The Syndicate

Love this from bea:

bea wrote:Before I go back and read, I still want to say quiet tranq freeks me out. I dislike it. LOTS. He will gain my final vote on that alone if a) I don't find something better or b) He starts playing.

Tranq will get her vote if he starts playing? I guess she means if he doesn't start playing?

DrWilgy wrote:Lol, am I just naturally scum after TH now?

I never thought you were scum in this one. You did try hard! But it seems like in this game, especially after FZ got taken out, the baddie strategy is basically 'lynch and NK actives'. The baddies just flew right by.

Three lylos?

No.

I started with bea, tranq, zebra.

I'm sticking with bea and tranq. And maybe luke? Or Boomslang? I don't know, really. This game hasn't created a lot to go on.

I feel like they may have nabbed one with choutas here. It depends on what tranq is, I guess... he could always still be a baddie using FZ's peek to gain cred if wilgy went down. Good luck town.

I'm with zebra. Taboo mauve is more visible than invisible violet.

Rezz possibility is only incompatible with dead players being allowed into spectator chat. It depends what the demand for it is, but I would never object to non-players having a chat room, even in games where dead players weren't allowed to attend.

Mongoose wrote:What rabbit hole did I fall down?

I don't know, but you seem to be some kind of legend around here that I've never got to play with, so I'm hoping that you stay in the rabbit hole for a while

Hey, mongoose, you don't have to use NP blue here...

But perhaps we should mandate the use of spectator scarlet.

Damn, lol.

I think I just find zebra inherently suspicious. I'm going to have to get used to that.

The civs are going to have trouble getting back in from here I think. You only get four mislynches. That's two.

I still think zebra is bad,... I would have voted that way today.

I need to read back Matt F!

As for 'big crazy games' - I don't try to figure out everything that is going on. I focus on a handful of people (say, maybe 10) that I feel like I have reads on or that have stood out to me in some way. Often I feel like there is three games going on at once, and entire plot lines I'm just not a part of.

It's only when the game begins to close in and get to a more reasonable size that I try to get reads on everyone and understand everything that is going on.

FZ. wrote:

Golden wrote:FZ, what is your first language? I had no idea.

It's a secret :P

It's ok, rico gave it away.

Ricochet wrote:

Golden wrote:FZ, what is your first language? I had no idea.

I do.

Oh, FZ speaks Nauruan. Got it.

FZ, what is your first language? I had no idea.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:For me it's very simple:

It's better for someone to win a game that they didn't necessarily earn than for someone to be denied a win that they absolutely earned.

I mean no offense to anyone with a contrary viewpoint, but I really have no interest in playing any game that isn't dead or alive. I think that's a completely different game -- it's no longer Mafia and instead it's something else.

I do think of town as a team.

If the game is as simple as town vs baddies, I can see the merit in this view point. And I definitely see the merit in win cons being balanced for both sides (I've mentioned before, that if baddies don't win if they die, things like bussing becomes quite contentious within the team and so it leads to better balance, for me, than allowing one side the privilege only).

However, I think there are some game set ups where being alive to win is not only appropriate, but kind of almost necessary. If you have a game with a lot of independents, for instance, then a world in which only the independents would be best served by playing selfishly makes them stick out strongly. I think the game set up should dictate the best win conditions not the other way around. I've been working recently on a game where I've had to give win conditions a lot of thought, and being able to win while dead would not work for that game. I also would have strict participation requirements on a win if I hosted a game

I also think that the 'win only if alive' thing often contributes to keeping mafia at our site civil and low-key, as opposed to mafiascum srs bsnss. Knowing your win or loss might be completely out of your control keeps people in a headspace where being the best mafia player they can possibly be isn't the be all and end all, and I think that can be good for culture. And it requires you to bring out a different skill set. I, personally, find the most exciting thing about mafia as we present it at the home sites I've had (and probably the Syndicate more than any other) is that different game requirements force your skill set into all sorts of directions. It creates a challenge for self to have to adapt to whatever the game throws at me, and doing my best to figure out how to meet that challenge is for me far more satisfying than winning itself (even if it means flame outs like, for instance, my recruitment flame out).

And, JJ... if you are anything like me, I reckon that even in games where dead people don't 'win'... you'll take one for the team. I've never minded losing if it gets my team the win. It's all about perspective anyway, I think. I'd usually sooner be dead and see my faction win than be still alive when the other faction wins. I don't think you should rule out different kinds of games... you should take them for what they are... and you are right that in some ways they are not 'mafia', not in its purest form. They are something else. But they are still something really fun.

FZ, are you going to tell us who your peek was?

I don't think you were obviously cop, but I did think you were the most townie looking. Maybe that's why.

Hey, look at Floyd... he is making civvie-like posts.

I thought FZ was supatown

Welcome to spectator chat, FZ.

Dunno how you took so many votes brian. That lynch was bizarre. What, for pointing out that a no lynch isn't that civ-helpful?

Golden wrote:Baddies = tranq, zebra, bea

I'm swapping out tranq for luke. Luke, zebra, bea.

I don't really understand why zebras vote is on brian.

I think we would have a murder in the spectator chat if I did!

Changing my vote for zebra. I agree JJ. Zebra is twitching my nose, like he is trying to sound as civvie as possible.

Baddies = tranq, zebra, bea

Oh, sorry... you are right that the coin flip decided russti would die and the game would end.

I meant when MP said what would happen if the town had lost the coin toss. There would have been a 96% chance of MM surviving, and then he would have won the subsequent vote. So the game wasn't really decided on that one coin toss.

Well, it was a coin toss that the town had a 96% chance of winning. That's some coin!

I like FZ already, one good supatown post under her belt.

Obviously Metalmarsh should be lynched. It's day one.

Are votes changeable?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Thanks, Golden. Definitely feels good to finally win a dang game.

Yes, and being alive too, even with standard TS rules you were in.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:It seems to be working.

I derped the OT spectator posting rule before it was rescinded. Oh well, it should be a fun game.

I posted "First"!!! And I was first!!! And MP deleted it!!!

lol, you and me both, in other words, JJ.

Grats on that awesome TH performance, btw.

I feel for Matt F. I thought I read the rules too.

First.