Return to “Monopoly Mafia [GAME OVER]”
Would you believe I was literally about to post this exact quote?thellama73 wrote:"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."
- Adam Smith
Best. Response. Ever.Epignosis wrote:Ca$h rule$ everything around me.Elohcin wrote:you gonna keep up he $$$$$ all game Epi?Epignosis wrote:I'll make $ure you get an extra die.keys56000000000 wrote:Yeah make it rain!
$60 on the extra die role power!
Yeah, that's honestly what I'm leaning towards. I think if we don't try to merge and gain BTSC with other civs, then the baddies would have an easier job picking us off one by one. Especially the utilities, who can learn peoples' roles from landing on those two respective spaces.Degobunny wrote:Okay this is seriously frustrating. One more time...I like the option to bid on powers, and no to unions. We all know the railroads and utilities will manipulate it all anyway.
There are 2 reasons I can see Epig doing this:FZ. wrote:I'm going to bed. Voting Epi for using so much money.
Not necessarily. Not if I don't find any of my teammates, or they don't find me. Then I would still be a vanilla civ.keys56000000000 wrote:That's cool, you can go ahead and do that and if you eliminate the mafia, awesome. But then y'know you are next to be lynched, right? It'll be obvious that you're in a set.birdwithteeth11 wrote:Alright. Here's my full opinion on the two hot-button issues so far.
1) In terms of searching for people, I am going to try and search for my teammates every night. I know most of us play for fun (I would hope all of us do), but we also play to win the game. Having a team of people whom I know can help me, and help add to potential collected money in terms of hotels, sounds a heck of a lot more appealing than a vanilla civ with no powers and throwing darts in the dark. The utilities have already learned the roles of 3 players so far, and the railroads learn who each others is once they find each other. Plus having a NK they get to share. So to me, the best long-term strategy is to search for teammates.
2) I will consider bidding on properties, if one comes up that I feel is worth owning. The way I look at it, I'd rather get rid of the baddies first who either have BTSC already (Utilities) or could gain it (Railroads), and have a NK to use, over people who are vanilla civs and do not have a NK. And, as llama said, it's a huge opportunity cost we are throwing away by going after people who decide to bid often or heavily on properties. So for now, I'm more concerned about trying to find and kill baddies.
Linki @llama: I agree. There's a big difference between a mafia team and a LMS team in my opinion.
Oh yeah. I completely agree with you there. But I don't think the best way to go about this is to not search for our respective teammates. I think anyone who doesn't do that makes it that much harder to win.keys56000000000 wrote:Birdwithteeth, I'm not saying lynch people for searching for their teammates. I don't want to lynch civs, I never said I would. I'm saying that if you find your teammates, we will have to lynch you. That is just a fact, as Boo has stated. Our priority should be the mafia with the kill, but after that the priority is to reach our win conditions, right? And that's going to mean lynching, or killing off via some other means, the other teams.
I know exactly what you mean, oh wi$e and fair $ir llama.thellama73 wrote:I can't help but be a little $u$piciou$ of the people voting for Epigno$i$. Fell$ like an ea$y lynch train, if you know what I mean.
I'm waiting to hear what he says about it before I proceed. Because how I feel about him depends on what his response is.zeek wrote:Yeah, pretty sure this will be standard. Not criticising at all, but we'll all probably do this at some point and vote patterns won't be that helpful. It's also going to make bandwagons very likely amd less likely to result in a mafia lynch.Turnip Head wrote:I don't think Epi is bad, or at least I don't think he has BTSC yet... but if he has a majority vote 10 minutes before deadline you can bet your $weet bippy that I'll vote for him and then try to take his card.
I understand the thoughts on Epi but don't necessarily agree. I expected some people to flash the cash early and I'm not that surprised its him. Dunno, as usual he's not defending himself so its hard to tell what to make of it
$orry. About the jumping on the Bid$ville Expre$$. I thought I had $tated that, but I mu$t have forgotten to do $o.Long Con wrote:You are waiting to see what Epig says about what - about jumping on the lynch train to bidsville, or about flashing the cash early?birdwithteeth11 wrote:I'm waiting to hear what he says about it before I proceed. Because how I feel about him depends on what his response is.zeek wrote:Yeah, pretty sure this will be standard. Not criticising at all, but we'll all probably do this at some point and vote patterns won't be that helpful. It's also going to make bandwagons very likely amd less likely to result in a mafia lynch.Turnip Head wrote:I don't think Epi is bad, or at least I don't think he has BTSC yet... but if he has a majority vote 10 minutes before deadline you can bet your $weet bippy that I'll vote for him and then try to take his card.
I understand the thoughts on Epi but don't necessarily agree. I expected some people to flash the cash early and I'm not that surprised its him. Dunno, as usual he's not defending himself so its hard to tell what to make of it
Hmmmmm....alright. Fair enough.Epignosis wrote:Very well. The current fear and debate can be traced to the concern that a civilian can only grow in power by hunting for a match. I find that I already have the power to grow in power- my wallet. An individual here did not take kindly to my penchant for the dollar mark; therefore I have written my reply without utilizing a particular letter of the alphabet.birdwithteeth11 wrote:I'm waiting to hear what he says about it before I proceed. Because how I feel about him depends on what his response is.zeek wrote:Yeah, pretty sure this will be standard. Not criticising at all, but we'll all probably do this at some point and vote patterns won't be that helpful. It's also going to make bandwagons very likely amd less likely to result in a mafia lynch.Turnip Head wrote:I don't think Epi is bad, or at least I don't think he has BTSC yet... but if he has a majority vote 10 minutes before deadline you can bet your $weet bippy that I'll vote for him and then try to take his card.
I understand the thoughts on Epi but don't necessarily agree. I expected some people to flash the cash early and I'm not that surprised its him. Dunno, as usual he's not defending himself so its hard to tell what to make of it
@Boo: Can we actually do thi$?Turnip Head wrote:I bet 50 Monopoly $'s that Epi makes it further in this challenge than MM does.
An unmitigated di....failure.Mongoo$e wrote:Good god, what have I walked into.
Hmmmm....I hadn't thought about this one.zeek wrote:This is a terrible idea too. Whoever wins this card is a prime candidate for a NK, but making sure the most trusted player gets it means you lose the person most people will listen to/trust as well.Black Rock wrote:That, and I think it's too early to trust anyone.S~V~S wrote:Not sure I want to spend the night talking about the person I trust most.
No. I just haven't made up my mind yet is all. And for now, I'm betting on the one I feel best about.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Are you gonna let other people influence your action?birdwithteeth11 wrote:RIPIYWG SVS. I didn't have much of a read on you yet. Or at all really.
I was going to bid on the Auto-Find a Partner power, but given some people are against us finding partners, I might hold off on that one for now.
I will, however, raise the opening bid for one of the other options.
Bid $175 on Silent Auction
That is indeed possible. With the utilities though, they already know half a dozen roles. So it makes me wonder if any of that will factor into their decision too.FZ. wrote:I did think about the option that the baddies would try and NK those who have the most money.Long Con wrote:Yeah... by my spreadsheet, Electric Company is up $480. The second biggest net earner is Metalmarsh at +$200. So if MM is Electric Company he's so rich!FZ. wrote:I just saw that I stepped on the baddies property. Great, they get $240 for 3 people stepping on...
Epig seems to be down the most, at -$500, from his big bid on the Chance card (will you let us know when you use it, Ep? Are you using it yourself or someone else? Is it Chance or Community Chest that can send you Directly To Jail? That would be funny.) Then Hedgeowl seems to be down $375, which I believe was the price she paid for the Windfall.
Ha, I just thought of another reason Epig could give for the early big bid. Maybe the baddies will consider him 'closer to bankruptcy' and avoid wasting their nightkill on a player that is so much closer to death.
I would guess the answer is no, since they don't have BTSC yet. The utilities do, and they're collecting 10 times the amount that someone rolls to land on one of their spots (IIRC, in Monopoly, it's only 4 times if you own one of them). But I'm going to ask just to make sure.juliets wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong but can't we at least assume Pennsylvania is getting $50 because they own the Short Line?Long Con wrote:So those payments to Pennsylvania RR are indeed $25 each. It's worth noting, though, TH, that boo will display the payments as $25 even if they are more, so as to hide the Railroads' actual current earning power.
I'm curious about that. I have no idea on either of you at this point, but do you think any of the people vouching for you two could be utilities?Turnip Head wrote:Hey LC, what do you make of all these people vouching for the both of us?
That's actually par for the course from juliets. She tends to start of slower in games and asks a lot of questions to try and get an understanding of other players. It's how she develops her thoughts and cases later on in the game. So while you don't know her and haven't played with her, you're essentially voting for someone because of the way they play mafia.HannaK wrote:I am inclined to believe FZ because back in the day I sorta played the pity card when I was civvie as well when I felt overwhelmed with the game and everything, plus it is also an indicator FZ doenst have BTSC.
The person I am mostly looking to right now is juliets, now I am nor familair with the style juliets normally plays, but looking through the posts I find it weird that most of them are either questions directed at other players who they find suspicous without really contributing anything substantial or info about votes and/or money. To me this feels like a good baddie tactic, posting without revealing too much about yourself so I am gonna go ahead and vote juliets. I'm not 100% convinced but so far this has spiked my baddie-sensor the most.
Do you actually think your life is in peril? Also, do you actually think Boogs is bad or not?Turnip Head wrote:I think Boogs is a railroad and is going to try to kill me tonight.
Here, she says she's going to focus on hunting down baddies. Which I'm assuming means the railroads and utilities.Black Rock wrote:DFaraday wrote:I can see both sides of the issue, but I think Keys has the best point. It's better to be a vanilla civ (or one with a BTSC partner) than part of a small team with no kill.
Do you not have a kill though? There are many ways to die and one way to kill is draining another players money. So wouldn't that be powerful too? Say I decided to play this game as a vanilla civ, do I trust the rest of you to play along? I look at this players list I see a bunch of these guys -
Right now I am going to play this as a mafia game and try and hunt down the baddies. Depending on how things look in the future will depend on who I trust. It's be nice if the civvies joined hands and fought the good fight, but that's not how this game was designed.
Says she isn't suspicious of anyone yet.Black Rock wrote:juliets wrote:Black Rock, speaking of hunting down baddies, do you have any suspicions at this point?
At this point? No.
Thinks Made slipped up. Voted for him too.Black Rock wrote:Turnip Head wrote:Made's post looks like a bona fide slip up to me.
That's what I'm thinking.
Wondered if any of the bidders realized they might be putting targets on their backs.Black Rock wrote:Sorry you had to go, thank you for making the day one lynch go so beautifully.Made wrote:I fucking hate being bad..no salt here y'all, well played.
pce out
Have any of you bidders thought this through?
Doesn't trust anyone. Which makes sense, given she said earlier she didn't suspect anyone yet.Black Rock wrote:S~V~S wrote:Not sure I want to spend the night talking about the person I trust most.
That, and I think it's too early to trust anyone.
Black Rock wrote:Do you have some sort of knowledge that the rest of us don't? Are you using this knowledge to make others feel stupid? Why do you think they killed SVS if not to gain the RR property? Whjat do you know about where it ended up? Cause it didn't just disappear. I feel like there is enough thread knowledge to assume that when the RR killed SVS they gained control of the RR property. I am sorry TH you are not looking like a helpful civvie, just someone trying to use words to make his case look solid.Turnip Head wrote:I was about ready to smother my hat in some ranch dressing, BUT! This isn't exactly the same thing. Boo said if someone kills you they get your starter card but in that quote he doesn't say that the same thing happens for any extra properties we collect. That leaves open the possibility that those properties might be auctioned off or simply placed back on the board. But you seemed pretty certain about your answer that they go to the killer, and you didn't ask in the thread for clarification.Long Con wrote:Hmm, well, maybe you should put your reading glasses, grandpa...A little ketchup and fresh ground pepper might make that hat a little more palatable. Will you post a video of you eating it?boo wrote:Successful NKs will result in the player responsible for the NK getting the card of the killed player.
Third post of the game, three paragraphs from the bottom.
Are you saying you did not ask Boo any questions on this matter, and that the line you quoted from the rules was your only point of reference?
Nah man, calm down it's nothing like that... I think you're a utilityLong Con wrote:Good point, I was wrong there. They couldn't kill one of their own. So I guess now I'm a railroad who's intentionally getting some thing s wrong about my own role...?TH wrote:Just pointing out that this isn't how it works. The railroads can't be NK'd until they've all found each other. The Short Line bidding war was a win-win for the railroads.Long Con wrote:They'd better hope they're the railroad with the kill, or else they'll kill one of their own. :ofingersplints wrote:Unless whoever wins it is railroad.
Black Rock wrote:Maybe I should have not said stupid, but I felt that what you were getting at was basically that you thought LC jumping to those conclusions without asking the host a bunch of questions was stupid. Maybe it's the wrong word but I'm feeling crafty with words today. I also read it the same way as LC had, and it would seem that's how it works because the card did not go back up for auction.Turnip Head wrote:And I don't know why, BR, you threw in that line about me trying to make everyone else feel stupid with my knowledge... I don't know what that has to do with anything, or what you're specifically referencing, or why you think I would want to do something like that...
I'm sad that you feel I'm a player who has those sorts of intentions.
I also felt while you were accusing him of jumping to conclusions with out asking the host questions you were doing the exact same thing. The only difference is you were using your conclusions as evidence. That reads baddie to me. The only reason I'm not voting you right now is the fact in other games when I didn't agree with you it was civvie TH and when I did like your arguments you were a baddie. So I disagree with a lot of your thoughts this game, you are likely civvie.
It ends with her backing off of him, and sounds like she's saying that she may have read into it too much.Black Rock wrote:By feeling crafty I meant NOT feeling crafty...Black Rock wrote:Maybe I should have not said stupid, but I felt that what you were getting at was basically that you thought LC jumping to those conclusions without asking the host a bunch of questions was stupid. Maybe it's the wrong word but I'm feeling crafty with words today. I also read it the same way as LC had, and it would seem that's how it works because the card did not go back up for auction.Turnip Head wrote:And I don't know why, BR, you threw in that line about me trying to make everyone else feel stupid with my knowledge... I don't know what that has to do with anything, or what you're specifically referencing, or why you think I would want to do something like that...
I'm sad that you feel I'm a player who has those sorts of intentions.
I also felt while you were accusing him of jumping to conclusions with out asking the host questions you were doing the exact same thing. The only difference is you were using your conclusions as evidence. That reads baddie to me. The only reason I'm not voting you right now is the fact in other games when I didn't agree with you it was civvie TH and when I did like your arguments you were a baddie. So I disagree with a lot of your thoughts this game, you are likely civvie.
Ok TH, fair enough. I just disagreed and maybe I read more into what you were saying than there was.
Voting for FZ to get in on the bidding action. Says she'll mention her suspicions later on.Black Rock wrote:I voted for FZ. Why? Cause I might as well be in on the action. I'm going to work out my suspicions for next day.
By that argument though, you can't assume everyone who is powerful is a baddie. There could be some powerful civs out there right now as well.Boogs wrote:Rip BR
I do appreciate the list. Thanks! I'll add it to my spreadsheet.Boogs wrote:According to the rules here are the winners as follows as far as we know:
Day 1:
Hedge wins Windfall
Epignosis wins dice roll
Epignosis wins chance
Day 2:
TH wins Auto protect
TH wins jail card
LC wins auto find and has partner contact
BwT wins auction card
So Again, Epignosis and TH win 2 things. Also, how does Epignosis have so much cash to blow, he must be getting low or have help. And LC auto found a partner potentially last night making him very powerful.
I will vote for either of those 3 if we agree they are getting too strong, which I totally do.
Alright. I'l go back and re-read what you said, because I don't remember all the details. But if this is indeed the case, then I will take back what I said about you contradicting yourself.Long Con wrote:Uh, what? "Go back on my word"? That is a misrepresentation of the facts.Boogs wrote:Exactly and thank you for reminding me of his discussion on partners Day 0. Why would he buy it unless he was preventing others of searching? I know he's a good liar in mafia because he fooled me down to the final vote in Monty Python where he kept me tell the end alive. Either way, I think it should be a vote on him today and it seems like a mafia thing to do by going back on his word for searching.
To answer you though on voting today: I do agree we need baddies but it could be a bonus if they are one of the powerful people. I think it's safe to say mafia members would be bidding on these things just like we would to prevent us as well as have powers to stop us later on for doing things. I think LC and Epignosis could be bad, TH I do not think is bad. I only wanted to vote him for being too powerful. So Epignosis or LC today is okay with me, and from the two i would do LC.
If you were mixing me up with keys at the start, then I'd understand. Keys pushed hard for not finding partners. What I did was ask questions and try to clarify exactly how the game would go. I never pushed for staying individual, the closest I can find is saying "I would advocate that, except for these reasons..." and I gave my reasons why that's not a good plan, and I called it lame.
Not really. I remember (and still think) that LC latched onto the keys idea of "nobody search for anybody so we all stick together". I haven't had a chance to read back on it yet though. So I can't confirm or deny if that was the case or not.thellama73 wrote:So, you're contradicting yourself, BWT?birdwithteeth11 wrote: Alright. I'l go back and re-read what you said, because I don't remember all the details. But if this is indeed the case, then I will take back what I said about you contradicting yourself.
Sounds to me like he's questioning a major flaw in the idea.Long Con wrote:So if your teammate finds you (assuming you are Civ), will you try to lynch them and avoid acquiring their card, in order to keep yourself Civ?keys56000000000 wrote:Players don't have to be in the union, I ain't forcing anybody, but just remember that if you are looking for your teammates, you're saying to the rest of us that you intend to kill us down the line. You intend to be no-good mafioso and murder us civilians. And the civilians in the union will have the numerical advantage over you and your measly one or two teammates in the lynch.
I'd say he's gone from civ to big question mark for me. I can understand wanting to keep an eye on people who are winning a lot of bids, acquiring lots of properties/powers. But I think it's a dangerous idea to want to lynch people solely for that reason. I can see civ and bad reasons for thinking that, but I feel like a civ would want to find in-thread reasons for pointing to someone being bad other than "Oh look. Player X is winning a lot of stuff. Let's lynch him!".MovingPictures07 wrote:BWT, what do you think of Boogs?
I look forward to your insights then. Mostly because I'm not totally sure where to start yet. Outside of the discussion we've generated so far this morning.MovingPictures07 wrote:Thanks, BWT. He's a question mark for me too.
I'm not totally sure where to look yet, so given my quick read of the thread to catch up initially, I will be re-reading it today in between multitasking on PhD work.
Not sure honestly. My answer would depend on if he is contradicting himself or if he simply changed his opinion on the issue with more time. And LC is the only person who knows which of those is right. So I think it's something to keep an eye on, but not enough for me to vote him for just that reason.juliets wrote:The way I read Long Con's post he's telling keys and us what is wrong with the idea. Are you guys saying what he says is in support of keys?
Ummmmm...what?Boogs wrote: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.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.
No, I get your case on him. I meant how it seems like more people are jumping on the idea of voting for him. And I want to know if they're just latching onto an easy case, or if something else has happened that has changed peoples' opinions on him. Because right now, I don't have a read on him.Long Con wrote:Did you miss everything I said leading up to the Day Two lynch, when I voted Metalmarsh? Nothing has changed my opinion much from then to now, and if people are willing to throw some votes his way, well, he's my main suspicion.birdwithteeth11 wrote:So what exactly is the case on MM again? I think I must have missed it.
Just let me know if you need me to remind you of the case I made back then, otherwise I'll let some of the newer Metalmarsh suspecters fill you in on their version of the case.
So wait....you want LC dead regardless of what his role is? Even if he's not a baddie or LMS right now?Boogs wrote:Splints i am not being shady. I expressed my opinion on LC finding his teammate and possibly getting the third and start bankrupting us. A monopoly this early is just as dangerous as a mafia member. I am suggesting he could be bluffing also and is mafia. Its a win win for me and i stand by my decision regardless what other disagree with me on it. Im Civ and alone, and it makes most sense to cast my vote on LC. Not changing my mind.
I could see that being the case, but I think there is real danger in Boogs pushing the ideas that he's pushing. If we go down the path he's suggesting, then we're just lynching people for deciding to play the game a certain way.MovingPictures07 wrote:
I'm wary of a Boogs lynchtrain because I'm not sure a baddie Boogs would be that obviously pushing a case that isn't sticking. I think he may genuinely believe what he's saying.
Nonetheless, he is apparently going after LC for a totally different reason than I am. He appears to want him gone because he won the Autofind. My suspicion is due to a very specific chain of events that links Llama and LC's behavior.
