The Syndicate

juliets wrote:speedchuck -
Is making my head hurt with his thought question.

Sorry. I'll reveal my answers and the reason for them and the questions once I get an answer from Straw. He's most important, you don't have to answer.

speedchuck wrote:

juliets wrote:speedchuck -
Is making my head hurt with his thought question.

Sorry. I'll reveal my answers and the reason for them and the questions once I get an answer from Straw. He's most important, you don't have to answer.

Oh cool. I'll think about them though.

I was under the impression that Straw's revenge kill only applies to his being night killed, not lynched.

Sockys2016 wrote:I was under the impression that Straw's revenge kill only applies to his being night killed, not lynched.

Hahaha oh I have so many of these damn socks right now.

here for like 15 minutes, then will be back again closer to EoD. Going to try to speedread

Oh?

*checks*

Dang. Ignore my questions. Here we go.

Strawhenge
Town: Claim was made well, I feel. The claim was also not chosen to be believable or to help survival. Wine there. There is a place for a revenge killer in this setup, yes? Also anti-alignment with the mafia.
3P: Claimed to mark people and then kill them later if nightkilled. This claim is unprovable, and if Straw is killed, it won't matter at that point.
Mafia: Really stuck with that Dizzy realclaim biz a long time on D1. Claimed to mark people and then kill them later if nightkilled. This claim is unprovable, and if Straw is mafia, will never be tested. (unless marker can kill at night)

Possibly 3p or mafia. Not probable in either case. Learning that the kill was a nightkill made it coincide less with Marker and more with mafia. However, Straw doesn't seem mafia aligned.
I'm less okay with lynching Strawhenge at any point now.

I'm confused about speedchuck's character thing. I'll have to check with sprityo and clarify before I say anything further. I'm not sure it matters though.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure why we think this game can be even remotely closed to solved via information outside the thread. I'm not at all accustomed to solving the game like this, and frankly I'm not a fan. I'd rather try to determine who to lynch based on in-thread information, and I requested interaction analyses information last night multiple times only for no one to answer my question.

This is the kind of stuff I don't understand. Why would you want to lynch anyone based on information they have claimed? Wouldn't mafia members be given logical fake claims? Why do we think the game can be solved this way?

I'm starting to think this is a waste of time.

juliets wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The role claims

MovingPictures07 - Bus driver -- I don't think his information reconciles with Golden's, but Golden was also scum. So.

One thing about this issue. Golden has said many times - and I think he said it in this game - that he does not lie when bad unless absolutely necessary, I think because it's too easy to get caught in a lie. This makes me think he is telling the truth about his claim which leaves me unsure about MP. It doesn't seem like it would have been a necessity to lie.

rolls eyes.

Why the fuck does anyone think I'm lying about my role information or that I fucked up OVER the explanation that a confirmed scum either lied or fucked up? And how would that alone even make me lynch-worthy?

The game can't be solved. But we are speculating regarding how much the claims give us a townread.

Literally none of our claims can be verified at this point in the game. But what we claim matters, because of the way we do it and such.
Example: Strawhenge's claim proves nothing, but makes me not want to lynch him.
Fred's claim is unproven, but it made me want to lynch him.

There's a whole new world of reads that can be obtained from claims.
Also, I think JJJ did interactive analysis once or twice. What exactly were you asking for? I skimmed the thread last night.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

juliets wrote:

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The role claims

MovingPictures07 - Bus driver -- I don't think his information reconciles with Golden's, but Golden was also scum. So.

One thing about this issue. Golden has said many times - and I think he said it in this game - that he does not lie when bad unless absolutely necessary, I think because it's too easy to get caught in a lie. This makes me think he is telling the truth about his claim which leaves me unsure about MP. It doesn't seem like it would have been a necessity to lie.

If MP is also mafia though then there shouldn't be a discrepancy. It's so easy to just corroborate Golden's claim correctly. I don't understand.

Indeed, let's just move on. This is a wild goose chase.

If there really is no single mafia member left, then we're in the dark re: trying to find the 3p. And based on what little information in thread we have to deal with to even try to hunt a 3p, I think we ought to lynch Fredwood because he's spewing TMI and seems way more interested in speculating what the marker would or wouldn't do than anything else. I don't know what else to do here.

My list of most suspicious to least for marker would be:
Fred
MP
Straw/Juliets
Speed

They're basically all infused with some degree of "but omg".

I guess I'm fine with my vote for now. Unsure whether I can be back to change it before EoD.

speedchuck wrote:The game can't be solved. But we are speculating regarding how much the claims give us a townread.

Literally none of our claims can be verified at this point in the game. But what we claim matters, because of the way we do it and such.
Example: Strawhenge's claim proves nothing, but makes me not want to lynch him.
Fred's claim is unproven, but it made me want to lynch him.

There's a whole new world of reads that can be obtained from claims.
Also, I think JJJ did interactive analysis once or twice. What exactly were you asking for? I skimmed the thread last night.

I understand that, but now it seems like we're spending 80%+ of scumhunting efforts in thread trying to parse through all of these claims and make a determination of whom to lynch with it, and I just don't understand that. Maybe it's because I'm not used to unsolveable closed setups yet. Most of the closed setups I have played have been within the last couple of years and relatively simple. Nothing like this. So maybe I'm missing something. But I'm a bit irritated because I feel like I spent plenty of time last night explaining exactly what my role targets were and all of that, and here we are discussing all the same shit, for me and Fred to be the final two lynch contenders again. It doesn't feel like the thread is progressing anywhere at all despite the amount of conversation. But maybe I'm out of touch; I haven't read all of this. That's all just my impression based on what I've skimmed.

I don't know, I just was hoping to quickly read some interaction analyses with other mafia members if such analyses exist, in the event we actually do have a mafia member still around and perhaps I could see something of note that you all hadn't discussed yet in those, but I never was directed with anything.

I'm sorry I'm not as comfortable with the thread content with you all and that I'm making these statements of confusion and demand for analyses and stuff, but I have very limited time and it's increasingly apparent I may be what causes the town to lose this game and I don't want that on my shoulders, so I want to do what I can to avoid that. And I just don't have the working knowledge about this game type or this game specifically.

speedchuck wrote:The game can't be solved. But we are speculating regarding how much the claims give us a townread.

Literally none of our claims can be verified at this point in the game. But what we claim matters, because of the way we do it and such.
Example: Strawhenge's claim proves nothing, but makes me not want to lynch him.
Fred's claim is unproven, but it made me want to lynch him.

There's a whole new world of reads that can be obtained from claims.
Also, I think JJJ did interactive analysis once or twice. What exactly were you asking for? I skimmed the thread last night.

Does your double vote show up in the vote count?
How does it work?
You said you have one, right? So could we arrange a tie and you to use a double vote to prove your claim?

MovingPictures07 wrote:This is the kind of stuff I don't understand. Why would you want to lynch anyone based on information they have claimed? Wouldn't mafia members be given logical fake claims? Why do we think the game can be solved this way?

I'm starting to think this is a waste of time.

In my experience, mafia members are not given fake role claims. They are often given fake character claims when there's a need for that in the flavor and structure, but not fake role claims. This means that in closed setups like this one, there is incentive and precedent for mafia members to make something up -- this was as common an occurrence as anything on RYM.

Certain claims fit better than others. The ones that don't appear to fit might have a greater chance of being falsified. It isn't foolproof, but it's a method that should be employed right next to behavioral analysis in the thread. That's how this works.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:This is the kind of stuff I don't understand. Why would you want to lynch anyone based on information they have claimed? Wouldn't mafia members be given logical fake claims? Why do we think the game can be solved this way?

I'm starting to think this is a waste of time.

In my experience, mafia members are not given fake role claims. They are often given fake character claims when there's a need for that in the flavor and structure, but not fake role claims. This means that in closed setups like this one, there is incentive and precedent for mafia members to make something up -- this was as common an occurrence as anything on RYM.

Certain claims fit better than others. The ones that don't appear to fit might have a greater chance of being falsified. It isn't foolproof, but it's a method that should be employed right next to behavioral analysis in the thread. That's how this works.

Huh, that's weird. Thanks for explaining though. Maybe I'm remembering but I thought all the closed setups with anything beyond just a couple of power roles I've played that mafia were given fake claims. Maybe in games where they didn't they didn't need fake role claims because the setups were largely Heist or Heist-esque where there are hardly any power roles. I don't know.

I'm not sure what else to say then, but despite not even feeling that invested in this game last night and only slightly more so today, I would be pretty peeved if what gets me lynched and potentially loses all of town the game is because Golden lied about a claim, as a confirmed scum, and I wasn't lying, yet people thought for some reason that I was. Because that's pretty much a shitty reason to lynch anyone, but especially at this stage.

And now I have to go again, sorry. I'll try to be back at least a few hours prior to EoD. I just have a busy schedule on my hands and I can't let this consume my dissertation time. Sorry for not being a better replacement. I'll be back later and hopefully can wade through more of this to make sense of what you all are trying to accomplish here and help out however you all think would be best.

Regarding the discussion of the hypothetical last mafioso:

What reason do we have, in this game thread, to assume there isn't one? That 6 sounds like a lot? Does that actually mean anything? I don't see how it does. It isn't evidence. It's nothing. It's an assumption.

What reason do we have, in this game thread, to think there might still be one? Scotty is dead. Conclusive, hard evidence.

Is there a marker? Clearly yes. Is the marker anti-town? That requires assumption; I assume yes. There isn't conclusive evidence.

No matter how we approach this scenario we are forced to make some assumptions given the data in front of us. That's closed setup Mafia. If I had to place my vote in the next eight seconds, it would be for Fredwood.

Dyslexicon wrote:Does your double vote show up in the vote count?
How does it work?
You said you have one, right? So could we arrange a tie and you to use a double vote to prove your claim?

My double vote would show up in the vote count.
I don't have one.
I conditionally get one if I find one of my targets the previous night. So I might have one tomorrow, but not today.
My role is unverifiable, just like Fredwoods and Strawhenge's and Juliets. MP's is technically verifiable, though Golden's claim doesn't fit it, and I'm leaning toward it being true based on reads.

MP
Your role is, as a busdriver, a protective role. You aren't used to a town busdriver, and that's fine. But there are some things you can do.
Tonight, assuming we lynch Fred (which is probably a good assumption), busdrive one of your suspected non-towns with one of your top reads. You are a redirector. You could redirect a mafia kill on the mafia, a mark onto the marker, a mark onto the mafia, or the mafia kill onto the marker. Basically, you are able to save key town targets and make scum self-destruct. No matter what the lynch, you can buy us another day or a complete win, once you reveal things.
You are so freaking powerful as a town role right now. That's what town busdriver is good for.

And that's one strong reason to lynch Fredwood over MP today. Even if mafia doesn't risk the bus and MP bites the bucket tonight, that would be preferable to lynching what might be our busdriver.
We also may or may not have protective.

I am very certain I don't want to lynch MP today.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm confused about speedchuck's character thing. I'll have to check with sprityo and clarify before I say anything further. I'm not sure it matters though.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure why we think this game can be even remotely closed to solved via information outside the thread. I'm not at all accustomed to solving the game like this, and frankly I'm not a fan. I'd rather try to determine who to lynch based on in-thread information, and I requested interaction analyses information last night multiple times only for no one to answer my question.

I'm confused about what information is outside the thread.

Also JJJ I agree that if I voted someone now it would be Fred.

@JJJ

It is technically an assumption, as you said, but I feel that if the Marker was pro-town they would have claimed by now or something.

@Speed - Then let's figure out who that dude is that you have to target, if that's allowed, so that you can prove yourself next day if you have too.

---

I'm out. Good luck.

Dyslexicon wrote:@Speed - Then let's figure out who that dude is that you have to target, if that's allowed, so that you can prove yourself next day if you have too.

Jeremy Bellic simply existing would mostly townfirm me, but nobody's come forward. My theories as to why:

Bellic hasn't seen this yet.
Bellic is scum, wants me not townfirmed.
Bellic is marker, wants me not townfirmed.
Bellic is town, thinks I'm a mafia seeker of some sort or is unsure.
Bellic asked and is unable to claim for some reason (might make sense, given the names that are in the flavor).
Bellic is DrWigly.

I am tempted to go ahead and vote now in case I can't make it to 11:00. Is there only one vote on Fred?

I believe the tally is currently empty. I'll verify.

Ok, I'm pretty sure from scanning his posts that Dys voted Fred. I don't see an unvote.

Also, this is a mechanics question, if I change my mind do I have to say UNVOTE before I re-vote or can I just do another vote?

You can just re-vote.

In 2.5 hours, I'll be pretty much gone as well. I can still check in occasionally, maybe, but for the last 4 hours of day it's going to be sporadic, and I'm not going to be able to read.

You're right, Dizzy still has a vote on Fred. So that's it right now.

I'd recommend using "unvote" to change your vote, it just ensures everything is clear. As in:

*unvote*

*vote whoever*

Probably doesn't matter though.

Everyone's leaving! Fredwood is the patsy! They're setting him up to die while they are away!

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Everyone's leaving! Fredwood is the patsy! They're setting him up to die while they are away!

I will be here as late as possible. I might make it al the way to 11:00.

Vote Fred

No pressure. I was mostly kidding.

Also, the reason I asked about the UNVOTE is my computer keeps wanting to change it to "INVITE" and I have to send time trying to make it UNVOTE. If time is of the essence like it was the other night it becomes a problem. Though tonight it looks like there probably won't be any last minute changes.

I hope Fredwood is at least one of the mafia/marker roles out there. Otherwise:

Assuming one person is marked now, we have seven people. We lynch one, mafia kills one, marker gets a second mark. BOOM. We down to three. Lylo-ish situation there, unwinnable on the off chance that mafia or maker doesn't die in the four kills.

So today is kinda important.

ugh my typos - please ignore

juliets wrote:Also, the reason I asked about the UNVOTE is my computer keeps wanting to change it to "INVITE" and I have to send time trying to make it UNVOTE. If time is of the essence like it was the other night it becomes a problem. Though tonight it looks like there probably won't be any last minute changes.

Perhaps in the future you could try "change vote" as an alternative.

Of course, kills and such might overlap, but still. Messy business, this.

If it makes anyone feel better: I've only seen one demo-man type role with the ability to detonate more than once (tee hee hi Sloonei) in all of my years of Mafia. Typically it's a one-time thing in my experience.

No idea if that reflects sprityo's experience or design.

Also, for my night phase bouncer squad: no need to protect me on Night 6. They can't kill me anyway.

speedchuck, real quick (I'm at work, I only have a minute, can't make big post)

1. Re: sticking on the Dys fakeslip. As I mentioned in a conversation with LC, I faked believing the fakeslip so hard to see if any easy-lynch-seeking scum would follow me on it, then I would nail them. Obviously didn't work. So that wasn't real. I'm not good at gambits.

2. Just so we're clear (your language on the matter was a bit ambiguous), I'm not marking people who will all die if I'm night-killed. I name someone every night, and only that person dies if I die. Just want to make sure my role was understood.

Strawhenge, could you verify that your role doesn't apply to you dying via lynch?

Strawhenge wrote: 1. Re: sticking on the Dys fakeslip. As I mentioned in a conversation with LC, I faked believing the fakeslip so hard to see if any easy-lynch-seeking scum would follow me on it, then I would nail them. Obviously didn't work. So that wasn't real. I'm not good at gambits.

Thanks. I did miss that.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Strawhenge, could you verify that your role doesn't apply to you dying via lynch?

Not without control-veeing my rolecard in here. But it explicitly says that it doesn't apply to lynches.

Is there anything we should be talking about? It seems like we are all talked out.

juliets wrote:Is there anything we should be talking about? It seems like we are all talked out.

It does.

I kinda want to vote Fred. I'm leaving in a half hour, after all.
But I think that puts him at H-1, so I'll wait until my last minute.

Note: We are currently at 3 votes for Fredwood:- Dyslexicon, juliets, speedchuck.

The next vote taking it to 4 will be a hammer vote. Please be careful and don't hammer unless you're sure.

Marmot wrote:Are you done lynching my teammates yet?

See, now this is too relevant for dead talk. This actually bears the potential to influence the mindsets of people who are alive. Shoo, rodent!