Kingmaker II-Game Over

[pablito]

As for the discussion topics,

1) LoE is fine with me, but I'm all for the King exerting independent thought instead of always following the will of the town. Nonetheless, more structure is better than less structure.

2) I'd be willing to follow those suggestions.

3) No, I don't find it worthwhile to discuss size of the scum group, especially since there's enough suspicious actions for us to talk about already.

1) It’s possible that both pablito and glork are scum. The idea is that pablito is the over-eager mafia, trying to support his pal. Glork knows how to play, and therefore doesn’t want the obvious attention and association, whether he is scum or not.

Therefore, Vote: Pablito
.....
4) Also, I’m just generally suspicious of anyone who uses flattery. I forget who did it though.

So, overall, I would suggest executing pablito, and if he is confirmed scum (is their role revealed when they are killed?) i guess glork would be next. Obviously I'm not completely sure about any of them.

That is just filled with bad observations and reckless suggestions. Nonetheless, I'd be willing to discount it as newbie behavior rather than anti-town scumminess (assumption based on join date).

I agree with some of cardb0ardb0x's statements, but the whole tone of that post is assuming that immediate action needs to be taken. I can forgive that mistake from a newbie, nonetheless someone like MBL shouldn't have. MBL's comments on cardb0ardb0x just make me feel awkward.

vote: MrBuddyLee

Also in looking at cardb0ardb0x's statements. I'd like to point out that Dead Rikimaru first introduced the concept of the Pablito-Glork distancing and cardb0ardb0x was the one that took it much further. Dead Rikimaru didn't even bother vote in that post. That would be an amazing scum move if it Dead Rikimaru just wanted to plant a little seed to get further. But right now I think that the Pablito-Glork distancing was something that any lot of people could have introduced. A lot of people were probably thinking it before Dead Rikimaru got to say it, so I won't vote Dead Rikimaru, yet.

*Oh sheeesh, everyone's already commented on cbox before I got to post, so an

FOS

on those that just voted him.

[Fritzler]

pj will you kill crashtext dummie for me?

[Fritzler]

Vote Glork

for wanting the king dead

Ah, the Macbeth manoeuver.

i like this guy

[CrashTextDummie]

Come to think of it, I did go too far with my joke votes

Unvote Glork

Unvote Pablito

"Joke votes"? Very interesting. Let me add you to my scummy votecluster.

vote: bird1111

I'm having a good feeling about box.

[Fritzler]

pooky is also good guy in this game

[Fritzler]

Come to think of it, I did go too far with my joke votes

Unvote Glork

Unvote Pablito

"Joke votes"? Very interesting. Let me add you to my scummy votecluster.

vote: bird1111

I'm having a good feeling about box.

see pj?

exactly what i was talking about

KILL KILL KILL

WITCH

[pablito]

While I wrote my last post, everyone finally commented on box before I submitted.

I admit that adding that vote to Glork was extremely scummy and that was backpedalling and succumbing to town pressure. I do not think that not voting Glork was especially scummy in the first place as I had been the more visible aggressor in the previous exchanges. But adding Glork after all of that does look scummy.

However, box isn't used to some players' playing styles and FTF mafia does require more urgency and a need to comment immediately rather than later. So I still see that cbox's post 58 seems consistent with his thoughts and does not suggest scummy behavior. The only vote on box that I find scummy so far (aside from MBL...although this is waning) is CDB's. The others seemed to justify their votes enough but CDB went so far to challenge cbox to test his theory. cbox may have had different intentions when he originally voted me. After getting flak for everything, he's forgotten what his original intent was and added the Glork vote.

So

vote: ChannelDelibird

I realize I'm taking a big risk in defending cardb0ardb0x, but at this time, I don't feel he's scummy and this quasi-wagon is very opportunistic.

And bird1111's joke votes - just so wrong and very scummy. Anyway, what prompted you to unvote Glork and I? You had decent reasons for voting us in the first place...

[ChannelDelibird]

While I wrote my last post, everyone finally commented on box before I submitted.

I admit that adding that vote to Glork was extremely scummy and that was backpedalling and succumbing to town pressure. I do not think that not voting Glork was especially scummy in the first place as I had been the more visible aggressor in the previous exchanges. But adding Glork after all of that does look scummy.

However, box isn't used to some players' playing styles and FTF mafia does require more urgency and a need to comment immediately rather than later. So I still see that cbox's post 58 seems consistent with his thoughts and does not suggest scummy behavior. The only vote on box that I find scummy so far (aside from MBL...although this is waning) is CDB's. The others seemed to justify their votes enough but CDB went so far to challenge cbox to test his theory. cbox may have had different intentions when he originally voted me. After getting flak for everything, he's forgotten what his original intent was and added the Glork vote.

So

vote: ChannelDelibird

I realize I'm taking a big risk in defending cardb0ardb0x, but at this time, I don't feel he's scummy and this quasi-wagon is very opportunistic.

And bird1111's joke votes - just so wrong and very scummy. Anyway, what prompted you to unvote Glork and I? You had decent reasons for voting us in the first place...

I think you've misinterpreted my "but you should at least put some pressure on them both to test the theory", and this is probably because in retrospect perhaps I should have put the word 'have' after 'should'. However, it's fairly obvious that the entire paragraph was written in the present tense describing something in the past, and therefore that 'have' shouldn't be necessary for you to realise that I was suspicious of what he didn't do at the time, rather than asking him to finish the job in the future.

And yeah, he's added the Glork vote, AFTER I voted him for not doing it. That makes my vote more sensible than you make it out to be, and also reflects badly on him.

[ShadowLurker]

Is it all right if I just kind of FOS Glork at this point? Actually, I'll

Vote: Glork

for presure, and then take it off

BAD.

Confirm Vote: CBB

[cardb0ardb0x]

OMGUS: ShadowLurker, although I understand where you're coming from.

[MrBuddyLee]

I agree with some of cardb0ardb0x's statements, but the whole tone of that post is assuming that immediate action needs to be taken. I can forgive that mistake from a newbie, nonetheless someone like MBL shouldn't have.

MBL's comments on cardb0ardb0x just make me feel awkward.

Can you please explain why my points against box make you feel awkward? At least one other person found them well-founded.

[spectrumvoid]

Gah. What a massive post flood.

This is my first time playing any kind of Kingmaker game, so I won't offer any opinion about what PJ said simply because I have no basis for comparison.

I'm leaning towards the side of box being scummy, because he added the vote after he was voted. However, I need to spend more time reading all the posts, so I'll decide tomorrow. Also nothing about Pab/Glork for now till I do the read.

[Mert]

This is my first time playing any kind of Kingmaker game, so I won't offer any opinion about what PJ said simply because I have no basis for comparison.

I think that makes you the ideal candidate to talk about some of it though. Many of the players in this game were in the last one and a few more have read through it (I know I have... it seems quite famous 'round these parts). A fresh set of eyes on some of PJ's thoughts might be exactly what is required.

[cardb0ardb0x]

come on, guys. please read my explanation in post 84... not just the bold "vote" sign. *obviously* my little vote there wasn't going to get glork lynched, i had just been instructed that people were supposed to vote a lot in this game, to give the king an idea of what everyone's thinking.

There's really not much else I can say in my defense that i didn't say already, so I'll just be quiet for now. As long as I can. I know there are a lot of posts and theres huge flooding, but please read my entire post and think about it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'm amused by the lengths Twomz is going to to insinuate that I'm trying to stay under the radar. If I was trying to stay under the radar, why the hell would I inform you that I plan to never vote this game unless I become king? That's counterproductive, since the very statement draws attention to this fact.

[Mert]

come on, guys. please read my explanation in post 84... not just the bold "vote" sign. *obviously* my little vote there wasn't going to get glork lynched, i had just been instructed that people were supposed to vote a lot in this game, to give the king an idea of what everyone's thinking.

There's really not much else I can say in my defense that i didn't say already, so I'll just be quiet for now. As long as I can. I know there are a lot of posts and theres huge flooding, but please read my entire post and think about it.

Sounds to me like you're setting up future plausible deniability when your voting trail doesn't check out. If you're found to be voting for a bunch of innocents you can say you were just voting a lot because you were told to. Conversely, if you're found to be not voting enough you can say "yeah, well everyone told me off for voting too eagerly before".

The only reason I'm not going to vote for you in this post is that I already randomly voted for you and now you've given me reason not to remove it.

While I'm on the subject,

Vote: Mastermind of Sin; Vote: bird1111

All three are generally removing the effectiveness of an analysis of voting patterns in different ways. Cardb0ardb0x I've addressed above, MoS by refusing to vote at all and Bird by talking about how his votes were a joke and he doesn't see the point in votes in this game etc etc.

[cardb0ardb0x]

nonono i'm not voting for them because i was told to. i was already suspecting them, so i was told that the appropriate thing to do was to vote for them.

to keep track: i suspected pablito and glork, but only voted pablito, because i found him more suspicious (please read my previous posts). I was criticized for suspecting both of them but only voting one. So i voted for glork as well.

jeez... i have to explain like every little thing. i swear i'm not going to say anything for a while. I'm not even going to check the thread... la lala la laaaa....

[bird1111]

When did I say that I didn't see the point in votes this game?

[MrBuddyLee]

box, this game is about explaining every little thing
particularly when pj is king
for you to fade to black makes scumdar go ding ding
i recommend you buck up and sing
the names of your scumpartners so their necks we may wring

[cardb0ardb0x]

fine. lynch me. if, after you lynch me, i'm a townie, just please, like, examine mrbuddylee. he's kind of obnoxious. if town wins, i'll count it as a win for me even if i'm lynched in the first round.

honestly, i trust pj to make the right descision. and actually read what i write. i admit i made factual errors in my earlier posts. i know i'm easy to bandwagon. no self-respecting mafia player would NOT vote for me. Sorry for distracting everybody during the first round and wasting a lynch.

[cardb0ardb0x]

Unvote: All

.

[MrBuddyLee]

examine mrbuddylee. he's kind of obnoxious.

Awwww, you're so SWEET!

Seriously, though, only Fritzler gets to lynch people around here cause they're obnoxious. People who push for lynches of the "obnoxious" regardless of contribution to the cause are more likely scum.

Sorry if it feels like you're being ganged up on, but your behavior is not pro-town so far. Maybe try changing that instead of surrendering. Give it the old college try.

So who're your scumpartners?

[Mert]

fine. lynch me. if, after you lynch me, i'm a townie, just please, like, examine mrbuddylee. he's kind of obnoxious. if town wins, i'll count it as a win for me even if i'm lynched in the first round.

honestly, i trust pj to make the right descision. and actually read what i write. i admit i made factual errors in my earlier posts. i know i'm easy to bandwagon. no self-respecting mafia player would NOT vote for me. Sorry for distracting everybody during the first round and wasting a lynch.

Man, I'm starting to hate the woe is me approach to these things. A protown move would be to explain your actions and play it cool. People make mistakes, it's human nature. But to just give up and say "well, fine. Lynch me if you want to" doesn't help the town and doesn't help you stay alive. You're never in a Catch 22 as there's always a counter-argument. And besides, if someone keeps pushing you into a Catch 22 type environment, that might help find scum in itself.

But yeah, move to make addition to PJ's list of things he doesn't want to see: woe is me posts.

As for Bird, I didn't say you didn't acknowledge the point of voting, I said you look like you're setting up plausible deniability for the future if someone calls you on your voting patterns. By making "joke" posts and trivialising the purpose of votes in this game, you could be setting up a mechanism whereby you can say "hey, I'm the sort of guy that makes joke votes! Don't look at my record in

too

much scrutiny!"

[Thok]

fine. lynch me. if, after you lynch me, i'm a townie, just please, like, examine mrbuddylee. he's kind of obnoxious. if town wins, i'll count it as a win for me even if i'm lynched in the first round.

honestly, i trust pj to make the right descision. and actually read what i write. i admit i made factual errors in my earlier posts. i know i'm easy to bandwagon. no self-respecting mafia player would NOT vote for me. Sorry for distracting everybody during the first round and wasting a lynch.

Why are you claiming? It can't possibly be a useful strategy here. (Maybe the Kingmaker should claim if on a LOE. IMOMNBTK [I may or may not be the kingmaker-since I expect to be saying this phrase a lot, I better just create an acronym now])

The only argument I can see in favor keeping you around is that you are behaving much like RandomActs did day 1 in Kingmaker I. Which lead to the lynch of a townie.

On other things:

Glork-pablito makes me more suspicious of pablito then Glork; if one of them is scum it's much more likely to be pablito, who was seemingly trying to link himself with a player of high reputation.

I agree with the trying to keep the Kingmaker as hidden as possible; I was making this argument even before the endgame justification in Kingmaker I. I'd prefer that scum doesn't get a chance to kill a kingmaker who's good at his job in hopes of replacing him with a less talented kingmaker. (IMOMNBTK).

In general I agree with PJ's big post.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

damnit Twomz,

don't apologize for your individuality or any style choices you made.

Who cut off your balls?

I scare you Shadowlurker? Why? Cuz You're scum and you are scared I will see through your facade and CRUSH you?

Shake In Fear Scumbags, Shake!