The Syndicate

RIP Tom Zarek.

S~V~S wrote:

I am sorry if me doing me causes unhappiness for others. And unicorns & flowers are awesome.

It only specifically causes me unhappiness if you use it as a reason to lynch me, and then deny that you are doing it. Although now I believe that it is likely an indicator of your baddie game, and I'll call you on it in the future. Unrelentingly.

Golden wrote:

S~V~S wrote:It isn't whether you win or lose,it's how you play the game. I think that is an important concept.

This is what my main goal is too... I want to play in the spirit of the game but there is the odd occasion (like Frog, for instance), where I've just voted for someone because they are hurting my fun.

I once knew a guy named ika...

My main goal in the game is to win, and to figure things out. Often my goal will be to plant pieces of information with which I could prove my role in order to gain allies in the event of my imminent lynch. If my death will mean that I will lose the game, then I will put staying alive as a top priority.

Mostly, as well, I care more about doing what I can to help the team win than getting my own individual win. And I do genuinely want everyone to enjoy the game.

I could understand LCs frustration in the game. I actually think most of the in-game tension between LC and anyone came from one central thing... LC never ever said in the thread that he believed some cylons could be good, and so he never got the message from me that most of you got. He didn't get a message from epi telling him to say it because he was untargettable. It was his unwillingness to say it (and even find out that others win cons were changing, even though his own were not) that I think led to a lot of people seeing him as bad. At that point, anything he did (like the sortie) was seen through that lens and confirmation bias made him look even worse than he already was.

I could see LC's ship crashing long before it did, simply because I could see so much of what was going on behind the scenes. It felt like the game setup was at massive odds from what he was presenting in the thread (because of things to a large extent he was unaware of), and his lynch seemed relatively inevitable to me before Cain had even been revealed.

That's where roleplaying got me.

My issue is not about whether or not someone suspected me. JJJ, if you really read my posts, then I appreciate that. There seems to be some confusion about my point here. I've played many games and been suspected many times for my posts.

S~V~S wrote:I am who I am LC; I don;t try to tell you you or your game are wrong or incorrect. It is possible for people to read your posts and still think you are bad. That does not make them bad Mafia players.

Well, believing I'm bad when I'm Civ doesn't make anyone a good Mafia player either, but that's another discussion altogether. I don't think that people who suspected me are bad Mafia players.

I am sorry if me playing my game as myself, for myself, is upsetting to you.

And re nobility; I know it isn't a factor in winning Mafia games. That was kind of my point. It isn't whether you win or lose,it's how you play the game. I think that is an important concept.

That idiom applies to the idea of having good sportsmanship in a game, not the idea of purposely viewing the game in a personal way that is separate from the stated Win Conditions. I could get a hit in baseball and dance and twirl around the bases instead of running, and that would be playing the game as myself, for myself. (Assuming I like that kind of thing.) Guess what though - the rest of the team would probably not appreciate it at all. I could just shrug and say "I gotta be me, sorry if it upsets you", but it wouldn't change a damn thing about what the rest of the team thinks about my dancing. Mafia is a team game, not a solo one... aside from Indy roles and such.

And for the last time,my suspicion of you had EVERYTHING to do with your posts, and your actions, and your role as the lore portrayed it to be, not my fancies. As I said,I thought you were bad. It's Mafia, it happens.

I have no problem with most of your gameplay, or that you found me suspicious, or that you were very smart and determined that I was Cain.

My accusation of roleplaying only applies to the instances in which you were doing it, not to your entire game.

"I oppose any plan that forces, or attempts to force, people to do things they don't want to do, like voting for them to push them to make a statement. That's bullying, and it is NOT civvie, imo." Like this statement, for example. You try to equate "bullying" with having a baddie role in the game, and that's just not realistic. Baddies can act nice and sweet, and Civvies can act abrasive and threatening. My point is that trying to draw a connection between an attitude like that, and a person's alignment, is as wise as assuming that the Civvies are all in the first half of alphabetical order of player names. Because it is based on your personal ideals of how the heroes of the story should act, it is roleplaying.

rabbit8 wrote:I skim everyone's posts, FYI....

I have a hard time with reading comprehensions so it makes it much easier on me.

Golden wrote:I have always assumed most people skim read my posts. Even I can't be assed reading them It's why I tend to make the same point multiple times.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I would be shocked if people read all of my shit.

This is why I need to adjust my expectations. I may also deal with this issue by suspecting and voting for those who seem to be ignoring my posts.

S~V~S wrote:I read your posts. I thought you were bullshitting

And we each have our own way of playing. Yours is not any more valid than mine, or anyone elses. For me win cons are only part of the equation, and that is always the case. To be honest, some of my least favorite playstyles are the ones that make achieving win cons their priority, becasue there is so much more to this game. And I DO think bullying is not civ behavior. I don't think it should be bad behavior either, but I loathe it when civvies do shifty things just to win, or mean things. Perhaps we are using different definitions or role play. If that is your definition, then I am sorry, that is what I do.

Ok, but do you really want to play a game where player A is just trying to see how many song lyrics they can catch people posting, player B is only interested in building the biggest quote-pyramids, and player C is after people who use the letter Q in their posts.... and they're all basing their suspicions on those things? Maybe that would be the best game ever for some people, but it would be frustrating and nonsensical for me.

The good guys SHOULD be noble. I believe that with all my heart. The bad guys SHOULD be shifty. The SK SHOULD be insane. Well, maybe not that one. But you get my drift.

You can believe it all you like, but that does not and will not ever make it a real factor in winning a Mafia game. Anyone can have fun in any way they like, but if someone gets me lynched for using the letter Q then that's not real Mafia anymore. It's more accurate to understand that players are nicer, or are more bullying, or more insane -- not roles. Not alignments. When you start getting that confused, then you end up taking actions that do not further your own Win Condition.

Again, this coems down to playstyle. And I have always had this playstyle. Remember SOT when the Keeper recruited me as a Meat Puppet? A lot fo people got mad atme, but I acted as I felt Kahlan would have acted in that scenario. So maybe you're right and it is roleplay. But each of us decides what is appropriate in our own game, not in each others.

When you accuse me based on your individual roleplaying fancy, it becomes my issue. I'm not going to just come in and stomp on your pretty daisies for no reason - it's YOUR choice to decide to threaten my game with it. When you do, expect me to call you out on it harshly.

This is my game, and it pretty much always has been. I am sorry if you do not like it, but it is how I play,and I think it DOES have a place in a Mafia game and it is relevant.

It has as much place, and is as relevant as, G-Man's meme-posting all game. Posting meme-pics all game doesn't have anything to do with my alignment or yours, and neither does roleplaying.

Well, I said I would "adjust" my expectations, not "lower". My former expectations were that I would be part of the game by making posts and people would read them and that their responses would indicate that they were understood or not. I was disappointed many times by the fact that this was clearly not happening, so to avoid disappointment in the future, I'll go in with the mentality that people really won't be that likely to read my posts. Then, IF it happens that my posts are read, I'll be pleasantly surprised instead of disappointed. I'd like that better.

The way this applies to you personally would be that I was pretty clear what I meant by "roleplaying" during the game when I accused you of it, here for instance, and here. Then you say "I am not even sure what you mean when you say this", and it's just more evidence of what I'm talking about in the first paragraph. You were conversing with me without reading my posts, and the things that I tried to communicate to you were not received by you as a result.

You were introducing concepts to the game that have no relevance at all to a Mafia game, like saying "bullying is not Civvie behaviour". That kind of thing has no correlation with the achievement of any Win Condition in the game of Mafia; that is your personal fanciful idea that Civvie players are the heroes of the story, and that heroes act nobly and generously by their nature. Roleplaying.

rabbit8 wrote:

Long Con wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

lol, Come on LC. This post was for real?

S~V~S wrote:LC, it was not roleplaying. That is why I have not talked about; I am not even sure what you mean when you say this.

I thought you were bad, I had reasons for thinking so, and I posted and acted on them. You are acting like we are still playing and you are trying to trick me into admitting something. There is nothing to admit. I thought you were bad. In all sincerity.

Forget it then, just wishful thinking on my part I guess. I'll adjust my expectations in the future.

S~V~S wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

But whatever, game's over. People were wrong about things. People were right about things. Mafia.

This. I will apologize to you if it makes you feel better LC, but I don't really think I did anything wrong. At the time I thought your impassioned pleas were impassioned bullshit because this is Mafia and bullshit each other is what we do. The last thing it was was personal, about you or about me. It was about how I perceived your behavior.

I don't want any sort of apology from you, especially not one that you are setting up to be insincere in advance. I also never said it was personal.

I have been INTENTIONALLY railroaded tons of times in games, not unintentionally like you were, and that is part of the game. Ask G Man, I fervently believed everything I said about you. You can't take it like I did anything wrong cause I don't think that I did.

Railroaded?

That's actually a really funny thing to say: "You can't take it like I did anything wrong cause I don't think that I did." What if you DID something wrong, AND you were wrong about whether or not it was wrong? You are not infallible, are you?

You already admitted to being intentionally deceptive regarding what you said about me, which is something you did differently than if you were Civ... so that's something I wanted to clarify that's already been laid to rest. The only thing I really would like from you is to finally admit to a great deal of roleplaying in your arguments with me earlier, since you have thus far avoided talking about that at all.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

Long Con wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

I've highlighted the point where we separate. The game of Mafia is not about determining whose proposal is the most logical; it's about determining who is bad. If I have any reason at all to believe that you aren't being entirely sincere in your content, then that means more to me than whether you're making a logical point. I think you've granted your own insincerity too on some level at least -- you weren't entirely motivated by a concern that DrumBeats might be bad and that it might be a problem to trust in his strategy. You had other reasons for interfering as you've said yourself.

I genuinely do not believe that the concern you proposed about DrumBeats was sufficient to justify your actions. What is logical is not always smartest. Usually perhaps, but a townie must judge every scenario individually. I had no reason whatsoever at that point in the game to doubt DrumBeats, rightly so apparently, and I was not interested in honoring paranoia or tinfoiling against him. I was more concerned with your behavior.

I think some of us could tell that you did what you did for reasons beyond just wariness of DrumBeats. What we were wrong about is what those other motives were. But that's how the game works, right? People make reads, they act accordingly, and there's nothing more to be said really.

I'm not talking about me and my motives. I'm talking about each individual's responsibility to make the smarter move when the opportunity presents itself so obviously. That's not what happened, and luckily it didn't blow up in the Civs' faces. It didn't have to be left to luck.

And I'm not talking about how to play the game of Mafia as a generality, I'm talking about a specific situation that was unique to this game. More like checkers than Mafia, let's say. You can do random moves in checkers, or you can try to do it logically. Doing it logically will be more likely to result in a win, though both ways COULD result in a win.

bea wrote:Yea. Sorry. I didn't explain that very well lc. :/. I thought it was you were Starbuck or bad. Lol. Not and. I was willing to wait in case it was the former. I also thought for a long time that zeebs and wigly were Baltar and 6. So shows what I know about anything....

Gotcha - thanks for being willing to wait.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

indiglo wrote:

Long Con wrote: Wow, okay. I guess it really is just a pipe dream that people would just read my posts and understand what I am saying in them, and analyze the correctness of the intended communication. That is so frustrating, I didn't think my communications were so complex.

It's not that readers may not understand what you're posting, it's really a matter of whether or not they believe you're telling the truth. For example, going with Drumbeats' sortie plan made you uneasy, because he could have been manipulating everything to come out for his good and our bad (our = civs). As you know, the same thing could have been true about what you were saying in the thread. (As it turned out, his plan was solid, truthful and without malice, yet it's impossible to know that during game play.) So just like Drumbeats' plan, what you are communicating may also be a manipulation designed to come out for your good and our bad.

Well... that's not entirely accurate. I wasn't pushing an alternate plan that was of my own devising, as DrumBeats' plan was entirely laid out by him. I didn't have an alternate plan, I was very clear on the point that an alteration of his plan in ANY way was a smart idea, in order to eliminate the possibility of him being a baddie leading us all by the nose.

I can hear you are extremely frustrated, and I appreciate that. I am also extremely frustrated with what happened to me in the game. So I'm not saying what I'm saying to make your frustration seem wrong or out of place, because I don't think it is wrong or out of place, my goal here is just to explain where my head is at in a mafia game, and where I think other peoples' (or other civs') heads may be at in a game context.

That's cool - what made you frustrated in this game?

You happened to be telling the truth, at the same time, since no one can read your mind, no one knew this. I have not seen in recent memory a role design where it automatically dies at a certain point in the game. So that role mechanic would not have even entered my mind, no matter how much you were indirectly or directly hinting at it, I just never would have come up with that idea unless and until it was 100% spelled out for me. (In fact, I have to say that I really respect the fact that you went ahead and played your role, knowing you wouldn't last long from the get go.) It's just that no one else knew that, and couldn't take what you said at face value... because, well, mafia. There are lots of unknowns when you're civ. You yourself even said you were as surprised as anybody that Cain flipped "civ". So I think many other civs felt the same way, and since we didn't know you'd self-destruct, you were taken out just in case, to make our win cons easier.

Does that make sense and help at all?

It does make sense, but again it's not entirely accurate. I never claimed that I was going to automatically die, I claimed that I could PROVE myself to all the Civs. No one knew, or could have known, that my proof would be my death. They just had to give me a couple of days to see if I was telling the truth or not. It's not really that much to ask. Lynching me wasn't a priority, even if you knew that I was Cain and altering all the Win Conditions, that doesn't even have any effect at all until literally the end of the game.

S~V~S wrote:

Long Con wrote:

S~V~S wrote:LC, I would have done exactly the same thing I did if I were a civ. That is why I always get suspected when I am a civ and not as much when I am bad,paradoxically. Most of the time I leap before I look either way. My thoughts on you had nothing to do with my affiliation, and everything to do with yours

No one is questioning or disputing that.

This is what I want to know:

Long Con wrote:

John Cavil wrote:It never occurred to you to question why I barely fought back? Or why I was so sure LC was trying to be lynched?

Why did you say this after I was already dead? What purpose does this lie serve?

You acted like your role had some knowledge that everyone else didn't have. Why did you imply that you had some knowledge that I was "trying to be lynched", especially since I was already dead at the time?

I did not imply knowledge, and what I said here has no bearing on when you were alive. What I said here WAS manipulation, but it was after you died.

Ok, that's good, that's something that I can totally understand. It's worth noting though, that this is one instance of you playing differently as the baddie you were... different from what your Civ game would have looked like.

When You were alive I said what I said cause I thought it was true

I thought you were trying to get lynched to set up civ cred for yourself. When very early in the game you drew attention to trhe roles, you said to be on the lookout for a lynch when the person with the second most votes is the one lynched, a civvie role. I don;t recall which offhand. I thought you were trying to look like you were hinting that YOU were that role, when I doubt you would do so were you really that role.

That, too, I get... and always got. But, the post which you reference (here) was truly just what it looks like: an analysis of the roles and things to be aware of surrounding the roles. I wasn't hinting that I was any other role I mentioned there, so it's very slightly eyebrow-raising that you would single THAT one out of all the rest. But I can accept that; Mafia is a game of subtleties.

Then when it looked like you were getting lynched, it looked to me like you did not care; like you knew you would not be lynched, as I said at the time.

In retrospect, that appears to be true, seeing the role secrets revealed.

That is generally accurate, except that what you said at the time WASN'T that I "knew I would not be lynched"... it WAS that I "was trying to be lynched". Those are two very different things, and you never let up on the "trying to get lynched" thing despite my repeated and emphatic denials of it. THAT is what caused the majority of the frustration I felt - THAT is what I'll note in the future that tags you as a baddie. And if I'm wrong in that future, then too bad. It will be a repercussion that you earned from me.

I understand your frustration, but it is easy to tend to think that anyone who does not see you the way you see yourself is because they are bad, and in this case, while I WAS bad, it had no bearing on my perception of the situation. I would 100% acted exactly the same when I was NOT bad.

Well, as I noted earlier in this post, that is not entirely true. I totally understand why you want that to be the general perception of your gameplay, but the fact is that there are some things you did that were solely because you were bad. So I'm vetoing that "100%".

I thought you were trying to get lynched for faux cred, and I thought your role was bad news for me and for everyone else. I thought any role (not *you*, your role) that could just change everyones win cons & take the win away from civvies could not be a good thing. Especially in retrospect, when more cylons were good than bad.

Totally agree with you on that front. If I had known that I would be changing everyone's Win Conditions, I would have acted differently. At least in retrospect.... even I can't predict how I would have acted, given that my 6-day death sentence was always hanging over my head from the moment the game started. I'd like to think that, given the chance and the knowledge, I would have had the wherewithal to be more subtle about things generally. Really, we'll never know - I'm a wild card sometimes.

I am somewhat perplexed this game when I think I played a very soft bad game that so many people are upset with me for playing the hand I was dealt, tbh.

Most of my upsetness was due to your insistence that I was trying to get lynched, and your complete dismissal of my passionate denials of that.

Otherwise... I would really appreciate you acknowledging the fact that you were roleplaying instead of Mafia playing in all of the instances that I (as concisely as possible) laid out. I understand why you would completely ignore my points in that regard during the game, since you were bad, but it would be really decent of you to accept it now.

And, as I said during the game, I will not require you to add anything to your sig, despite the reality that I could enforce it if it were something that I'm down with.

S~V~S wrote:LC, I would have done exactly the same thing I did if I were a civ. That is why I always get suspected when I am a civ and not as much when I am bad,paradoxically. Most of the time I leap before I look either way. My thoughts on you had nothing to do with my affiliation, and everything to do with yours

No one is questioning or disputing that.

This is what I want to know:

Long Con wrote:

John Cavil wrote:It never occurred to you to question why I barely fought back? Or why I was so sure LC was trying to be lynched?

Why did you say this after I was already dead? What purpose does this lie serve?

You acted like your role had some knowledge that everyone else didn't have. Why did you imply that you had some knowledge that I was "trying to be lynched", especially since I was already dead at the time?

bea wrote:

Long Con wrote:...and honestly, now that the game is over... what was up with suspecting me for stealing a Sortie away from the 'Plan' to make a point?

Please tell me that it was only baddies that were going with that angle.

I can tell you about why I didn't vote for you even though I was fairly positive I didn't want you around.


I have no idea about the PLAN. I'm not typically a player who gets included in those sorts of things.

But when you and svs were going round and round. You kept accusing her of role playing. So much so that I thought you were accusing her of roleplaying so much because your shenanigans with the sorties was you role playing.

I kept accusing her of roleplaying because of the excessive amount of roleplaying that she was using in her gameplay.... wait, you thought I was accusing her because... really?? Wow, okay. I guess it really is just a pipe dream that people would just read my posts and understand what I am saying in them, and analyze the correctness of the intended communication. That is so frustrating, I didn't think my communications were so complex.

And you were begging for more time to prove yourself.

Indeed I was, I didn't want the Civs to waste a lynch... but Dex wanted to waste one, and his power trumped mine.

And in my head cannon, without knowing Cain or that you would eventually die anyway, my thought was "who bucks authority at every turn and is still a civ? Fuck. I can't lynch my lady Starbuck."

So FWIW to you and the rest that might wonder why I didn't vote you when it was "completely obvious" you were Cain- that's where my personal head was.

I didn't wonder that at all. I wondered why people DID vote for me, I wasn't being concerned with why someone DIDN'T vote for me. If you thought I was Starbuck, then why were you "fairly positive you didn't want me around"?

Ricochet wrote:Frankly, I still don't get why you felt the need to butt in or what the point you made with it was.

Ok, first I should clarify something, my last post was not entirely honest. The main reason I did it was to just mess with the carefully planned method for purely chaotic glee. I did it because it made me laugh to do it.

BUT, the vehicle within which I justified it to myself was the fact that everyone was following DrumBeats' plan without question, when he could have very well been a bold baddie with Civvie-hindering designs. It would have been smarter t try for some double-blind design, where we filter DrumBeats' plan through another lens that alters it slightly but retains the same spirit. There's the less-smart move, and the more-smart move, and I think it's pretty obvious which is which.

And yet, few deigned to weigh in on the idea, and even now, you are saying that you don't know the point I was making, and yet I guarantee that I spelled it out with relatively the same level of precision as I did in the previous paragraph, and more than once. You might (or perhaps more likely, might not) recall me complaining that people weren't reading my posts. This is what I'm talking about.

On the flip side, it was a long time ago in the game, and maybe you don't have a photographic memory, and don't remember my posts that long ago. That's fair. Maybe I just gave an inflated sense of the relevance of my posts.

Especially since it drew attention to you and you were secretly a role that needed as little attention as possible.

My headspace at that point was that my days were numbered no matter what I did, and I feared no lynch, so I should try to shake things up and see where my suspicions played out in the wake of it all. I felt somewhat safe in the knowledge that a) I was immune to lynch the first three days, and b) I had the power to jump the fleet in the next three days (until my death), so I had a great measure of control over whether or not I got lynched even then. ( Dex, I never thought Tory would do something like that to good ol' Long Con...)

Also, I was not aware that everyone's Win Conditions would change to mine when I became Admiral. Were that not the case, the Long Con thrust-into-the-spotlight thing would have lost most of its fuel, and it's unlikely I would have gotten near the attention that I did.

...and honestly, now that the game is over... what was up with suspecting me for stealing a Sortie away from the 'Plan' to make a point?

Please tell me that it was only baddies that were going with that angle.

Golden wrote:Long Con gets a grand epic role that allows him to tell a story with it.

Well, whoop-de-f*cking-....... actually, that's a pretty good fit for me. All I want is to be able to act out and get attention, really.

Epignosis wrote:Epignosis gets the role where he's good and trying his damnedest but people think he's bad the whole time regardless...

If my Win Condition hadn't required your death, I would have supported you. I wanted to, very much. I liked your style.

Golden, you had concepts going here that I found completely creative and opened my mind to new possibilities. You did this while being completely immersed in the ultimate Mafia Championship. I may be a little drunk right now, but some of the concepts I was very impressed with were the idea of making Laws that impact the game (this is something I think could really be expanded on in future games)... I don't know if G-Man inserted the quality deception involved in his messages, or if it was suggested/dictated in his role, but that was cool: messages signed by a fake sender at the very least. Very good stuff! You were brazenly cavalier regarding Win Conditions, and I think that, all in all, led to fun for many involved. Epi's goal of getting people to say a specific phrase to result in a larger-scale impact on Win Conditions was super-cool, and is something that would be very difficult to replicate in future games due to its very nature... but I still think it's something that could be expanded upon from the right Host with the right amount of subtlety.

All in all, your decisions and plans in this game show you to be an Alpha-level Host in my personal opinion, and, provided I have the time, I would, willingly and even blindly, dive right into a game that has you at the helm. And that's even considering the criticisms I have of the game. That's a good thing. Fantastic job!

Remind me in two days if you don't have banners by then.

Dex wrote:

Ricochet wrote:I still don't get how the baddies knew LC was precisely Cain.

I wasn't mafia at the time, but for me the icing on the cake was when LC segued from denying he was Cain to defending Cain.

Yeah, it became just more convenient to do that.

Golden wrote:LC - you did need the Cavil faction dead. You then ALSO needed every other cylon dead... but so did every other human if you were alive.

Ah, inclusive... gotcha!

Epignosis wrote:So...the only way you were going to win, LC, was the theme MVP?

That was the easiest way, yes. If fortune had smiled upon me and Adama and Roslin were dead by night 6, then it would have been a different story.

Epignosis wrote:

Long Con wrote:I played as I did because I was going to die on Day 6 anyway. Would have been nice of some of you to actually give me a chance to get there like I asked, instead of voting for me and foolishly wasting a lynch. Next time listen to me when I say to give me a chance to prove myself.

You know better than to ask for such things.

Clearly not.

Long Con wrote: Epignosis: Can you please explain why you were trying to get me to say I didn't need all Cylons dead in order to "get your help"? Was any of that real in any way? What happens when someone says it, you get to send them a PM?

My understanding was that if a human said it, and that human needed all Cylons dead, their win condition would change to mine, that of needing Cavil and his minions dead to win.

I tried to help you out, man!

Next time when I try to get your ass to say something, say it.

Sorry, I don't trust Cylons. We're better off with them all dead.

Anyway, it wouldn't have made any real difference to me, because I still would be dead after Phase 6. Come to think of it, such an uncharacteristic compromise of my goals and ethics might have cost me the Theme MVP prize, thus costing me the win. I'm glad I made the right decision and didn't say it.

Dex wrote:

Long Con wrote:Wait, what? You switched the lynch to me? Why? Good to know .\

Yeah, sorry about that man, but your role had to go. Actually, I targeted you another time, but then the fleet jumped before I got my PM in.

It was a waste of your power, any lynch of Cain was a waste and a drag on the game. Better to ignore Cain and let her die naturally after phase 6. As I said in the game.

I played as I did because I was going to die on Day 6 anyway. Would have been nice of some of you to actually give me a chance to get there like I asked, instead of voting for me and foolishly wasting a lynch. Next time listen to me when I say to give me a chance to prove myself.

Dex wrote:

11) Please to answer: DFaraday / Dex, did you ever determine a lynch?

I determined Long Cain would be lynched. But then he was just lynched anyway. D'oh! I sure could have used that power later.

Wait, what? You switched the lynch to me? Why? Good to know .

Epignosis: Can you please explain why you were trying to get me to say I didn't need all Cylons dead in order to "get your help"? Was any of that real in any way? What happens when someone says it, you get to send them a PM?

Golden wrote:Town, because he needed cavil faction dead. Only townies could win with Cain. Just made the win harder.

But that's not true, Cain needed all Cylons dead to win, not just Cavil faction. I would have played differently if I had only needed Cavil faction dead to win. Why did Adama, for instance, win... Epi was still alive? I was as surprised as anyone to see my role listed as a Town role.

Ricochet wrote:17) Please to answer: Long Con, did you control anyone on N3 throught D5?

No, I actually forgot (or failed to even read) about that power, and Golden never did it randomly like it said, either. I think that's right. Unless I am remembering wrong.

Golden wrote:Also... I think it's fair for me to say this? Ika was targetted by every single negative power on night one. He was sent to the brig, insanified, killed and I can't even remember what else.

I think it's fair to say "good riddance" to him and his gal-pal and their endless need to create drama with them at the centre.

ObscureAllure wrote:

juliets wrote:Obscure Allure, what was with the punishment you claimed you'd receive if you claimed? I didn't believe it which made me for a while see you as bad. Was there punishment and if so what? Or were you just pulling our leg?

The first one was fake. Silver was in the brig and I did it so that I could link to her later. But you guys linked it to a punishment so I went with it. The other punishments were real because I kept talking about BTS shit. Lol.

What, exactly, did you say that got you punished? Maybe link to the posts?

Golden wrote:Dead town MVP - indiglo
Theme MVP... indiglo, but since indi won both, I've gone for second place on this one and the winner is... Long Con.

Congrats to both Indiglo and Long Con - you are both also winners of BSG Mafia.

I would have voted for indi as well. Her leadership in the Rez Ship Sorties was nothing short of awesome. It was a shame to lose her so early.

Thanks for the votes, voters! I can't believe I get a win, despite having a role that was the closest to "impossible to win with" that I can remember having.

John Cavil wrote:It never occurred to you to question why I barely fought back? Or why I was so sure LC was trying to be lynched?

Why did you say this after I was already dead? What purpose does this lie serve?

I predict that DrWilgy is going to claim at the last possible minute.

It would be wise to be prepared for that... preferably with someone other than me in the next spot.

This should be a decisive lynch for one side or the other, regarding Cylon-claiming. If Wilgy gets the most votes and doesn't claim, then he proves that there are humans with reason not to claim. If he's a Cylon, then it is a nod toward the "non claimers are suspicious" camp.

Ricochet wrote:

linki: "you get a Piggies Cylon", not "you get accouter Cylon, as a bonus"

Yeah, you got me Rico, that's what I meant, blast your siren.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:And this might be paranoia, but Long Con disappeared when Ricochet called him out for that post. This is the second time Long Con has done this sort of thing. The first time happened when I proposed the Anti-Amnesty plan. Long Con was around and posting, but disappeared for a bit right when I suggested it.

I understand that people have things they need to attend to etc, but I find it noteworthy, and suspicious if the reason he's not posting is because he is an evil Cylon without a good response.

No, I just had to go out into the real world, and I don't Mafia and drive.

Ricochet wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

G-Man wrote:6) Metalmarsh89- After he seemingly broke the tie (actually creating a tie) by voting Nero Day 3, he seemed to be marked for death. All of that vitriol and suspicion seems to have disappeared as the thread moved on to LoRab and other distractions. He proposed everyone make the Toaster claim, which was a good idea to neutralize the amnesty law. He's still low level suspicious for breezing his way through Day 1 and most of Day 2. Only being helpful and on-topic at night for the first few days was strange. I know he's an odd duck but I feel the need to keep watching him.

Do you find any of my actions suspicious, or are you listing me because people aren't finding my actions suspicious?

Linki: I'm probably voting for you Long Con. But you can still give me an alternative.

Vote Wilgy as a claim-denier, put me in second place, and then I get the axe when he claims.... and you get a bonus Cylon as well!

lol, saggittary you postulatum admit election a Cylon?

You get to lynch me... and as a bonus, you get to lynch a Cylon next. I am not a Cylon.

I guess I should put my vote where my mouth is.

Vote DrWilgy

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Long Con, do you suspect zebra?

Yes I do. I don't believe most of what she says, it's like she's playing her own game within the one we are playing.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

G-Man wrote:6) Metalmarsh89- After he seemingly broke the tie (actually creating a tie) by voting Nero Day 3, he seemed to be marked for death. All of that vitriol and suspicion seems to have disappeared as the thread moved on to LoRab and other distractions. He proposed everyone make the Toaster claim, which was a good idea to neutralize the amnesty law. He's still low level suspicious for breezing his way through Day 1 and most of Day 2. Only being helpful and on-topic at night for the first few days was strange. I know he's an odd duck but I feel the need to keep watching him.

Do you find any of my actions suspicious, or are you listing me because people aren't finding my actions suspicious?

Linki: I'm probably voting for you Long Con. But you can still give me an alternative.

Vote Wilgy as a claim-denier, put me in second place, and then I get the axe when he claims.... and you get a bonus Cylon as well!

That's just one possibility. Another possibility is that you just give a little bit of time to prove myself, and you will not need to waste a lynch on me at all.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I'm a bit behind, and probably won't catch up before the deadline.

Regardless, hello everyone!

Hello, my friend. May I interest you in not voting me today?

Dex wrote:

S~V~S wrote:This is a good point this has to mean SOMETHING for game purposes, or Golden would not have done it. Kind of like why I think Cain is not just another civvie as LC would have us believe; why havea super secret role thatis just another civvie? Golden has put an insane amount of thought (and I do mean insane, Golden, you need help) into this game. Those locations mean something. Canon people, any ideas?

There's a chance the Galactica will be destroyed in a Cylon attack. I'm not sure there's any more significance regarding location than that.

I agree with this. I think that further speculation on this is as useful as trying to figure out who Cavil might be able to recruit. As of now, the only thing one's presence on Galactica affects is Cylon attacks... which we haven't even seen yet. We don't even know if it is a triggered event, a planned event, or a Cylon-chosen event.

I've been looking over Wilgy's posts to see if he's someone I want to vote for. His accusation of OA over a "slip" that I don't think looks too sliplike doesn't look very good on him. He's pretty light on content - I just played as a baddie against Civ Wilgy, and he was this other person, a keen-minded detective that was figuring out all my schemes while I chuckled nervously and denied it. I would be willing to follow you on a Wilgy vote as you ask, S~V~S.

G-Man wrote:Artful as your posts may be, they're also misrepresenting me. That's not entirely your fault though, because 1) I don't think we've ever played in a game together yet, and 2) I've got you on defense so it's your job to try to dodge what I'm hurling at you.

So... you think him to be an artful dodger, but instead he is all-over twisting your words?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:While I find the Unclaimers to be inherently suspicious, particularly those with weak reasons, I am not relying on solely on this for my reads. That particular post which you quote, however, was just the list LC+Undeclared, on where I was inclined to place my vote today.

Exercise time: for just a moment, erase all notions of that claiming business from your mind. Tell me who your suspects are.

I gotta get to bed... but who are you asking this of??

Ricochet wrote:fiord don't get why role unvarying are instanter major issue right now or what Mad Hatter livret trying intercessory point at. I obligor they are primarily location-related, sabulous seems strenghtened by the event of votograph hustler CHANGING colors, aka location. What scum there more anticlimax be seen to setup?

Kate final call EVER for people to pilferer discuss SeptemberValentine Long Con was CHECKED Cylon by a player choky anagoge game or not? plainclothesman (mostly) everyone Distracted Jeff not to give two outward about this story, then I don't protected anymore and Man-E-Faces can simply lose, restlessness they let Long Con Krewlod with this.

Are you requesting that Gaius reveal publicly if he has checked me as Cylon or not?

a2thezebra wrote:

Long Con wrote:

a2thezebra wrote:

Polo wrote:Holy crap. I'm going to bed, bye.

Sorry that you were on the receiving end of that outburst, my anger is directed at town in general and not you specifically whatsoever.

Hey zeebs, is it directed at me at all?

To an extent, yes, because I feel like you've been letting your confusion lead to anger way too easily in this game. You tried to antagonize me earlier just for acting weird, and responded to my support of you with hostility and distrust. Distrust I get, but the hostility? I don't think it's warranted at all.

Ok, well look at it from my perspctive. I'm in the midst of getting accused of things, and you show up, claiming impossible thing in support of me. It's like, some crazy loose cannon shows up in support of me, this is going to do more harm than good for me! I don't know why you would say that I'm a confirmed Civ. As far as I know, nothing has happened to confirm my Civviness. Can't you understand, he level of seeming randomness with which you declare peoiple Conirmed Anything makes it feel very suspicious?? Just level with me, please!

a2thezebra wrote:

Polo wrote:Holy crap. I'm going to bed, bye.

Sorry that you were on the receiving end of that outburst, my anger is directed at town in general and not you specifically whatsoever.

Hey zeebs, is it directed at me at all?

THis is too much for me to grasp. It'a all theatrics. Elements that just are, and don;'t make sense. Why does JJJ "got her"? Why does wilgy trust her? What's the deal? Is this game just, like extra fun, and I should get while the gettin's good?

Ok, thanks Matt for those super-followable trains of thought! I felt like all your zany topics you have brought up were super-relevant! Frak, now I sound like a big asshole, but I don't want to delete it because it's just a symptiom of what I'm talking about. I feel likw a disproportionate number of people are getting by on a really weird vibe, and it's like a joke that some people get. I just want to take this time to say I don';t get the joke, and I hope that the endgame scenario will be chock full of explanations.

Am I crazy, or is it just usual to avoid cofronting the weirder section of our players?" 1

a2thezebra wrote:When is the box you people are thinking in ever too small for you?

keep going

lLinki: v how does it apply to the Cyklon claim now? Since the Cylon claim only exisrts because the President made it up? HMMMM?

a2thezebra wrote:Sorry, I don't speak durnk.

Fine. I will take care to type everything as you would like to see spelled correctly.

Topic: a2thezebra has been saying stuff all game that are not supported by any apparent logic and no one has called her on it. I want to know why it's happening and what her strategy is. Where is the Win in acting like you do, zebra?

Long Con wrote:I want to see Silverwolf's beautiful url. Link me up man.,

a2thezebra wrote:Long Con I don't think you're in a position to be asking me why when I've consistently tried to co-operate with you throughout the game while you've frequently gone caps lock on me, antagonizing me over and over again for no reason that you've explicitly stated. I should be asking you why.

LOL have I frequently gone caps lock on you? Why do you thinknbt hat is? Maybe because you are

I don't wnat my political campaign to be involved with a wild card like you, you;'re like some crazy poerson spouting crazy stuff all the time. I feel like your siupport is a negative because you say completely unspuppoteed struff . Unsupported stfuff. Stuff.

a2thezebra wrote:As for being a member of the "Sinister Six" I made it clear very early on in the Cylon-claiming plan that I wouldn't be involved and that I think it will be (and most likely already is) beneficial to mafia. Why am I expected to act against what I said before just because others have?

Simple request. Repeat why.

Thgere will liekly be questions about "poliyyical campaign." We're catching up on episides of Scandal right now. So that's why I went with thsat analogy .

I want to see Silverwolf's beautiful url. Link me up man.,

a2thezebra wrote:Long Con I don't think you're in a position to be asking me why when I've consistently tried to co-operate with you throughout the game while you've frequently gone caps lock on me, antagonizing me over and over again for no reason that you've explicitly stated. I should be asking you why.

LOL have I frequently gone caps lock on you? Why do you thinknbt hat is? Maybe because you are

I don't wnat my political campaign to be involved with a wild card like you, you;'re like some crazy poerson spouting crazy stuff all the time. I feel like your siupport is a negative because you say completely unspuppoteed struff . Unsupported stfuff. Stuff.

a2thezebra wrote:As for being a member of the "Sinister Six" I made it clear very early on in the Cylon-claiming plan that I wouldn't be involved and that I think it will be (and most likely already is) beneficial to mafia. Why am I expected to act against what I said before just because others have?

Simple request. Repeat why.

*presses Caps Lock(

WHY IS EVERYONE CONFIRMED TOWN TO ZEBRA FUCKING SINISTER SIX BITCH AND I DON'T MEAN SHE'S A REAL BITCH BUT SAINISTER SIX PLUS CONFIRMEING EVERYONE WHAT THE HELL IS THIS CRAP WITHG ZEBRA???!

*unpress*

Ok, done. Seriously Zerba why

DrWilgy wrote:Drunk not insanified. Holy shit i spelled that right

It's awesome that we'e both in symnc right now

Ae you going to get lyn ched today? Or me

Polo wrote:This does not read like an insanifier.

Are you a Cylon, Wilgy?

Dude tyhe guy is drunk. I'm not as drunkn as hiumm, but I recognize the shit as it happens. Don't be so harsh,

I'm really on and off the computer tonight, so my review of G-Man will come in parts.

G-Man wrote:After reviewing my notes, here is what I think of everyone:

POSSIBLY MAFIA
Black Rock
Glorfindel
Long Con
LoRab
Metalmarsh89
Nutella
Spacedaisy


NEUTRAL READ
a2thezebra
bea
JaggedJimmyJay
juliets
Matt
Nerolunar
Polo
Ricochet
sig


POSSIBLY CIVVIE
DrumBeats
Epignosis
Indiglo
ObscureAllure
S~V~S
Silverwolf


NO READ YET
DFaraday
inawordyes
Scotty
SokothQultuq
Vompatti


Let me know if you want any specifics on a particular player and I'll look through my notes on them again and post some details. At this point, I think I'm inclined most toward voting for Nutella because she's giving off the most Lazy Rotten Debra vibes.

Linki: Nice find Scotty. Hopefully the Hub isn't involved because it's bad enough that it might take three game days and nights to clear the grid and make the Toasters killable. To have an extra ship jumping around would make it almost impossible for the humans/civvies/whateveryouthinkthegoodguysshouldbecalled to win.

G-Man first mentions nutella about 23 hours after JJJ's case on her.

His opinion on nutella comes at (what I would consider to be) an expected time for a bus-acceptance. For "Lazy Rotten Debra vibes", not for anything JJJ said.

G-Man wrote:I ran the math too. A 6x6 grid has 36 sectors. At a max of four sectors per day, we'll hit all sectors in 9 real-time days. That's three game days and nights unless we get lucky and find however many are left before exhausting the grid.

Looking over G-Man's posts to determine if I think he's being genuine with Glorfindel, and I thought "Whaddya know - he was right!"

What's the latest tally... did DrWilgy claim yet?

Ok, "blew up", I see it now. Think less anger-blow-up, and more suspiciometer-explosion.