Consulmaker II: the Pyrrhic War - Game over.

[Nathanael]

^this is me.
please don't divulgate.

[chamber]

Tasky, please read better.

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Tribunal Vote Count

Jack - 1(chamber)

Not voting - (Everyone else)

mod: are the consuls at the beginning chosen at random?

No. They were chosen by the consulmaker in pre-game. Also, you're not very good at this alt thing.

[Powerrox93]

I haven't played with anyone here, so I'm not gonna vote someone for tribunal yet.

Mod:

V/LA dates is in my sig, one already next weekend

[inHimshallibe]

Jack is a strong candidate for Tribune.

vote: Jack

[Jack]

I picked those two because I wanted people who would be willing to sit back and execute whoever the town fake lynches. That's important day one. Although I didn't realize nathaniel was an alt for someone.

I agree with the consuls not giving reads. An ideal kind of scenario is them posting execute on a top suspect/candidate without knowing what the other consul believes--makes it hard for scum to risk taking a shot at their buddy. Although that only works early on in the game, and it seems best for them to just follow the town today, sooo.

[chamber]

@jack stop failing at your role (namely claiming, not those you chose)

[Jack]

I don't know what you mean.

Another strategy thought: best picks in the future may very well be scummy-VI'ish type players (or at least one). People who are easy mislynch targets for scum and who might reveal info in their choices.

[Rabies]

VOTE: Jack

He seems like the obvious choice now.

[SensFan]

Vote: Primate

I don't object to the JackWagon, but I figured I'd offer up someone else I think would be a good choice.

[Rabies]

Vote: Primate

I don't object to the JackWagon, but I figured I'd offer up someone else I think would be a good choice.

Why do you think Primate is a good choice?

[Primate]

Vote Jack

for Tribune. I believe it is beneficial to have a Tribune who will actually threaten to use his abilities, and to me, that's either Chamber or Jack. I may be missing others who would do similar, I've not been to involved in mafiascum for a while, but I have faith in those two to do not go against their personal beliefs for the sake of the town, which I reckon is a good thing for a tribune. Voting Jack specifically because I feel like he has a better hit/miss ratio on scumhunting.

[Primate]

Unvote

Vote Chamber.

Missed Jacks post earlier. I don't agree on the play he's suggesting there and the suggestion is he wouldn't be what I want. The threat of a tribune cancelling the lynch needs to be there on a day 1. You need people who have responsibility for info. Removing that by saying they are expected to be inactive is a bad idea, imho.

[Primate]

Also this fundamental misread of someone page 2 should be testament to how much I suck at mafia nowadays.

[SensFan]

Vote: Primate

I don't object to the JackWagon, but I figured I'd offer up someone else I think would be a good choice.

Why do you think Primate is a good choice?

Contrary to what he says, his name stuck out as one of the better players on the playerlist.

[Primate]

Ok, so I misread what jack was saying apparantly, think I get the meaning now. It's the same argument but with consuls, and I wouldn't have done it, but I get he wasn't talking about tribunes.

I don't know what you mean.

Another strategy thought: best picks in the future may very well be scummy-VI'ish type players (or at least one). People who are easy mislynch targets for scum and who might reveal info in their choices.

Agree with this though. Obviously you have to be careful with it, but not a bad tactic if we have room to do it.

[Jack]

I played another game with an irregular voting (alternative vote mafia) . On the whole it was very awkward since there were no real wagons, lots of thumb twiddling. I'd rather today played out like a regular day one with us executing whoever wins the fake vote, just so we at least get started.

[SensFan]

I expect everyone to proxyvote as if the votes matter. I make no promises about executing whoever has the most votes, though.

[Primate]

That's a legitimate point. I agree that people losing any idea their votes are important would kill things a little activitywise. I played a game like this once and the way i remember dealing with it was by playing the game straight and being much harder on lurkers or anyone who showed a sign of disinterest, but that is a weak solution, cause people didn't really take to it like their votes mattered like they would in a real game either, and it required a crapload of work.

It just seems a shame to have these roles that can veto lynches and have them lose the responsibility for doing it because earlier in the game it was concensus decided they shouldn't do it. Possibly the middle ground here is to have all the veto-able players explain why they didn't veto it previous lynch, but the problem with that is that that kind of thing is going to benefit the scums cause it is too easy to pick on the day after against a weak town in late game. You get what I mean?

[chesskid3]

Vote: chesskid

[Mert]

Just like in the first Kingmaker that was played on this site, I think a decent line between Consul autonomy and the town having some say in proceedings needs to be drawn up and ahdered to. I wouldn't want to remove our ability to find Consul or Tribune scum through their actions but, on the same token, they are going to need to take some input from the town. This early talk of simply keeping their execution choice to themselves until they finally decide to use it concerns me greatly - while I'm not saying that they should make full cases way in advance (as that'd obviously cause the suspected to change their play and stop doing the things that have drawn suspicion), I'm very wary of this notion of not having to be accountable for their actions at all under the umbrella of "well, I didn't want to say why".

My initial thoughts are that as we approach deadline, the Consuls make a shortlist of their potential targets - hopefully the reasoning behind those choices will be evident from the other things they've said but, in the event of an execution of someone they've said nothing about so far, they should of course be held to account for why they chose that action the following day. I've not played a game with this kind of mechanic before and I'll go and read the first Consulmaker when I get the chance to get a stronger feel for what does or does not work in terms of Consul/Trinune direction from the town.

In the meantime, however, I'm pretty confident in suggesting that anyone who goes V/LA at any point during the course of the game should cross post the dates into this thread,

especially

if they are a Tribune of Consul at the time - needless to say, I will be wathing for anyone who tries to set through an execution when they know one or more of the players with the power to veto it are currently absent.

[SensFan]

For what it's worth, I said nothing about not participating, or not giving reasons for my execution attempt(s), if any. I just said I want Town participation, but that I won't bound myself to their decision.

[Rabies]

Vote: Primate

I don't object to the JackWagon, but I figured I'd offer up someone else I think would be a good choice.

Why do you think Primate is a good choice?

Contrary to what he says, his name stuck out as one of the better players on the playerlist.

Is this a criterion for tribune? I would be much more comfortable with making someone I pretty much know is town tribune.

[SensFan]

Vote: Primate

I don't object to the JackWagon, but I figured I'd offer up someone else I think would be a good choice.

Why do you think Primate is a good choice?

Contrary to what he says, his name stuck out as one of the better players on the playerlist.

Is this a criterion for tribune? I would be much more comfortable with making someone I pretty much know is town tribune.

Oh, you're right. I completely forgot that the Mod gave us a handy list of confirmed-Town players to pick our Day1 Tribunes from. Sorry, my bad.

[Powerrox93]

@SensFan: What is proxyvoting?