The Syndicate

espers wrote:couldn't the town have won this from the off by massclaiming characters? i admire your sportsmanship

Thank you, perhaps we should have gone ahead with that. It just seemed like it would cancel the game, and thereby cancel Christmas. So.... yeah. You're welcome.

Oh well, good job guys!

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:

sprityo wrote:One last thing

I've just kinda felt....alone and targeted this whole game, but whatever, circumstances and things happen

In what way? You haven't been nightkill-targeted, and you haven't been a major lynch candidate.

Is this your first game?

No, just my first in a while.

sprityo wrote:One last thing

I've just kinda felt....alone and targeted this whole game, but whatever, circumstances and things happen

In what way? You haven't been nightkill-targeted, and you haven't been a major lynch candidate.

sprityo wrote:Yknow what I'm frustrated and done

I want you to claim Scotty

That is all I want

But he did claim Buzz.

Scotty wrote:LC, are you Leslie? Because we have this one shored up if so.

Yes.... yes I am.

sprityo wrote:Scotty has been irking me this entire game and it's about time we get rid of him

Shouldn't you have been after him from the start for claiming Buzz?

See ya, Enrique! I guess he could have been a Wet Bandit or Civ, modkills care not.

DFaraday wrote:I'm here, I'm sorry I haven't been around lately. Based on what I've read so far, sprityo sounds more suspicious than Elo, but I need to do a little more rereading.

Which Civ role are you, DF?

DrWilgy- Lynched Day 1 (Kevin McCallister)
Metalmarsh89 - Lynched Day 2 (Fuller)
Ricochet - Killed Night 2 (Gus Polinski)
thellama73 - Lynched Day 3 (Kate McCallister)
Draconus - Killed Night 3 (Old Man Marley)

Kevin McCallister (Cop)
Peter
Kate
Buzz
Fuller
Uncle Frank
Aunt Leslie
Gus Polinski
Old Man Marley (Doctor)

Harry
Marv

Long Con, sprityo, Elohcin, Scotty, DFaraday, Enrique...

If Enrique is non-playing then we don't need to lynch him right now even if he is bad, because he'll miss the nightkill. I do not suspect DFaraday. If Scotty were a baddie who was fake-claiming Buzz, and on Day 1 I was acting like I was Buzz and knew he was fake-claiming... then killing me Night 1 and revealing that I'm Buzz would implicate Scotty very harshly. I am not Buzz, and I believe that Scotty is Buzz. So sprityo and Elohcin are, again, my top baddie choices. If Enrique got a Wet Bandit role and the baddies have been running on just one active player, then I don't know which of them it is.

Epignosis wrote:9) Role-claiming and info-dumping are permitted.

So, who wants to roll the dice and claim my role? sprityo? Eloh? Anything to say?

Hmm, ok, so I was protected Night 1. I was wondering how I had lived this long into the game, turns out I wasn't supposed to.

Pretty sure I only suspected Scotty on Day 1. Then I got an assassination attempt on Night 1. This leads me to the conclusion that Scotty is Civ and the Wet Bandits were trying to implicate him in my death.

I didn't think the ISO of Elo was twisting words. The only thing that I can see that she would take exception to is:

Draco and LC jump on her demeanor and she then blows up like 40 pounds of C4, where she feels unappreciated and let down.
A bit of an overreaction, I think.

My read: Aside from her freakout, nothing has seemed overtly off. She followed through with her votes with reasoning behind it.
If she is bad, I can see her freakout coming from a frustrated baddie who knows she's been caught.

I agree with those words as non-twisting and accurate.

If DF and Enrique are non-playing, then that leaves sprityo and Elohcin as my choices for the baddie team. I'm going to go look at roles, and which ones are dead, and which ones are left. Then I'm going to list which ones are left. Then I'm going to ask for some roleclaims. Then I want to lynch the one that claims my role.

Is that legal? It seems like such a cop-out way to play, but then again I can't remember playing a game where roleclaiming is legal. I know that's the natural way to play on some other Mafia sites, so any wisdom on the matter from those with more experience in this kind of game would be helpful.

Elohcin wrote:This is so stupid. I was being so helpful, active, and I still get looked at like I'm a baddie. I am convinced that no matter what I do in a mafia game, I will be looked at as a baddie. Whatever. Who cares anymore. Cause I know others will follow LC and Drac on this. It's how it goes for me. I seriously may stop playing mafia b/c the only way I can last a good length of time in a game is by not saying much at all. Then I eventually get lynched for not saying much at all. I need to leave the syndicate as Elohcin and change my name then come back and have no one know who I am. I think that's the only way I an get you all to stop suspecting me for stupid crap. *throws hands up in the air*

Chill out, sistah! No one has voted for you. The person you want lynched looks like he's getting lynched. All's well in your world if he's a baddie. Even if he's not, it's not the end of the world for you. YOU ARE FREAKING OUT!

Elohcin's responses surprised me. I didn't think I was making a case against her, I was just clarifying my earlier misconception that Epi would have most likely given her a Civ role. I felt she was needlessly defensive about it.

I'm going to vote for Llama now, there have been several pings against him for me and I'm willing to give it a try.

Is that what I said? That I want to lynch you?

And rainbow lists ain't my thing.

Ok, so my thoughts right now... I don't think that a team of Scotty and Llama would be agreeing too much at all in the thread, right? When I'm a baddie, I keep conscious of distancing from my teammate from the earliest possible point in the game. So this alignment of thoughts on the Enrique front makes me think they're not both Mafia. Maybe I'm wrong, and this is a strategy designed to fool someone with my perspective. I know that next time I'm a baddie, I want to think about that - agreeing with my teammate in such a way that it looks unlikely to be a team. Feels smart to me, manipulative in just the right way. But I don't think that this is what's happening here. But hey, I've had a few rye and cokes, maybe my judgment on that front is drunk. Just putting it out there for opinions.

The other thing I want to say is hard for me to say, because it throws me all off-kilter. I had an opinion on Elohcin that, through Mafia talk with my wife tonight, I have discovered may be erroneous.

I had thought that it had been stated by Epi before that Elohcin doesn't like to have a baddie rle, and that she gets more into it when she is Civvie. If you recall earlier, I said that there was one player that I think is Civ and I won't say who it is. Well, it was Elohcin. And Black Rock said that I was misremembering... that Eloh is happier and more involved when she has BTSC, not when she is Civ. I thought Epi *of course* wouldn't give her a baddie role when he knows she likes Civ, but now I'm concerned that I was wrong.

Not that I'm saying I suspect Elohcin for game-related reasons now, just that I was un-suspecting her for meta reasons that may not have been accurate. Again, some other opinions on that front would be good. I'm not the only one here who has been playing a game with Epi where he shares his opinion on Eloh, so what do you guys think?

You agree with Llama about Enrique?

Elohcin, thank you for taking the time to do those ISOs. I think maybe some of the lack of play is Christmas-related - it's a busy time of year.

I still have to read over Scotty's, I just skimmed a bit so I could catch up. I have seen some people who agree with my suspicion of Scotty and Llama, so that's "interesting", as they say.

Going back to reread.

Sorry, Marsh! Ok, Scotty and Llama are my top suspects now. Baddies knew Metalmarsh was going to flip Civ, and avoided voting him. Llama already said he's going after Metalmarsh voters if he flipped Civ.

What are all the issues concerning MM?

thellama73 wrote:I also want to state on the record that I think MM is unlikely to yield a baddie, and I will be looking at his voters with extreme suspicion if he gets lynched and I am right.

Well, I'm unlikely to change my vote this time. But I don't think it's me that you'd be looking at suspiciously.

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.

I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.

Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.

That's where I'm at right now.

Are these your real or fake thoughts

A little of both, actually.

I know this is anti-civ, but as a civ who thinks you are a civ too, I kind-of want to lynch you for this

Aw, that's sweet, Eloh! Thanks!

thellama73 wrote:I like the way Long Con is thinking this game. Good job, Long Con.

And thank you, Mr Llama. I'm really interested in exploring the use of deception as a Civ in order to coax Mafia into some sort of misplay. I think it gets a bit diluted when people focus too much on it, but hey, I'm just experimenting a little. From now on, I'll only post real thoughts.

Elohcin wrote:

Long Con wrote:Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.

I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.

Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.

That's where I'm at right now.

Are these your real or fake thoughts

A little of both, actually.

Ok, fair enough. 24-hour days and thread silence doesn't work for that line of thinking, that's true. I think that the Mafia deliberately didn't kill anyone in order to lead us on a wild goose chase against low posters.

I also think that DrWilgy "red peeked" Metalmarsh and voted for him. It's not the strategy that everyone would use, but I think it's logical enough for him to go after MM right away just in case he got nightkilled early, there would then be a record of his info played out in a Day 1 vote, if nothing else. So I'm going to vote Metalmarsh at this time.

Furthermore, it's likely that the other Wet Bandit would try to steer the thread away from focusing on MM, so your post that doesn't suspect him at all follows that logic. So you're my other main suspect at this time.

That's where I'm at right now.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Long Con wrote:Well, the thing is, when you're trying to catch the bad guys, it really hinders the strategy when you blurt all your thoughts into the thread right away so that they can read and adapt to what you say. I don't want my suspects taking my thoughts into account when they are posting, because then they could post with the right kind of foreknowledge, saying the things that I so generously supplied the means to say that will make me not suspect them.

Like, I could say "I'm suspicious of the player who goes after Llama today"... and if I said that before you had posted, then maybe you, as a hypothetical baddie, would have posted something different than you did, and my suspicion would be cut off at its base.

I hope this helps you understand why I, in this game and future games, might be inclined to hold back thoughts I have from the thread.

Then perhaps you can blurt out fake thoughts on another player and see how people respond. :P

That is another strategy that I will likely employ at some point. Right now, though, I just want to wait until someone other than Metalmarsh or Long Con has posted.

Even saying this stuff could sour the results I'm waiting to see. Some Mafia biatch could just alter their post in any random way BECAUSE they know I'm waiting to see some specific reaction or whatever. Good thing I'm not a good detective, and my strategies might be completely crappy... I'll probably end up hiding under some coats until it all plays out.

Well, the thing is, when you're trying to catch the bad guys, it really hinders the strategy when you blurt all your thoughts into the thread right away so that they can read and adapt to what you say. I don't want my suspects taking my thoughts into account when they are posting, because then they could post with the right kind of foreknowledge, saying the things that I so generously supplied the means to say that will make me not suspect them.

Like, I could say "I'm suspicious of the player who goes after Llama today"... and if I said that before you had posted, then maybe you, as a hypothetical baddie, would have posted something different than you did, and my suspicion would be cut off at its base.

I hope this helps you understand why I, in this game and future games, might be inclined to hold back thoughts I have from the thread.

I am not a member of the Mafia aka the Wet Bandits. Still working out who my prime suspect is today, I have a few front runners, but still would like to see what some other folks have to say about the Day 1 lynch and the night's events.

Yay for no death! Perhaps the Doctor protected the right person?

Why Llama, Metalmarsh?

Ricochet wrote:A peek is a role check. I have not encountered it having any other meaning - like intercepting something. Green means civvie, red means baddie.

Thanks!

Ricochet wrote:

Long Con wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Host: Does the Cop receive a random D0 peek? Also, can he receive a D0 peek of any kind or only a civilian one?

4) Kevin will peek before Day 1 begins. On ensuing night periods, the cop may select another player to role-check.

To me, this is effectively: 4) Kevin will gdfhk before Day 1 begins. On ensuing night periods, the cop may select another player to role-check.

Will what now?

Exactly. I don't know what a peek is, although I assume it's a role-check based on the context, but other players seem to think it could be something very different. I sure as hell don't know what you mean by a "red peek".

Epignosis wrote:

Ricochet wrote:Host: Does the Cop receive a random D0 peek? Also, can he receive a D0 peek of any kind or only a civilian one?

4) Kevin will peek before Day 1 begins. On ensuing night periods, the cop may select another player to role-check.

To me, this is effectively: 4) Kevin will gdfhk before Day 1 begins. On ensuing night periods, the cop may select another player to role-check.

It was his choice to vote for you though.

Epignosis wrote:4) Kevin will peek before Day 1 begins. On ensuing night periods, the cop may select another player to role-check.

Just so we're clear, a "peek" is role-checking someone?

How delightful for the baddies.

linki: nvmd

Maybe DF will save himself. I don't want to be part of the tie though!

Ok, I'll go with Enrique. My other suspect (not Scotty) is actually the person that I think must be Civ, so I won't go that way.

Pretty much what Llama said about Enrique. That's the best I have right now.

Enrique wrote:I was originally gonna make a post to explain why I was gonna vote Long Con, but the more I went into it, the more I realized what he's actually saying. I don't think he's withholding any info that the rest of us aren't (which is to say, our roles). Llama laid the bait and it looked like LC was ready to take it to prey on Scotty, but what if he just knew he was fake-claiming?

Right now that's good enough for me. Scotty.

Hmm...

If I, as a Civ, think that it's in the Civs best interest that I keep some reasoning to myself, then that's what I'm going to do. Even if other players threaten to kill me for it.

How does this one grab ya? There's another player that I firmly believe is a Civ, but I'm not going to tell you who it is.

If evaluating a player's reasons for casting their votes is your main method of finding baddies, then I would suggest that more information is needed before you draw any conclusions. However, if you want to vote for me because I'm not telling why I'm voting for Scotty, then go ahead.

Oh, ok, maybe we do not share a time zone, because it's 4:14 here and you haven't actually voted for me yet. I just reread your post, Elohcin, and realized you were intimating that I was voting Scotty for personal reasons. That's a negatory on that one, I have no personal beef with Scotty. I mean, he didn't play my A World Reborn game, but I don't hold it against him, it's his loss.

Your binary mode of thinking on this, is it truly the way you believe this game works Eloh? There are two types of reasoning in the game? One of which is "game-related reasons", which should all be completely shared with the whole thread, and the other being "personal reasons" which should be kept out of the game altogether?

I would like to posit that strategy in the game of Mafia is a more dense and rich mosaic of stated actions, underlying plans, reaction judgment, and gut feelings.

Ricochet wrote:Why are you generalizing? Yes, at first I asked for some thought process or tactic behind your vote, but you dispelled that angle. Right now, the problem lies in the fact that you voted and you are openly keeping the reasoning to yourself, as shown in that quote. Reasoning your vote sounds likely play mafia playing to me.

Sounds to me like you are inventing a problem to give yourself an excuse to vote someone on Day 1. Can you possibly give me the last sentence in your quote here again? I think there was some error and I'm not 100% sure I understand the meaning of it. I think you are saying that voting for Scotty because I find his Buzz claim suspicious makes me Mafia, but that sentence is just a little jinky.

Elohcin wrote:

Ricochet wrote:

Long Con wrote:I'm not withholding any information.

Long Con wrote: my reasons for voting Scotty are my own for now

You got some 'splainin to do or I am voting you come 4pm. What does that even mean, your reasons are your own? If it's game-related, then they might be reasons for all of use. If it's personal, then I doubt that you should be having them.

Ok, then I guess you've already voted for me, assuming we have the same time zone. If you could just list for me every strategy you use to try and out-think baddies, and how you are implementing or will be implementing any of those strategies in part or in entirety, then I won't switch my vote to you. By 4:30 if you don't mind.

I'm not withholding any game information that you don't already have.

If, by "information", you mean every thought process, every strategy for winning, and every assumption that I feel is reasonable, then you had better get used to disappointment.

I'm not withholding any information.

I have basically the same answer, my reasons for voting Scotty are my own for now. I will say that I'm not voting him for some fishing ploy. He's my slightly-greater-than-zero-information top suspect.

Scotty wrote:God I hate Kevin. I wish I could feed him to my tarantula

So you are saying you're Buzz. Interesting. Let's see if the votes are truly moveable. Scotty

thellama73 wrote:Hi everybody! Why does Scotty hate Kevin? Is he a baddie?

How you feel about your family is a complicated thing.

I'm going to vote for dear old Aunt Leslie.