The Syndicate

Yay boo game

FZ. wrote:Whoa, this seems like one complicated game.

I didn't understand the part about how we advance on the board. Can you explain that again, please?

I have played a lot of boos games (all of them, iirc?) and they CAN seem complex at first glance (maybe even second) but usually the complexities wrinkle out by the end of Day One. So so long as you are paying attention the first day & night you should get the hang of it pretty quick. This one actually seems a bit more straightforward than is usual for boo. I don't see much in the way of secrets, so there's that

So now is the time to read the mechanics and ask questions.

And Keys point is something to consider:

keys56000000000 wrote:Sup players

I have a question. It says civvies without BTSC win together if everyone else is dead, and that civvies with BTSC can only win with their BTSC teammates. Does that mean that civvies without BTSC are in competition with civvies with BTSC? That one group needs to eliminate the other to win? If that's the case, I don't understand the incentive to find my BTSC partner/s. Perhaps us civilians will be stronger if we don't attempt to gain BTSC with each other?

I don't know if that would work, voluntarily not searching, becasue then we can't build hotels and eliminate people through eviction (death via being unable to pay the rent). ALTHOUGH, numerically, we would be more likely to be eliminating other civs than baddies that way. I am not sure if there IS a way to manipulate this game that way, and if there is I am not sure we can trust people to actually do it; almost everyone like being an Indy

boo said: Civvies (22):
Each night, every civvie will search another player. If they find a player who matches their colour/set (ie, the Mediterranean Avenue player searches Baltic Avenue player) they get BTSC. Once all the players of a set have BTSC, they may start buying houses and hotels (making double the posted value until they put up their first house). A set that has (at any point) all living players together will cease to be considered a civvie set, and become a LMSing group.

This was in the sign up thread:

- A monopoly will be when a group of players with BTSC (or a single player) manages to own all properties along the side of the board their original property was on.

So then, @boo~basically the goal, for a color based BTS group, is to eliminate the other color groups on their side of the board? Like if the Marvin Gardens (yellow) team managed to gobble up the Illinois Avenue team (red)? Would there be more of an advantage for doing this, than say, the Marvin Gardens/yellow team gaining, say, The Baltic Ave group? (This last part is more rhetorical/aimed at the other players than at you, boo)

Or should I not be mixing up mechanics from different threads?

Also, @boo~

During the night, the card of the lynched player will be bid for (players who voted for the lynched player will have $200 applied to their bid, but they can’t actually access that money for anything else). The player who bids the most for the card will receive it. Successful NKs will result in the player responsible for the NK getting the card of the killer player. The bid is done publicly (in thread).

At any point, a player with a card they do not want may PM the host, to offer it to the thread. They may either set a flat sell price, or set a minimum bid, and how long they want the bid to last (a maximum of 24 hours). You may not sell your starting property (as that would kill you). You can also just say you'll accept trades, and people can offer properties (or you can specify which one you want) or whatever else.

So the bidding is public for lynched cards? Is the bidding public for offered cards as well? Won't public bidding tend to out people on various sides of the board? Like if I was to bid for both Illinois & Indiana at various times, wouldn't that clue people in that I could be Marvin Gardens?

Or am I foolishly missing something very very obvious? A totally possible thing

Thank you for answers boo.

Degobunny wrote:I am finding it really hard to post on this site. Every time I finish writing something I need to login again and it erases what I typed out on my pad.

When you log in, do you have "Log me on automatically each visit" checked? The last person this happened to resolved the issue by clicking that. If you do have that checked, then not sure what about this site would be causing that.

And not sure about bidding on any of these yet, initially I want to be more conservative with my money.

And I am still trying to figure out which option, search for partners or NOT search for partners, would benefit the rail/utilities more. Standard civvies, no BTS with purchased powers, but civvie win conditions OR indies building monopolies and potential hotels that will require the baddies to shell out real $$? I think FZ asked this question originally, and I don't think anyone really addressed the issue.

I definitely think that discussing what would most benefit the baddies should be the big topic.

Standard civvies would make it easier for the non-rails/utils to win, but going the other route might make it HARDER for the baddies to win, might present more competition. I could see going wither way, although, I find it unlikely that every civ will agree to do the non search thing, pretty much rendering it moot. Because you can pledge not to search all you want, if someone else finds you, it still affects your status & win conditions.

@boo~ if someone who is the member of a completed monopoly is lynched, will their Monopoly status as well as their card be revealed? Since being in a monopoly has effected their win conditions, and they are no longer really a "civ"? And if the member of a monopoly is deaded, does the remainder of the team revert to civ, or are they still a LMS team?

I need to reread the rail/util sections of the host posts.

At this point I am most leery of people implying that those who disagree with their strategy of not searching are bad. I think that keeping the civvies as unempowered vanillas with no earning ability plays right into the hands of the rails/utilities.

Even the implication that playing the game within its design is somehow "cheating" feels very off to me.

I also play mafia for fun as much as for wins, and actually playing seems mor fun to me

Keys I think it likely that only one or two, maybe three groups will complete their sets.

Searching is a very haphazard way to form teams and i believe most of us will remain vanilla civs .

Why would this make you want to stop posting?

Keys it almost seems like you are implying that we do it your way, or you are going to stop playing? Before you said you would stop posting, or might as well stop posting, now you are saying you will find somewhere else to play? I am not understanding your meaning in saying this. We do it your way or you won't play anymore?

I also want to take Boos game seriously, and take full advantage of the awesome mechanics he devised. I am not sure how that would be not taking the game seriously.

I asked this earlier, and I don't see that anyone has had an opinion of this~ what would benefit the known baddies, the rails/utilities, most? If we try to stay un-monopolized, or if we try to form monopolies?

fingersplints wrote:

Long Con wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I asked this earlier, and I don't see that anyone has had an opinion of this~ what would benefit the known baddies, the rails/utilities, most? If we try to stay un-monopolized, or if we try to form monopolies?

Trying to find our teammates will hurt the baddies more, because it will tell some Civvies who other Civvies are, and they can defend each other.

If I am understanding this correctly though, it won't tell civvies who other civvies are, because they won't be civvies anymore though, yes?

If only limited BTS forms, then those people remain civ. And the odds of that are high since 3 people searching for each other actually finding each other is slim. The two properties with only 2 cards have the highest chance of forming an actual monopoly. I think we are putting the cart before the horse here.

The thing that is confusing me, I guess, is all the worrying people are doing about what MIGHT happen if civs form monopolies and become indies rather than worrying about two actual baddie teams that have kills. And I just reread the Utilities, those guys are super powerful. They know roles, plus they have a bidding advantage if those known cards come up for sale.

So people finger pointing already over *might* strikes me as worrisome. And I think that vanilla civvies with no earning power are sitting ducks for the baddies. But last I looked it was a free country (at least the various countries we all come from seem to be somewhat free in varying degrees) so if people choose to not search, that's cool. But i don't want people telling me I am suspicious becasue I want to search.

keys56000000000 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Keys it almost seems like you are implying that we do it your way, or you are going to stop playing? Before you said you would stop posting, or might as well stop posting, now you are saying you will find somewhere else to play? I am not understanding your meaning in saying this. We do it your way or you won't play anymore?

I introduced the idea of a union because I thought it would be a fun tie-in with the game's theme, and what I thought might have been a good strategy. I pushed it because it wouldn't work without support. Like I said to Nijuukyugou, I don't know where you got the impression that I'm telling you what to do. I don't know if that's you being overdramatic, or if you can actually go back and quote where I've told you what to do. I've just stated the plain fact that new teams aren't civilians. Am I losing my mind here? I've certainly never intended to imply that if you do not do things my way I will stop playing. To be frank, the constant bullshit misunderstandings -- I'm asking people to cheat, I'm forcing people to play my way, I'm trying to take the fun out of the game -- is getting irksome and is why I would consider not playing here.

I am sorry if I came across that way to you; sometimes I do not sound as clear as I think I do . When I said "cheating" I did not mean *actual cheating* it in that context; I meant that I did not like the idea that people searching for their partners as the game is designed, would be indicative of baddieness, as opposed to lynching actual baddies. I mainly used that word as it was used previously (and not by you):

FZ. wrote:

FZ. wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

keys56000000000 wrote:Llama, it's cool that you're invoking Nash equilibrium, I dig it. However, unless you can show me the spreadsheets where you've gone over every potential scenario in the game, just saying "game theory" doesn't actually mean much. You need to have studied this particular game to know its theory.

You don't. You just need to understand that when individual interest trumps group interest and there's no way to detect cheaters, individual interest wins out.

I think it's a very, very, very poorly considered strategy to focus our lynches on trying to prevent Monopolies. The mafia can prevent monopolies just fine using their kills. Lynches are the only way we have to kill off the railroads and utilities.

Isn't that what we have in most mafia games?

The fact that there's no way to detect cheaters doesn't mean we can't do it. If we all agree that ideally, not forming BTSC is better for the civvies, then we don't need to find cheaters because that's not our worry.

And tbh, I never said I suspected YOU or thought you were forcing people to play your way~ I was trying to understand your meaning. If you feel that you want to stop playing, then I wanted to make sure you did not feel that I was forcing YOU. I certainly never said you were trying to take the fun out of the game, I just said what was fun for ME. Questioning what people say is a big part of Mafia. Again, sorry if I was not clear. What sounds good when I type it sometimes comes across as confrontational, I guess.

Actually, like Lorab, I had someone else in mind, not you at all, over this. I need to make sure I am not remembering it as worse than it actually was, though.

fingersplints wrote:

Black Rock wrote:You guys sure like to keep it interesting... or distracting. We'll see how it goes.

haha I was just thinking this too

Yeah, me three. I have no intention of looking for the letter "S" etc.

Go into your user control panel, Board Preferences (third tab from the left) and select your time zone from the drop down and click or unclick Daylight Savings/Summer time. This should reset the poll and the board time as well to your time. It ends approximately 15 hours & 15 mins from now.

And I was talking about searching for your Monopoly card partners; there is some discussion that finding your BTS partners and forming monopolies (which turn the players who form them from civvies to LMS indies) will weaken the civvies and reduce all of our chances of winning; basically what is more beneficial for the group vs what is more beneficial for the individual members of the group.

And as for bidding, I think keeping an eye on it will be prudent, I may even start a spreadsheet (!!!) because keeping track of who landed on utilities will not be easy (last night apparently 3 landed on a utility, but off the top of my head, I only recall 2).

Forty Five minutes to vote. Of the people with votes, I have seen Epi do the weird crap act as a civ too many times to think he's bad for it this time. He might be, but it's too early to tell. I don't mind the no "S" anywhere near as much as the "$" since it is easier to ignore the lack of something, so i don't find it all that distractionary, I actually forgot about it until Mongoose brought it up again.

I am going to vote Made, that felt like a slip. He understood the mechanics enough to start bidding on powers with his second post. None of the other people with votes strike me as all that suspicious.

He was a freaking baddie!!!!!

Awesome

@boo

Team 1: Railroads (4)
Each night, every member of this team searches for another member of the team. If they find anyone on their team, they get BTSC. Searching continues until all 4 find each other, unless any of them get lynched. None of the 4 can be nightkilled until all living members have BTSC. They kill odd nights, with the kill randomly being assigned to one member each night, until they all have BTSC, at which point it will specifically be assigned to one member.

Does this mean that they can no longer search? Or am I reading into it? If it DOES mean they do not continue to search, are they then not able to be NKed permanently?

zeek wrote:Cya Made Why is anyone bidding on his card? It's hardly useful, is it?

I looked over the rent list for B & O, and the rails get double the rent of owning 3 rails for owning all 4 http://monopoly.wikia.com/wiki/B._%26_O._Railroad (assuming they can collect by owning the 4th card when the 4th member is dead? boo??). So, keeping it out of the hands of the other rails can't hurt.

$250

Not sure I want to spend the night talking about the person I trust most.

I didn't think of that

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

juliets wrote:Metalmarsh while you're here would you answer my question from yesterday? Why did you vote long Con?

For a potential extra $200 added to my bid if he would have been lynched. Nothing more. If I had come back on before the lynch, I would have changed to Made, but at the time, Epi had the lead over any other player 3-1.

And I did not want to lynch Epi today, and LC had voted him.

So you think a vote for Epi makes someone a baddie?

Yay

And no I am not able to discuss my first role.

I kind of followed along, so won't have to do much to get up to speed after work tonight. The current match ups are interesting and I THINK I have an opinion on all of them, but want to read more before I comment.

FWIW I would have voted for FZ as well, I wish she would have asked for replacement rather than, essentially, suiciding.

Epignosis wrote:

LoRab wrote:I'll go with here:

Epignosis wrote:No...that theory cannot be a good one.

Cannot be good means that it has no redeeming qualities. Or possibility to be accurate. Or the possibility that someone could agree with it. That is belittling, not just disagreeing.

Or it could mean I can't utilize a certain letter.

No... it means you CHOOSE not to use a certain letter. You are not under a posting restriction, and saying this is just making excuses, imo, for posting things others may question otherwise. It's why I don't like it when you do things like this. It makes it easy to hide behind it. In my experience with you, it does not mean you are bad, and i don't suspect you for it; nor does it really effect my opinion on you vs Lorab (I am leaning civ/civ at this time pending a deeper reread).

It isn't "CAN'T". It's "WON'T". And that makes a big difference.

But I think invoking your self imposed "curse" as an excuse for being hurtful (and you had to have rolled your eyes when I subbed back in, knowing i would read it that way) is weak. You may choose to ignore my opinion, and similar opinions. I am sure you will do so. But in Mafia we give our opinions, and that is mine.

And that's all I have to say about that (*Grabs box of chocolates, sits on bench*)

I thought she was bad on day one myself, though. Plus, to me, reading along, the "lynch me I suck" defense felt like a baddie ploy. I felt that if she was a civvie she would have asked to be replaced. I would have voted for her, tbh.

fingersplints wrote: RIPIYWG BR

She probably was~ it is unlikely the remaining rails other than Made found each other, although possible, I guess.

Turnip Head wrote:Rest in peace BR!

thellama73 wrote:

boo wrote:Sorry everyone, was having internet issues when I got home so had to get that sorted out. The post will be a little while because I still have to do rolls and check a bunch of PMs.

Can we have the post now please? I want to see if my team's kill was succes---OH NO I DON'T MEAN THAT! WHAT HAVE I SAID?

Llama made a jokey post like this when we were baddie buddies in Harry Potter Concerning.

Really? I don't recall, I just remember how Llamaesque his sock was, lol. But that IS an interesting point. Anyone recall Llama doing a similar thing when bad? Or civ, for that matter? I don't always notice things like that about Llama, I tend to specialize in the anti-low poster aspect of his game. Has he brought that up yet this game? And that brings me to...

I reread Sabies 3 posts consisting of confusion and mentioning the "favorite capitalism" stuff boo asked for Day One (I am pretty sure she did not send anything in~ I don't think she sent any PMs in from what I was told). So I don't think I have anything to address from replacing her, but if I do, plz let me know.

Boogs is someone I have issues reading at times; he keeps up that Kitty persona, and it is something it is easy to hide behind~ it is cute. So I am curious what you saw that he said that you in turn discounted, TH. "I think Boogs is gonna kill me" is a pretty strong statement, and I am curious about what led you to it, even if you think now that you may have been incorrect.

zeek wrote:Aren't you dead, S~V~S?

Disappointed to see me back?

Why would we rather lynch a hypothetical Indy than look for baddies? You know, the guys with the kills?

MovingPictures07 wrote:Boogs is acting strange, but I'm not sure he's bad.

S~V~S wrote:Why would we rather lynch a hypothetical Indy than look for baddies? You know, the guys with the kills?

Interesting question, S~V~S.

1) I've already said there's a possibility LC and Llama are railroads. Care to address how you know that to not be true?
2) What baddie hunting have you done?

I just replaced back il for Sabie yesterday; I was killed night one. So not very much. If you suspect me, you haven't either.

And I don't "know it". But that seems to be the implication, doesn't it? I don't think Llama is bad. Not sure re LC, but I sm not seeing bad Llama.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Boogs is acting strange, but I'm not sure he's bad.

S~V~S wrote:Why would we rather lynch a hypothetical Indy than look for baddies? You know, the guys with the kills?

Interesting question, S~V~S.

1) I've already said there's a possibility LC and Llama are railroads. Care to address how you know that to not be true?
2) What baddie hunting have you done?

I just replaced back il for Sabie yesterday; I was killed night one. So not very much. If you suspect me, you haven't either.

And I don't "know it". But that seems to be the implication, doesn't it? I don't think Llama is bad. Not sure re LC, but I sm not seeing bad Llama.

Okay, sure, but why would you ask such a question if you're doing no looking of your own? You haven't stated a single suspect. Also, your deflection of "if you suspect me, you haven't either" is ridiculous. I'm obviously making attempts to baddie hunt. I was gone until D2 or so myself, so you have no excuse. My case on FZ. My case on Llama and LC. My thoughts on you and JC. My attempts to start discussion. So how dare you try to imply that because I suspect you I'm not baddie hunting?

If you don't know it, why did you ask that question? You asked it as if you either know or strongly believe LC and Llama to be LMS and not railroads.

I asked it becasue that was what Boogs has been talking about, how the Indy teams are just as bad as the actual baddies, if not worse. And he is not the only one.

I am not you, so saying "Look at all the baddie hunting I have done" yada yada yada does not mean anyone who does less than you is bad. And I don't need an excuse, nor did I make one. You asked a question, I answered it.

And don't say stuff like "how dare you", there is no need for adversarial language like that. Please don't talk to me that way.

If you are going to eyeball me, do it in context. that quote you took of mine:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Boogs is acting strange, but I'm not sure he's bad.

S~V~S wrote:Why would we rather lynch a hypothetical Indy than look for baddies? You know, the guys with the kills?

Interesting question, S~V~S.

1) I've already said there's a possibility LC and Llama are railroads. Care to address how you know that to not be true?
2) What baddie hunting have you done?

THIS was the post right before it. I was joining this conversation, and had noting to do with your awesome case, or with any knowledge of any specific roles..

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Boogs wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm not sure how I feel about this MM push. There are other players one could say are as equally contributing as MM.

Splints, can you tell me how you feel about keys at the moment, and vice versa?

What do players think of juliets?

I'm keeping my vote where it is.

I agree MP. I don't like the sudden change to MM but I also don't like so many people being quiet also. I think LC is the way to go and if he flips Civ, we have more Cred now to trust Llama. FZ was like a random train and I can see MM being that way too for us wasting a Civ getting lynched.

Ummmmm...what?

If we lynch LC and he flips civ, that doesn't necessarily mean he isn't llama's teammate.

I mean, sure, a railroad would be fine with winning that bet. But your train of logic doesn't suggest either way whether or not llama and LC are teammates. First you think we should be lynching people who have bought powers and properties, and now this. Is your logic meter broken this game? Because I really don't understand where you're coming from at all.

What the fuck are you talking about? How am I responding? This is exactly what a civvie SVS would do. Shes doing it.

I did not mean to say you were not baddie hunting, how I meant it to sound was that if you think I am bad, you are not successfully baddie hunting. And I don't care if you said you are sorry, you sound incredibly aggressive and hostile, tbh.

Just calm down.

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:What the fuck are you talking about? How am I responding? This is exactly what a civvie SVS would do. Shes doing it.

I did not mean to say you were not baddie hunting, how I meant it to sound was that if you think I am bad, you are not successfully baddie hunting. And I don't care if you said you are sorry, you sound incredibly aggressive and hostile, tbh.

Just calm down.

Fair enough. I am not being hostile, I am only trying to find baddies. I do apologize if I offended you or seemed unnecessarily hostile. I don't intend to do so. But I was really bothered by the fact that you would ask such a question (which I didn't realize was targeted at Boogs) followed by an implication that I'm not baddie hunting.

I'm more than willing to take a step back from the situation and reevaluate. But your responses have just sounded not genuine to me. I just realized I couldn't even vote you today if I wanted to, anyway.

Not genuine in what way, MP? Most of them were from phone, I had a lot of stuff to do after work and just got home maybe 30 minutes ago. But I never said you were not baddie hunting, I was kinda trying to make a joke with you about you doing a bad job of it if you suspect me, but I guess that fell flat.

My intention tonight was to reread Zeek becasue of his reaction to me being alive again, and then his next post where he said, after I asked him if he was disappointed to have me back, basically, "No of course not. Now lets talk about this other thing." I had planned to reread him, but the thread had exploded with all this LC/Llama business.

At this point, the main case seems to be that they appear to have BTSC, right? I did not read all of those long ass posts, can you give me the tl;dr summary?

Boogs wrote:This changes my whole perception of the situation that LC could have been a color set, and that in fact he could have auto searched a Railroad if Llama was already found. I agree his behavior was iffy on Day 0 and I agree with MP on the total turnabout on Llama. He did a fake back and forth with Bullzeye in Monty where i didn't bite on it too much and they played me at the end when they were distancing teammates. I would NOT put past LC to do it here again with Llama. Not to mention Llama and him having fake arguments today on "don't ruin my game" and stuff to now them not after each other again and focusing lights on me and MM to get out of the radar.

So you want to lynch them whether they are baddies or LMS? LMS without a kill is better than a civvie, but i would still rather find a baddie. And even if we are to accept that they have BTS now, how do you know it is baddie BTS, not civvie BTS?

Did either LC or Llama land on a utility?

Epignosis wrote:

Boogs wrote:Epignosis I counted that you had the last vote to win that dice at the end. If not you, then who outbid you that I missed after? Also, BWT is notable on your finding of flopping like a trout. Something to keep in mind on discussion for tomorrow.

Discussion for tomorrow? Why not today?

You don't drive the train.

Remember?

I have to agree; why wait? We should discuss all options, not just one. I read BWT fairly well; I also thought the BR analysis was pretty pointless. But usually he plays a fairly blendy bad game, no real substance in his posts, and casual one liner vote posts, not the opposite. He could have switched it up, though.

And yeah, pointing out all the people you think are civvie as opposed to those you think are baddie would be the safest use for the Utilities power. Buddying up rather than leading lynches. I was thinking more in terms of leading lynches and getting cred, but that would also be a way to get suspicion. I am sure I am not the only one looking for a case to be made on someone who landed on a Utility for just that reason.

I would also consider Metalmarsh~ he has seemed more about bidding and the "S" thing than about discussing baddies, but I want to reread the case on him a bit. I should have more time tonight for posting (we are getting my house ready to put on the market, plus we are in the middle of being acquired at work, so AAAARRRGG!! somewhat frazzled) and should be able to do more catch up reading at work .

Epi, when I first replaced back in, you seemed to be gunning for LoRab~ now it is BWT. Do you think they are both bad? Sorry if you have already answered this~ I have not read the thread in depth yet, just specific people and some skimming, reacting to the most recent post, etc.

Also, TH, I know you were suspecting LC pretty hard; what is your opinion of llama? And same, sorry if this is redundant, I saw that you were asked this question, but I have not yet found your answer.

fingersplints wrote:

Boogs wrote:

fingersplints wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I was kinda trying to make a joke with you about you doing a bad job of it if you suspect me, but I guess that fell flat.

I got it.

Boogs wrote:Mp I feel like a total dumb cat. I re-ead and realized that Railroads Do NOT start with BTSC like mafia usually do, only the utilities do. So it makes total sense now Llama and LC are railroads and they found the third with the auto search. I was under the impression of normal rules that Baddies start with BtSC. I am on it now buddy and same page. Let's get them.

That seems incredibly lucky that they happened to find each other N1. And then just blatantly buddied up in the thread for no other reason then to flaunt their btsc. This doesn't fit the style of either of them.

It seems like you are changing why LC is bad to fit this. It doesn't make sense to me.

Also, I feel like this is incredibly distracting and that you have a one track mind at this point, which is keeping us away from discussing the rest of the players.

I'm keeping you from discussing? wow lol. Because you know I have a little voodoo doll controlling you and all in my left hand. You can do whatever the hell you want. I am bringing some real discussion on lynching rather than just everyone showing up to vote for the top voter because they are lazy like FZ yesterday. There have been plenty of other name mentioned to lynch Splints besides me suggesting LC. Don't get it twisted, sister.

This is an incredible overreaction.

Do you not think most of the discussion has centered around LC? llama being connected to LC? Who suspects LC and doesn't? Because, I do. I didn't say that has been ALL of the discussion, but a vast majority of the players are falling through the cracks.

Do you honestly not see why baddies would want to keep the conversation centered around a few individuals? With your little voodoo doll comment you are acting like this notion isn't something that comes up regularly in games.

Did I just show up to vote FZ? Here's a suggestion. Why don't we look at those players who did just show up to vote FZ and cared more about the money then lynching baddies, instead of this crusade you have started against players who bought something.

I was trying to entertain the fact that this might be a civvie you, but this defensiveness really isn't doing you any favors.

<3 Thank You~ sometimes my sense of humor is so dry, it doesn't even seem to exist

I reread Boogs last night, and it does seem to me like Boogs just wants to get rid of LC since he fooled him in Python. That makes me unhappy since I get lynched for variations of that myself, but it does not necessarily make Boogs bad. While I disagree with him for the most part at this point, I am nt sure I will be voting for him, and after my last death, I won't be doing any night bidding anytime soon, so am not too concerned about the $200.

I started my reread of Zeek this AM, and have to say, he does not seem like the same guy we had in Dr Who. Helluva lot quieter.

For me, LC has a certain "feel" when he's bad, he just feels phony. He feels like a salesman, like he's giving you a hearty handshake, slightly TOO hearty (I don't think I have ever articulated this before). He's a little edgier, slightly snarkier, more real when he's good. He feels on the level to me at this point.

Boogs, I think, has an agenda. It is an agenda I have seen from lots of people myself, the "Oh My God, You Screwed me SO BAD In the Last Game, I Can Never Trust You Again". He wants LC to be bad, and that's that. If anything I think that makes him more likely to be civvie rather than less.

At this pint, I am looking at MM, BWT & Zeek. I might table Zeek for now as I think this is gonna be tight and less spread is better than more, IMO.

BWT is DOING & saying all kinds of baddie things. But he is not acting like bad BWT all that much. Llama is calling him blendy, but bad BWT is blendy like Faraday blendy. BUT he could have switched it up. I hope he comes back. The case is good but my gut is waffling.

MM has said almost nothing that can be pinned down. He is agreeable, and seems to vote for people based totally on reasons other than whether or not they are bad.

Zeek has struck me as playing a very smooth, non spotlight style game. He is also not saying much of substance. I poked him twice, and his reaction was the same both times.

zeek wrote:

S~V~S wrote:I started my reread of Zeek this AM, and have to say, he does not seem like the same guy we had in Dr Who. Helluva lot quieter.

This is not-my-first-game-since-coming-out-of-retirement-Zeek. I'm sorry I'm not more like MP this game, but thats not my usual style anyway.

Speaking of MP, he's passionate every game I've played with him, so I'm not really seeing how he's different this game. He often hammers home his theories.

So, on my radar at the moment are BWT, LC, llama and Boogs.

I feel LC has acquitted himself well since the theories about him and llama have been put out there and I'm pretty happy not voting for him at the moment. He's seemed pretty genuine to me. llama is a different story. Still unsure about him but maybe not enough to vote there right now. I find the "you know me better than that" thing suspect though. I don't know him, why even say it?

BWT has a fair few empty posts and as pointed out he did say he'd only bid on property he felt was worth having. There's little reason to want the property he did bid for unless you're railroad. He also far outbid me for win an auction, when there was no need to go that high. I believe he has a bit of spare cash, makes me wonder how he got it.

Boogs has been acting suspicious the way he advocates lynching people with powers or has BTSC. He says the crux of his case is he thinks LC and llama are mafia but I'm not sure I believe that anymore. He may be trying to eliminate any strength developing within the civs. We need BTSC atm, so theres more trust. That can be a problem for endgame, once the Mafia are gone.

So yeah, may go BWT or Boogs today. My eye is still on llama.

That whole, "Speaking of MP..." feels like such a subject change. "Yeah I'm not bad, now lets move along, nothing to see here". This is totally gut and feels, but this was pretty much the same:

S~V~S wrote:

zeek wrote:Aren't you dead, S~V~S?

Disappointed to see me back?

zeek wrote:Of course not

I haven't played much with llama really, four cycles in Zelda but I was quite busy and couldn't follow the game fully. Even less with Boogs, she died before I did in that game. I do think the kitty thing is easy to hide behind though. Is this something she does when she's bad?

I'm interested in hearing from keys, as he's been very quiet after the searching debate and not said much about suspicions.

"Of course not

Now lets talk about something else. " is how that reads to me. But like I said, I will revisit this tomorrow.

Linki, not sure how I feel about that. But it did lead me to conclude that I feel more strongly about Metalmarsh~

I talked myself into an MM vote.

I know, plus he is not here, it is like o'dark:30 in the UK now, right? So this is for another day. But that's a good point, about never having been a baddie, I had forgotten he said that. And if he was a rail (and that is who killed SVS 1.0) then he would not have BTS, at least not initially. Which would make it even harder.

I could be wrong, I was not looking at him at all until he made that post about me being dead. He *sounded* how I feel in games when someone I killed comes back. I might have totally dropped it if he had not reacted to it the way he did. Twice now.

Juliets, he posted just as much when he was a civ, though. And it is not just a matter of post count, his content feels blendier to me. He could also be pulling back from that behavior. But like I said, it is totally gut. I usually trust my gut, but at this stage, I would be surprised if anyone else did.

And Keys, I don't think you are disrespecting boo the best part of being a host is seeing what the players do with your playground. A few times I have been disappointed that a fun mechanic did not play out the way I wanted, but overall, I know I have always enjoyed watching players do things with my mechanics that i never thought of myself, and i am sure boo is the same. I never suspected you for it, although you seemed to have thought I did. Actually, I suspected FZ for it I thought she was buddying you.

I asked him that Day One, and he said you just come back as your card.

And thanks for the input on Zeek, MP. It is just a *feel* for me, as soon as I saw his post, I was like, "That's who killed me". I could be wrong, but that was how it felt, and how it still does feel to me.

Juliets, didn't you play Dr Who before zeek was recruited? So you have experienced him as a civ. He transitioned pretty flawlessly.

Here was boos answer~

boo wrote:

S~V~S wrote:

Degobunny wrote:I am finding it really hard to post on this site. Every time I finish writing something I need to login again and it erases what I typed out on my pad.

When you log in, do you have "Log me on automatically each visit" checked? The last person this happened to resolved the issue by clicking that. If you do have that checked, then not sure what about this site would be causing that.

And not sure about bidding on any of these yet, initially I want to be more conservative with my money.

And I am still trying to figure out which option, search for partners or NOT search for partners, would benefit the rail/utilities more. Standard civvies, no BTS with purchased powers, but civvie win conditions OR indies building monopolies and potential hotels that will require the baddies to shell out real $$? I think FZ asked this question originally, and I don't think anyone really addressed the issue.

I definitely think that discussing what would most benefit the baddies should be the big topic.

Standard civvies would make it easier for the non-rails/utils to win, but going the other route might make it HARDER for the baddies to win, might present more competition. I could see going wither way, although, I find it unlikely that every civ will agree to do the non search thing, pretty much rendering it moot. Because you can pledge not to search all you want, if someone else finds you, it still affects your status & win conditions.

@boo~ if someone who is the member of a completed monopoly is lynched, will their Monopoly status as well as their card be revealed? Since being in a monopoly has effected their win conditions, and they are no longer really a "civ"? And if the member of a monopoly is deaded, does the remainder of the team revert to civ, or are they still a LMS team?

I need to reread the rail/util sections of the host posts.

Just the card. The remainder stays LMS (and will want to try and keep the lynched teammates property). They would still be allowed to build houses and hotels on their properties, but the equal building rule would require that if someone who wasn't them picked up the lynched players property, they build on it as well (so 1 house, 1 house, 0 house, would prevent from building a second until the 0 had 1 built). The person who got the property without knowing they were getting one that had had all of them together (meaning no houses had been built) wouldn't find out until someone landed on that space (since the amount of rent they would receive is doubled) or a house was built (although with the rent doubled, if you pay attention to the linked board movements, you could see that it was already that way if anyone landed on any of the properties in the monopoly).

There are however also powers that relate to this sort of thing that may come into play, so that won't all be true 100% of the time.

thellama73 wrote:SVS, what do you make of Alex this game? I think he is acting weird, but I don't know that weird = bad.

I think he's acting pretty much just like he acted at the beginning of Dr Who. This is how he acts now

linki~ ooooh now llama is pulling out the technical jargon, lol. Brings back fond memories of being raked over in Harry Potter.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I also don't understand how my behavior in this game or DW is any different than my civvie behavior of the past, so I'm intrigued why people seem to think that's the case.

It has no bearing on THIS game, so remind me post game and I will tell you what I am talking about. I also need time to think about it; it's hard to explain.

thellama73 wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote: Fair enough, I'll consider this. Thanks for responding. Can I ask why you are just saying things though?

Thank you. All I ask is that you think things through instead of acting rashly. In answer to your question, there are two reasons.
1) It amuses me.
2) This is a big, complex game taking place during a month where free time is scarce for me. It was originally my intention to ride out the first few days without doing much in order to think the herd and have a more manageable group size. I have inadvertently gotten sucked in more than I intended to though. The case making will pick up after there is more of a vote record and when there are fewer people to make consider.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Also, while I understand your point, the game of mafia is sometimes much more about deception than incentives. What incentive would you have had for gunning after your only civvie-appearing teammate ALL of American Gods? I could ask plenty of incentive questions not only to you but also myself and other players who have been baddies before and have defied the most straightforward cases of action.

Deception doesn't matter more than incentives. Deception is an incentive. That's like saying money matters more than incentives.

With regard to American Gods, I had multiple reasons for playing that the way I did. Mainly, I wanted to appear consistent (it kept me from getting lynched, didn't it?) I was confident that he was in no real danger of dying, I was confident that if he did die it would not be a game ending blow to my team, and it was really, really funny.

Also, it convinced SVS that I always throw teammates under the bus, even though that is literally the only time I have done it, so that is worth something. I can't speak for the others you mentioned, as I do not know the particulars, but I guarantee they had good reasons.

You ALWAYS say this and you are wrong. What convinced me you throw people under the bus was Grimms. You were the harshest teammate ever in that game, throwing people under the bus just in case. I thought you were the most horrible person ever, lol (I changed my mind ). My opinions on you & Greyhound have nothing to do with AG.

It certainly would not be the low posters.

Yay you guys who voted BWT !

Welcome Bea

So the second Electric is now an SK, essentially. @boo~ will we be told if a team is eliminated (even by NK) and what happens to the kill if it is eliminated? This is pretty standard stuff, but we have some unusual mechanics, and a two person baddie team, so it can't hurt to ask.

And Metalmarsh, this also got my eye from you~ you said it while I was dead, and at the time I was surprised when no one really noticed it. I had forgotten it until I saw it again in a multiquote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Long Con wrote:Of course, I'd just like to say right now (for any murderous, property-hungry baddies that are reading) that if I ever win the bid for a property, it will IMMEDIATELY be put up for private trade, and be gone from my possession before the next night kill lands.

What if I don't believe you?

What LC said here was addressed to baddies, and you replied to it. I thought that was weird.

@LoRab~ I am older than you, and it flew right over my head. So

bea wrote:

thellama73 wrote:Points to bea for posting 11 times in a row.

$10 on rob.

what - I'm just trying to catsup as fast as I can - and this vote ends sat?? fuck's sake. I'll keep doing my best to keep reading

Not sure why you had to shut her down

i was looking forward to hearing Beas take on the rest of the thread.

Long Con wrote:
HOWEVER... why has no one mentioned Hedgeowl's survival? Turnip Head, did you use your protect on her? 'Cause otherwise... she's a baddie. Right? I don't know why it hasn't been mentioned yet.

This, it's the first thing I did when I went back into the thread is look to see who died in the night. But I only see two ways to NOT be nightkilled by the rails other than that protect LC mentions; being a Utility, or being a Rail. Which is possible being as they may not have full BTS yet.

But for now, I am going to vote for Hedgeowl, as i am not sure how she can be other than bad. If something plausible comes up explaining it, awesome, votes changeable.

Now I have to reread the thread back through the end of the last day; I came home early from work yesterday with some kind of virus or something, and went to bed early. I called in sick today, so will have catch up time.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Or, there's this.

boo wrote:Night 1 Event: I have a list of 24 powers currently (there are some more that are locked up because I'm RNGing everything and don't want them to be able to get listed yet). You may PM a power description you think is one of the 24 that is not 1 of the three already confirmed (or protect/roleblock), and if you're right, you will get 1 extra vote you may send in during any lynch. If you submit one that is not on the list but I like enough to put onto the list, you get 2 any time votes.

And...he's been auctioning them off. Publicly. Lets clarify this point.

@boo~ Are these 24 powers just being given out behind the scenes, or are they the ones being auctioned?

Has Hedgeowl won an auction?

You did not get my post in linkitis? I posted a good 30 seconds before you did.

It seemed like a reasonable response to me lol

While we are both here, Metalmarsh, what do you think of Hedges survival? Do you think there is a plausible reason why she could have susrvived an NK other than being a baddie?

Lol, I missed YOU in linki as well. Well, changeable votes.

@boo~ Was this a one use protection, or is it a nightly/daily power? It reads like a one time use to me, but better safe than sorry, because it really could be read either way I guess.

3rd) Protect (Can be used to protect a person of your choice at night if you pick during a day, and remove a person of your choice from being on the lynch poll if used at night) - $50 start

If it is a one time use, then I doubt TH would have used it at this point.

Hedgeowl wrote:Wtf BO! Why did you want to kill me? I have nothing for you! I am going to keep my $100 from Community Chest thank you very much.

I do know how I survived to those who have asked. Having friends in high places helps. However, I don't fault anyone for suspecting me otherwise and would do the same honestly.

I am preparing for the arrival of guests and another toddler, but should be back to discuss more tonight and tomorrow night. I haven't really read llama's case on TH in depth yet, but find some of Epi's points on Boogs interesting, I just don't know that I am as deeply convinced by them as he is.

What does "friends in high places" mean?