before your post when I started with modding my own game and only then turned to this game), I felt you were claiming I lurked which I did not. Never mind I think you were eager to get there.

Jenter just followed our statement that Twomz seems to be the most scummy, which might lead to a quicklynching Twomz.

By the way is there a printerfriendly way to print the game or parts (I mean without the colors and the bottoms, avatars and all the other nice things)?

[Dead Rikimaru]

By the way is there a printerfriendly way to print the game or parts (I mean without the colors and the bottoms, avatars and all the other nice things)?

First you click the button to the right of Post Reply (Printer Friendly Button).
Then you click a button that look like this 0_o (All in one page)

But you could just select Save As and save the htm to your computer.
Please don't actually print. I would prefer not to write a death scene for a tree.

[Hjallti]

Thanks, if I consider printing I won't print it entirely, I won't print on unused papers, so I won't hurt a tree, but probably I even just wont print.

[Twomz]

Of course I'd seem the most scummy if I have the next highest vote count against a player who is pretty much 100% confirmed >.>

Now, besides just a thought then a skip on the game... how about some actual content? This is the last, or at worst second to last, day of the game, how about some effort?

[Dead Rikimaru]

From now on I will be performing prods by request.
If you want a player tobe proded just ask here.

[cicero]

It's frustrating for me, because on the one hand I want to follow CKD's call and lynch Twomz. On the other hand, it feels awfully shitty to do that when he's put in more effort and the guy that replaced in obviously cant be bothered. If we lynch Twomz and he's town then it will legitimize all the shittiest scum play as beneficial. It's almost worth losing, really. Well... tie-ing. Which would be the appropriate result.

[Twomz]

Aw, I feel the same way about you cicero <3.

Well, we can sit here all day and do nothing and probably eventually no lynch and hope the mafia kills one of us to narrow the choices (no lynching in this situation would be the logical play I suppose) or could lead us into a spiral that would end in a tie (happily ever after, unless the mod makes the mafia make a kill) or we can lynch someone.

After a little bit of though (not a lot, just a little) I have come up with this... my brain tells me it is probably Hjallti. From the cumulative slightly suspicious behavior of all the people that he replaced, and the bare minimum participation a couple of days ago.

BUT, my gut is telling me Jenter. It might just be my innate antilurker/noncontributor instinct kicking in, but it is to the point where I would rather lynch him than Hjallti.


Now, I know that this is the endgame, and that it will take 3/4 people to lynch. I also know that casting the first and second votes (a quick 3rd vote is pretty much a giveaway that the person was scum waiting for the vote to get to 2, but it won't matter at that point) before the target is agreed upon is seen as scummy because of the way that a few votes can pile up fast at this point in the game.

But, I am gonna go ahead and

vote: Jenter Brolincani

. I'll be damned if I am going to let the scum win by lurking in the endgame and leave us at a happily ever after when I've put MONTHS into this game.

"The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again. in one Age, called the Third Age by some, an Age yet to come, an Age long past, a vote was cast in the great game of Mafia 69. The vote was not the beginning. There are neither beginnings nor endings to the turning of the Wheel of Time. But it was

a

beginning."

[Hjallti]

I am now starting my reread.
But a quick question since you two are online anyway.

On the other hand, it feels awfully shitty to do that when he's put in more effort and the guy that replaced in obviously cant be bothered.

I thought this was about Twomz, but he played the entire game, I don't understand the comment.

By the way if you get frustrated about me giving only little content so far, I get frustrated about seemingly to be the only one with a real life outside.

[Hjallti]

PBPA of Twomz (numbering according to the singled out version):

To the end I used some

italics

to split between fact and comments, but probably I left some comments unitalicized

I want to think this over before coming back to you but I am at going to

FoS: Twomz

By the way I deliberately paraphrazed rather than quoted because I wanted to show how I read what I read. I took me longer than expected.



0. No random vote. Clearly just play style.
1. Hopes to create a tie for a vote count... could be today?
2. -
3. votes Karen for crap logic.
4. Explains Karen that quoting is not paraphrasing
5. Gets in a quarrel, clearly on the good side.
((Hindsight remark: I saw Karen play as bad elsewhere and what she did was not really a scumtell, bad players will do such a thing regardless their alignment good players will not do it regardless their alignment as well))
6-7. something about an idiot interfering
8. explains why his vote stands, good reason.
9. keeps on explaining to Karen why she isn't helpful
10-12. No content except whining about time between posts.
13. QFT (Cephrir fossing dybeck defending Karen) with a critical nuance, keeping your own mind.
14. Fosses dybeck and green day, no clear tunneling
15. explains to ckd
16. jester?
17. promises read over
18. theoretic post; clearifies wolfsbane/bpv (without the name) and dualistic balance + suspicions day 1. In his top3 there is one werewolf and no mafia. Votes GreenDay (((funny to note that around the same time in one other game we mislynched Karen and in another Green Day moved his replacement in a bad situation (GreenDay turned out to be scum in that game afterwards, so again a badplayertell in hindsight rather than a scumtell)))
19-21. No game content
22. Vote remains on GreenDay, Cephrir is in second spot
23. no content
24. Makes his case on GreenDay more explicit.
25. Warns town for a quicklynch
26. Gets annoyed about not posting again
27. analysis of the wagon against Cephrir
28. explains why scum should be hunting scum
29. I should look this up but end sep beginning of oct in illustrated the GreenDay wagon also halted due to his absence... From this game I get that it were no scumtells in illustrated afterall.
30. What could happen with GreenDay 3 possibilities without what actually happened in the game. I do understand your frustration
31. Someone pointed at replacing as an option and he reacts.
32. 'you should vote on the most scummy if your not yet voting'
33. Still hopes on a return.
34. CKD wants Cephrir as lynch, Twomz agrees that he wants pressure, but doesn't change his vote.
35. Unvotes to give the replacement a chance.
36. Cephrir should explain (thirded a request seconded by dybeck and done by Kanaga (=me))
37. explains thinktank he misreads GreenDay's game
38-39. no game content
40. justifies Karen lynch, 'even as town she was useless' and goes on to say that the wagon on Karen will probably contain town and scum equally, and thus tell nothing.
41. no content
42. Thorn attacks Kanaga for playing the game, Twomz defends.
43. Some nutritive comment
44. Votes Cephrir for attacking dybeck on no good reasons and probably OMGUS
45. ...waiting for thorn...
46-48. activity sigh
49. twilight post: thorn is lynched
50. New day: I could see a cephrir or zonace lynch to day. Note that Zoneace turn out to be mafia and that Twomz never mentionned anything suspicious about him. Zoneace lynched Thorn without giving him the chances Twomz wanted to give him.
51. Twomz defends Zoneace in saying that he didn't expect discussion anymore from Thorn.
52. starts with a votecount that shows omgus patterns CKD and Cephrir are a pair and dybeck and Zoneace the other pair. analysis of all 4. suspicous of Cephrir and Zoneace, not the other two.
53. Answers Zoenace why OMGUS votes (broad definition, whenever you vote somehow who voted you) are not productive at all.
54. vote on Cephrir, implicit fos on Zoneace (not bolded) and finds dybeck town.
55. reaction to strange comment
56. answers Cephrir, explaining that voting in a lynch is lynching, explains that there are no good cases made yet in this game, but the one against Cephrir is the best so far.
57-58. re-explains the lynch point.
59. Mind if I call this a frustration post?
60. Refutes (or tries to) the connection between CKD and dybeck. (valid point, they were both town, but off course didn't know that)
61. quotes a post to answer a question about having stated a reason.
62. quotes and comments the giving up of Cephrir
DAY 4
63. agrees with whome
64. Does what CKD asks yesterday: vote on him
65. Asks for waiting on CKD.
66. Suggests to discuss other players while waiting on Cephrir
67. that should have been CKD.
---here CKD claims---
68. doesn't like the fact that CKD did a full claim. When I first read this (the mod advised me to start reading the game from day 4 when I replaced in) I found this an overreaction, and I still find it this way. Of course if Twomz is scum, he should been excited because CKD's claim makes the entire setup suddenly very predictable. Two protective roles (not balanced: doc-nurse vs two semi-sorceres) and one unnightkillable for each side. ony the nurse was not deducable from this. Of course he knew we have 3 mafia, Peers tried to confuse us there.
69. Asks for more conversation and mentions 'Zoneace/Kison/Peers': including both mafia: mafia/town/mafia: was this in tread conversation?
70. He clearly wants to know if there is another protector against mafia around
71. keeps whining about the sorcerer claim.
72. and about lurkers, which is understandable
73. Some ethical debate about wagering in a game you participate
74. "still voting"
75. unvote due to the claim of ooba. I don't think it was wise of the town to let ooba claim as well, and I can't imagine that Twomz didn't realize that threatening the hammer would actually trigger this. 'I don't know if I should thank you or yell at you' is therefor hypocrit (as town (an funny to come from scum somehow))
76. Reattacks CKD for his attempt to hammer himself.
77. agrees with cicero who first brings up the 'bulletproofvest' without claiming it.
78. Asks a full claim from Tar, which pretty much put the game in different current.
79. clarify please tar
80. votes Peers at L-2, and asks if there is still discussion needed before we lynch him.
81. there is.... unvotes to give Tar the chance to explain
82. Again he bothers us with personal stuff when being absent...but this is somehow more justified since when he returns night has fallen.
83. Leaves with saying that Peers should be the lynch and Tar tomorrow.
---Tar was the lynch however: day 5---
84. Still wants Peers away. vote
---cicero claimed BPV
85. Keeps his vote although he finds it good to game free info.
86. keeps his vote although he is fine with a davidangelssummers lynch, wants to wait together with ZoneAce
87. Peers will die tomorrow rather than today.
88. still his vote is on Peers
----day 6, davidangelsummers (wolf) passed away
89. vote:peers
90. Comments on cicero's meta-theory about the first to post
91. and on the game set-up [/i](it feels like rolefishing)

92. prefers peers-lynch before a quest for the last wolf.
93. Explains in tread how Peers could win the game...!!!!
94. repeats his point: Certaintiy before quest...
95. I don't want to tip of the scumgroups to something big

???? (it reads like=hey scummates think hard, we are almost won)

96. Changes vote to Kison...

a Kison lynch would have been a certain win for one of the two mafia groups and with 3-1 advantage it could ensure a win for mafia!

97. my reason : a gut feeling

(strange after the carefulness before...)

98. my reason: proces of elimination

(how on earth could you eliminate Kanaga/Fernando?)

99. elimination: I leave Hjallti and cicero open...

A proces of elimination is per definition closed!

100. I wont explain Peers
101. The basis of my case against Kison... re-explaining the elimination
102. Absence during the night - point
----day 7 without ZoneAce
103. Again starts with suggesting a Peers lynch.
104. claims that 2 mafia is BIG maybe, yet uses it as a reason to vote Peers
105. Finds Peers attack on Cicero 'making a lot of sense'

((it doesn't: cicero not being a bulletproofvest means Peers is the last mafia and he should be lynched))

106. responds to cicero but it doesn't convince me
107.

I agree with cicero you were so good scumhunting and townie until you started to repeately asking peers lynch, not by the fact but the way you did it.

108. Getting in the response mode.
109. <- still waiting on CKD...
110. votes theHermit
------DAy 8
111. wants to wait to vote to get more info
112. explains that if one townie dies....
113. -
114. posts his opinions about the others
115-116. explains to me what he finds scummy
117-119. More waiting for GODOT posts
----Peers past away
120. Can the mafia choose not to kill?
121-125. Impatience
126. Votes Jenter while fossing me.

[Jenter Brolincani]

ditto hjallti.

I've been lurking. I admit it, I've had too many games on with cross replcing for 527. I'll try and make good fo the endgame though.

Twomz;

- States that he's town several times wit' no backup.
- Screamed to lynch Peers a day or 2 ago while there were still dogs alive Peers could help us with (diatance, distance, distance).
- Kept repeating that there was a possibility Peers was the last Mafioso (which, as he admitted would totally not add up, so why bother repeating it unless you were te last mafioso and didn't want people to think you existed?)
- No Lynch might be a valid strategy
Like you did last night? Youu are soooo desperate to get us to 2:1 instaed of 3:1 aren't you? Narrowing down the choices doesn't look good play to me... and anyway scum can no kill as amny times as they like if we NL to do that.

I'll do Hjallti soon.

[Twomz]

Now...

- States that he's town several times wit' no backup.

??? I have my PM that says I'm town, but you know, w/e. I've seen no proof that you are town either.

- Screamed to lynch Peers a day or 2 ago while there were still dogs alive Peers could help us with (diatance, distance, distance).

On the peers thing. 1) I didn't want it to get to the point where we either lynch peers or lose the game (we got to that point btw) 2) Scum can LIE about what happened at night, it still surprises me there was no "We targeted _____ last night and the kill didn't go through so he is def. wolf (while they actually targeted someone else or cicero), and then when he turns up town say, "Ooops sorry, I meant that other guy, I guess I should pay more attention at night . 3) Lynching a known scum > mislynching. If you know about a scum there is no real reason to mislynch.

And I know this is obv. WIFOM, but why would I do such obvious distancing if I were scum with him? I really think we should have lynched Peers earlier, I think it would have been the better play. But, w/e, that's not what happened.

- Kept repeating that there was a possibility Peers was the last Mafioso (which, as he admitted would totally not add up, so why bother repeating it unless you were te last mafioso and didn't want people to think you existed?)

Don't twist my words scum, I said that it was a possibility, but most likely was false. Regardless, it would become apparent later on if it was true or not.

- No Lynch might be a valid strategy

We are actually in a situation called the Prisoner's dilemma. If we lynch today, it would put the game at 2:1 and the mafia kill tonight would put the town at 1:1, thus a lose. The "proper" strategy for this endgame situation is to no lynch, let mafia NK, then lynch at 2:1, so the town, not the scum are in control of who is the last 2 people alive. Scum would be the only people fully opposed to a no lynch today.


@ Hjallti: Do you have any questions for me?

[cicero]

I say again 1:1 should be a tie. It would be if a wolf and a mafia lynched the last townie. Likewise if mafia can't kill me... they can't kill me. I see no reason why town should be so disadvantaged.

Nevertheless:

Vote No Lynch

It is indeed the correct play for the day. Maybe mafia targetted me last night or maybe they just wanted more people to feed the confusion. Forget it. Man up and kill tonight like a good little mafia group.

[Dead Rikimaru]

Nevertheless:

Vote No Lynch

I would like to request that you do not provoke a no lynch today.
If the town won't lynch and scum won't kill the game will last forever.

Please make the the best use of the time you have and choose someone to lynch.

[cicero]

It just results in a draw. If scum wont nighkill to narrow our choices then it's a stalemate. You just need to force mafia to kill tonight. Then I have no problem being forced to lynch tomorrow. This is mafia's doing. Why should town get punished for it?

[Twomz]

Nevertheless:

Vote No Lynch

I would like to request that you do not provoke a no lynch today.
If the town won't lynch and scum won't kill the game will last forever.

Please make the the best use of the time you have and choose someone to lynch.

So, I guess that means no happily ever after huh?

Dead, can't you just force the mafia to kill at night if we no lynch?

[cicero]

Given it a good think and a good read. Gotta go with my gut.

Unvote: Vote Twomz

[Jenter Brolincani]

Now...

- States that he's town several times wit' no backup.

??? I have my PM that says I'm town, but you know, w/e. I've seen no proof that you are town either.

... Of course you haven't but I haven't been randomly stating 'I'm a townie' repeatedly for no real reason.

- Screamed to lynch Peers a day or 2 ago while there were still dogs alive Peers could help us with (diatance, distance, distance).

On the peers thing. 1) I didn't want it to get to the point where we either lynch peers or lose the game (we got to that point btw) 2) Scum can LIE about what happened at night, it still surprises me there was no "We targeted _____ last night and the kill didn't go through so he is def. wolf (while they actually targeted someone else or cicero), and then when he turns up town say, "Ooops sorry, I meant that other guy, I guess I should pay more attention at night . 3) Lynching a known scum > mislynching. If you know about a scum there is no real reason to mislynch.

Kison was correct here; Peers was our get-out card. if we'd lynched Peers then gone to LyLo, we'd have had no idea who to kill and might well have lost as it was we just knew who to lynch straight away. Only reason anyone would have lynched Peers early is if they were scum thinking they could get a mislynch when it went to LyLo and the town had lost its Get Out of Lylo Free card.

And I know this is obv. WIFOM, but why would I do such obvious distancing if I were scum with him? I really think we should have lynched Peers earlier, I think it would have been the better play. But, w/e, that's not what happened.

You tell me why you were distancing. I don't know.

- Kept repeating that there was a possibility Peers was the last Mafioso (which, as he admitted would totally not add up, so why bother repeating it unless you were te last mafioso and didn't want people to think you existed?)

Don't twist my words scum, I said that it was a possibility, but most likely was false. Regardless, it would become apparent later on if it was true or not.

Yes, I'm being accurate, I'm saying yu said it was logically completely implausible - so WHY reapeat it on 2 to 3 seperate occasions?

- No Lynch might be a valid strategy

We are actually in a situation called the Prisoner's dilemma. If we lynch today, it would put the game at 2:1 and the mafia kill tonight would put the town at 1:1, thus a lose. The "proper" strategy for this endgame situation is to no lynch, let mafia NK, then lynch at 2:1, so the town, not the scum are in control of who is the last 2 people alive. Scum would be the only people fully opposed to a no lynch today.

SCUM WON'T KILL IF WE DO THAT. GOT IT?

[Hjallti]

It is not a tie it is a loss for town and probably a loss as well for scum. Our win condition is to free the town from danger. If scum$players survive we loose. Likewise it is possible for some neutrals to win together, it is possible to have a loss for ALL players in the game. In fact if scum has a similar win condition they already have lost...

I regret that the mod answered my after the night because it applies as well for the night choice of scum, which I guess was no kill (it could have been kill cicero as well by the way: if he would have decided a no kill it might have been come to the mind that they could use it as well to test the BPV-theory).

I have no open questions for Twomz, but I would like a reaction to my comment at your post 75 (see my PBPA of yesterday).

PBPA of Jenter and predecessors later today.

[Twomz]

Now...

- States that he's town several times wit' no backup.

??? I have my PM that says I'm town, but you know, w/e. I've seen no proof that you are town either.

... Of course you haven't but I haven't been randomly stating 'I'm a townie' repeatedly for no real reason.

So, the fact that I haven't gone around yelling "I'M SCUM LOL LYNCH ME PLZ" means that I'm stating that I'm town w/ no backup? I don't get it.

- Screamed to lynch Peers a day or 2 ago while there were still dogs alive Peers could help us with (diatance, distance, distance).

On the peers thing. 1) I didn't want it to get to the point where we either lynch peers or lose the game (we got to that point btw) 2) Scum can LIE about what happened at night, it still surprises me there was no "We targeted _____ last night and the kill didn't go through so he is def. wolf (while they actually targeted someone else or cicero), and then when he turns up town say, "Ooops sorry, I meant that other guy, I guess I should pay more attention at night . 3) Lynching a known scum > mislynching. If you know about a scum there is no real reason to mislynch.

Kison was correct here; Peers was our get-out card. if we'd lynched Peers then gone to LyLo, we'd have had no idea who to kill and might well have lost as it was we just knew who to lynch straight away. Only reason anyone would have lynched Peers early is if they were scum thinking they could get a mislynch when it went to LyLo and the town had lost its Get Out of Lylo Free card.

Well... you know, the mafia still had to kill the wolves, if they found another then we might have been able to pick out the third one when they were pushing for the last wolf >.> Having Peers live pretty much cleared the other two from having to expose the fact that they knew who the wolves were ahead of time. Oh well, it didn't really matter in the end since the last wolf was found w/o the mafia anyway.

And I know this is obv. WIFOM, but why would I do such obvious distancing if I were scum with him? I really think we should have lynched Peers earlier, I think it would have been the better play. But, w/e, that's not what happened.

You tell me why you were distancing. I don't know.

Oh I dunno, trying to get him lynched is pretty obvious... and it seems that trying to get a known scum lynched because you think it's the best course of action is distancing... you do the math.

- Kept repeating that there was a possibility Peers was the last Mafioso (which, as he admitted would totally not add up, so why bother repeating it unless you were te last mafioso and didn't want people to think you existed?)

Don't twist my words scum, I said that it was a possibility, but most likely was false. Regardless, it would become apparent later on if it was true or not.

Yes, I'm being accurate, I'm saying yu said it was logically completely implausible - so WHY reapeat it on 2 to 3 seperate occasions?

"Logically completely implausible"? I said that there was a small possibility that it was true but most likely wasn't. That's called being cautious, you word it as if I dismissed it offhand, which not only is not what I did, but not what you are trying to blame me for.

- No Lynch might be a valid strategy

We are actually in a situation called the Prisoner's dilemma. If we lynch today, it would put the game at 2:1 and the mafia kill tonight would put the town at 1:1, thus a lose. The "proper" strategy for this endgame situation is to no lynch, let mafia NK, then lynch at 2:1, so the town, not the scum are in control of who is the last 2 people alive. Scum would be the only people fully opposed to a no lynch today.

SCUM WON'T KILL IF WE DO THAT. GOT IT?

That's why it's called prisoner's DILEMMA. It's a problem on who takes the first step, because if the mafia NKs first, it puts them at a disadvantage the next day, and the town has a lower chance of hitting successfully in a 3:1 situation than in a 2:1 situation. The best way for the town to solve it is to force the scum to NK. The best way for the scum to handle it is to wait for the town to lynch. It seems as if MoS isn't going to let us no lynch, which of course means that he won't let the mafia hold off on the night kill. So it doesn't really matter anyway because the problem has removed itself from the game.



@ Hjallti: The logic of my Kison vote made sense to me at the time /shrug.

On Cicero... before the last wolf was found I was highly suspicious of him, because it seemed to be the optimal fake claim for a wolf. Now that the wolves are dead, it doesn't make sense for him to be scum anymore.

107. I agree with cicero you were so good scumhunting and townie until you started to repeately asking peers lynch, not by the fact but the way you did it.

So... I looked town until my viewpoint differed from the rest of the town? I guess that makes sense, but it doesn't change anything for me.

75. unvote due to the claim of ooba. I don't think it was wise of the town to let ooba claim as well, and I can't imagine that Twomz didn't realize that threatening the hammer would actually trigger this. 'I don't know if I should thank you or yell at you' is therefor hypocrit (as town (an funny to come from scum somehow))

Hmm? I was voting for CKD before he tried to hammer himself. How is that related to Ooba's claim. What I saw was a sketchy attempt at a claim at the time. And the thank you was for stopping a mislynch, and the yelling... I don't really remember too well. I think it was for either the way he claimed or that he waited so long /shrug. It's been 4 months, what do you want from me?