The Syndicate

I am joining my good friend Zebra to the docks

Hosts: Does anyone have any info about this poll?

Golden wrote:Looks like you are in the clear sig.

I know I say this and then people still sus me anyway but...

I'm GOING to be quieter this game.

I have a plan for the very few games I can sign up for in the coming months. Arkham was not on that plan. I just started a new role at work, and have heaps of other stuff going on in real life, so I need to be very careful with my time.

How's that working out for you so far Golden?

Nerolunar wrote: I still believe we should go to AA though. Im wondering if there is a mechanic that makes the Riddler place clues where he has been. He has been at Arkham, so it wouldn´t surprise me if there was one.

What is this based on?

Golden wrote: You and I definitely see game mechanics the same way, sig. Wayne can win with the mafia. They don't want to (because killing mafia nets them points and killing civs subtract points) but ultimately they will do what they need to do to win, and if that means taking out the last civ to end the game alive and above 100% they would do so.

It's difficult for Wayne's Manor to win with the baddies. Adding up all the percentages available in the game nets them 100% (with Rupert Thorne being the wildcard).
If a baddie team wins, it means that atleast all of GCPD (11) are dead + one other baddie team (3), giving them a base percentage of 11*-2+3*5 = -7%. Best case scenario, they would need at least 9 of the Arkham Asylum dead. If one of Wayne's Manor dies, they would need all the inmates dead. I don't see a scenario where they will be in favor of a civ lynch, ever.

Matt wrote:(cept nub Typh)

no u

That he's a nub

Enrique wrote: sig I see no reason to assume Gotham would start at 100%? The game would practically be gifted to them at that point.

Epi answered this already

Do you actually expect anyone to answer those question Mac?

Are you suspicious of Glorfindel SVS?

S~V~S wrote:
Typhoony wrote:Are you suspicious of Glorfindel SVS?
I am not sure, tbh. I was just intrigued by his reaction to having read the thread. There was alot of tunnel type stuff and some quite a bit of tension at some points going on, and he only noted one thing, and his opinion on that seemed a bit one dimensional.

His reply was very well crafted; and tbh, it felt kind of *crafted* to me, if you get my feeling~ designed to appease. I can't be anywhere near sure at this point; he is unfailingly polite and I don't know him well, so have no basis of comparison. SO my initial thought, intrigued, best fits my feelings at this time, I think.

Do you have an opinion?

I'm not suspicious of him atm. He is posting similarly to the Pikmin game. His posts there also seemed designed to appease, to be polite, and he was civ there.

Are we sure it's a good idea to talk about this stuff? One of the rules specifically mentions that it is not in your best interest to talk about the map

I'm not opposed to voting a low poster, but I will rarely actually advocate lynching one. I did that just recently in Enriques speed game, and those were pretty extraordinary circumstances that we're not even close to here.
Aside from that, I don't think it should ever be the main focus of the thread.

nub Zebra.

a2thezebra wrote:
Typhoony wrote:nub Zebra.
Do you think revealing this is going to hurt the both of us or just me?

I don't think it will hurt either of us. I'm more concerned with who it might potentially help.
And since we have no idea on that front, I would have preferred if you had not mentioned it.

DharmaHelper wrote: I think that the reason (at least I) am seeing more sincere discussion is directly tied to the smaller mafia teams. IMO, more standard sized mafia teams are able to get into discussions easier because they have a handful of players that they can rely on to either support them or at the very least not suspect them if they fuck up, and by virtue of their numbers they can have a more significant impact on the flow of thread discussion, particularly in early game. This is much more difficult to achieve in pairs.

Do you actually think that this is a conscious decision from the baddie teams?
Like, them going "Let's not get involved in the thread, we don't have the numbers to influence discussion that much"?

That is not how it works from my experience of being on baddie teams, especially in the beginning of a game.

I've thought about that, and realized I wasn't going to go insane thinking about it. Better to just wait and see what will happen :P

Hello nubs.

juliets wrote:
Typhoony wrote:Hello nubs.
Hello nubphoony have you got something you would like to share? Like your take on whats going on?

What would you like my take on?

Enrique wrote:Typhoony do you think it's sketchy that some people really want to talk about their info? What would it take to make you do that?

I don't know if I would call it sketchy. As I said earlier somewhere, my main concern is that we have no idea what this thingy is about, who it benefits and who it does not benefit.
If I would be pushing for people to release info, I would know who the information benefitted. I don't think everybody pushing to share the info has an idea who it might benefit, but surely someone out there knows at the very least what we are talking about.

juliets wrote: I'd like to know where you're thinking to put your vote today and why?

Not sure, but I know I'm not staying at the Docks.

Typhoony wrote:
Enrique wrote:Typhoony do you think it's sketchy that some people really want to talk about their info? What would it take to make you do that?
I don't know if I would call it sketchy. As I said earlier somewhere, my main concern is that we have no idea what this thingy is about, who it benefits and who it does not benefit.
If I would be pushing for people to release info, I would know who the information benefitted. I don't think everybody pushing to share the info has an idea who it might benefit, but surely someone out there knows at the very least what we are talking about.

I'd also like to add that I find the wording of the rule peculiar.

14. Talking about the map is allowed, but not in your best interest.

It seems directed at every single player, which would mean that none of the players actually benefit from it... And solving whatever is going may have net negative results for everyone.
Maybe Epig is expecting our curiosity to get the best of us and talk about it anyway, only to say after everybody has shared everything "Told you right there in the rules".
Regardless, I'm very much against talking about it at this stage.

Dunno.
I was not pinged by any of the major convo's going on.
I thought Nerolunar pushing Arkham Asylum with the Riddler thingy might have had a nefarious purpose, but it seems there aren't any negatives from going there as we now know.
SVS seemed to be trying something with Glorfindel, hence why I asked if she was suspicious of him.
I don't think she is an appeaser at all, but I do think I haven't seen her civ self this game yet. Too early to say if I've seen her baddie self though.

I'd rather focus in individual cases.
Ie if you can point me to a player who's been unusually quiet and avoiding conflicts, I'm willing to listen.

Scotty wrote:
Typhoony wrote:
juliets wrote: I'd like to know where you're thinking to put your vote today and why?
Not sure, but I know I'm not staying at the Docks.
What's at the docks? (It's ok, explain in code that only I will understand)

Zebra was so kind to point out what's at the Docks here.

Also, it smells like fish aka your mom

Juliets who do you think you'll be voting today?

I think she's more emotional/defensive as a civvie. So right now I'd lean more towards civ.

Linki: That's about SVS

Actually I don't think she's defensive as a baddie really. She herself agree

Golden wrote:
Typhoony wrote:Actually I don't think she's defensive as a baddie really. She herself agree
Interesting Typh. What about World Reborn?

As for teammates: She was not vocally defensive about Juliets, but she definitely pushed the thread into another direction by lynching Canuck. She said she saw me more civ than bad if I remember correctly.
Not sure how she reacted to suspicion aimed at herself, I remember Epi naming her as suspicious early on (as well as Juliets and me). I don't think she got overdefensive in the thread, but there was a bit of a freak out over that in the chat, but she always does that in the chat, she keeps it out of the thread.

Enrique wrote:sig can we avoid the wifom please. You were very actively pushing for something that benefits the baddies. Even you seem to admit that it was too obvious? Why?

why would bad people do bad stuff sig i dunno you tell me

How do you know it benefits the baddies?

The Hosts said it is not in anyones best interest to discuss it. You said it was in the baddies best interest.

Those are two different things.

Enrique wrote:Typh, okay. I'm not saying BADDIES themselves would be sharing any real info, I'm saying they would want to know what others got. That's why as a baddie you encourage that discussion. That's why as a civ you don't.

Fair enough.

MacDougall wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:As neat as it is to see everyone advocating participation for once lets try to avoid sheepvoting and keep in mind that it's pretty easy to just dump a vote onto someone and avoid accountability.
We should compile a list of people who vote for people having not mentioned them at all beforehand and sequentially landslide vote them out of this game imo.

Add me to the list!

Cause I'm voting Wilgy. Most comfortable voting him out of anyone with votes atm.

Hosts:

- How do you decide lynch ties?
-Was this:

All GCPD win dead or alive as long as the individual win condition is met.

*A result of something that happened during the lynch?
*A result of the location poll?
*Always the case but just not yet changed in the roles?
*Something else?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
Scotty wrote: You call it tunnelly, I call it my normal day 1. Every game. Look at the D1's any of the other 10 games I've played on this site. I do tunnel, admittedly, but this is not an example of that.

Next time maybe I'll just vote in alphabetical order or something, because apparently that is a safe way to vote that won't induce criticism.
As scary as it sounds, this has proven to be somewhat correct.

Everybody should vote in alphabetical order.
Kills must also be done in alphabetical order.
I have hereby decided this.

Svs would not miss a vote on purpose, no matter what. Anyone that knows her and seriously thinks she would gets an

Nerolunar wrote:Any combination of three night actions/votes earns a modkill. There is a possibility that someone would do it on purpose without getting punished

Participation score =/= modkill.

Linki: hence the "knows her well" Scotty

DharmaHelper wrote:
Typhoony wrote:Svs would not miss a vote on purpose, no matter what. Anyone that knows her and seriously thinks she would gets an
Really hyped on that SVS defense aren't you.

Really hyped on that svs attack aren't you.

I know the Docks smell like fish, but is there really nobody that wants to go there?

I was at the Docks D1

Glorfindel wrote: Frankly, if it was someone that would be considered experienced then yes, I would. The thing is, I feel that any analysis of that is hampered simply by the way the site is set up. I should think a list of the voting sequence over the last hour/half hour or so before the EoD may be an interesting read...

Here you go my friend. Enjoy analyzing!

Day 1 Voting graph

DharmaHelper wrote:Anyone who feels SVS would not intentionally miss the vote, explain to me how she missed the vote after explicitly stating that she had to vote 10+ minutes before EOD

She's a human being.

All the votes are fucked up. Lemme fix that

MacDougall wrote:
Typhoony wrote:

All the votes are fucked up. Lemme fix that
You just have Scotty and Wilgy as the wrong colour I think.

Nah more stuff is wrong, like somehow LC ended up on the graph. I modified an old graph, changed the names in the Excel sheet but the graph wasn't using the cells, it was just using the names I implemented by hand. So now it should be fixed.

Day 1 Voting Graph

Glorfindel wrote:
Typhoony wrote: Here you go my friend. Enjoy analyzing!

Day 1 Voting graph
Wow! That's pretty cool :-0 And yes, Sig - I think you have some explaining to do...

Just be sure to use the New version!

Enrique wrote:@Hosts: What do you do in case of a tie?

Epignosis wrote:
Typhoony wrote:Hosts:

- How do you decide lynch ties?

Also, Wilgy wasn't around for the last 8'ish hours of the lynch looking at his posts. How would he have sent in a lynch stop?

Nerolunar wrote: Im kinda siding with Sig in the debate on information sharing, although I do not think you should look at tone when searching Glorfindel. He is always polite whenever he writes something, and I can´t seem to spot a post where he deviates from this. I assumes this is true even when he is mafia. I do belive that both of thekm are civs though, but I do not think we should share information about the map.

So which one is it?

If there's one player in the game who advocated for sharing the info, it was sig. It's hard to read his posts and think otherwise.

Why the fuck do people still think Wilgy was Robin when he was not around to send in the lynch stop? Please explain, thanks.

Also, I don't have a lot of time until Night 2 to follow the game so don't expect a lot from me

Then how would he possibly have info on Scotty th?

What is this clear evidence you are talking about Golden?

Search found 220 matches