[END] Fight Club Mafia

[timmer]

Hey guys, sorry I haven't been posting, we went camping this weekend, but I'm around now and will catch up by late tonight. Thankfully this is a long day!

[Kylemii]

ok i'm home now :0 gotta catch up.

i still hope to be in a fight sometime soon just to see what it's like. i didn't volunteer for the last one because i was worried there might be some sort of involvement of activity which i wouldn't have been able to do. anyways yeah. reading now.

[bea]

Glad to see you back Kyle. I forgot you were playing there for a while.

Sorsha: That's a fair point about the fights. I had been basing it on my knowledge of my fight and my fight level. But there was no definite "because of" clause.

[Kylemii]

hehe thanks bea. I can see the merits of both sides of the discussion on who tyler would want to recruit. on one side it would be effective to get players who fly far below the radar so they have a higher chance of not getting police'd. On the other side, it would be also effective to collect many players with various strengths and weaknesses that counterbalance each other. Sort of a pokemon approach. The only indication we have of Tyler's recruit tactics so far is DH's recruitment. Which I think would tend toward the latter strategy, but then again Tyler may have mixed it up.

[Kylemii]

Boogs vote potentially saving llama is interesting to me... It always looks odd when more quiet players swoop in and place critical votes like that. Right now I'm running on hear-say of other players in the thread but I would like to look into it myself.

[Long Con]

What I don't understand is why people were following my (basically random) vote for Dom. Given the fact that he flipped unrecruited civ, I think it looks bad. Furthermore, no one even gave a reason for following me.

I should vote now, could be my last chance. Not too sure about who's guilty here, so I vote Dom, because I think I owe him one.

That makes no sense.

As far as I can tell, Boogs gave no rationale for his vote at all.

Can you two explain your votes? Because I think they both look pretty shady.

Well, Dom has given me a hard time in the past and gotten me lynched before, so in the absence of a solid suspicion, I tossed a vote his way. It was the second vote on him, and I was surprised to see him get lynched with just one more vote.

I've already laid out my suspicion of you and boogs that Kylemii just mentioned. Immediately after you received your third vote, Llama, boogs gave Dom an equal number of votes, very much saving your life.

[unfurl]

If that's the case, it might be worth it for me to take another look at unfurl. And I'm probably going with this strategy. I feel like I'm starting to run in circles in this game. And I could use looking at people from a fresh perspective.

Let me know if you have any questions for me, bwt
cause catchicn up in reading this last pages
you go from wanting to look at me, then to not wanting to look at me anymore, then to go back to looking :P
Am I that intersting to look at?

---

There still so many quiet people, are those people not scare of MP punishment?
I feel we still the same people talking and trying to figure out things out

---

Boogs vote potentially saving llama is interesting to me... It always looks odd when more quiet players swoop in and place critical votes like that. Right now I'm running on hear-say of other players in the thread but I would like to look into it myself.

I found that a very fly vote, he only said he like ties, but he has not posted anything since then, and actually he only has 2 post in this thread
is that normal for him? I dont recall playing much with him, probably once in RM or justr recall seeing his name there

[unfurl]

I did not like thellama call what I was saying nonsense, it actually got it my nerves

Yeah, I get that a lot.

I dont think anyone likes to be call nonsense, I rather say I dont agree with what you are saying or I think you are wrong
But I had been having a treatment to grwoth a ticker skin to protect my nerves lol,
plus and everyone has a free will to have their opinion, even if I dont agree

[juliets]

Unfurl, in regards to your question about boogs. In the games I remember him in he was active which is why I brought it up earlier when he only had 1 post in this entire thread. Now he has two I guess. I haven't played with him all that much lately though (that i can remember) so maybe he has become like this. Anyone whose played with him lately, is this normal for him these days?

[S~V~S]

I see the thread has exploded today, I am loooking forward to catching up.

Something just came up, a boat ride, can't say no, it's a beautiful day. I have to vote now. I am going to vote Llama; I did not love his "Trust the Police" rhetoric, and then his wide eyed "Oh I never thought of that" reply just pinged me more.

I think the idea thta the police may be compromised is a good one, Tyler can only recruit once a night. It would have taken a long time for him to get a majority of them on his team. In the mean time, he would have been recruiting people who are not getting a lot of suspicion or else the police would have been killing them.

How do you know how often tyler recruits~ did he tell you? Five cops, 1 dead, leaving 4~ it;s day 8, INH died Day 5........if you are right about once a day recruiting, maybe they killed INH becasue they knew he was a cop since they already had recruited a cop. It seems an amazing coincidence that out of appx 30 people they picked one of the cops to randomly kill.

I want to read what you said today, a quick roll throught tells me its quite a lot. But if its a theory totally based on supposition and/or "facts" like this one about how often Tyler recruits as a justification for lynching low posters, I might have to vote for you again. Low Posters, saviors of baddies everywhere

I did not like thellama call what I was saying nonsense, it actually got it my nerves

Yeah, I get that a lot.

I dont think anyone likes to be call nonsense, I rather say I dont agree with what you are saying or I think you are wrong
But I had been having a treatment to grwoth a ticker skin to protect my nerves lol,
plus and everyone has a free will to have their opinion, even if I dont agree

It is my experience that Llama like to squash discussion when he's bad, and making people feel foolish over their ideas is one way to do that. I noted this when he said it to you, actually.

Also, @ Sorsha, look at the PM you got right after the "Who's Going to Fight" poll in which you were chosen ended. That PM told me how my fight would be decided. Not after, BEFORE. Maybe you missed it? My fight was a Level 1 vs Level 1 (I fought INH, maybe cops start at a higher level? Cause I thought I kicked his nameless ass )

In any case back soonish, dinnner, dog walk, phone a friend.

Linki, no not really, i think maybe he has already posted more in the speed game that started Saturday?

[unfurl]

Unfurl, in regards to your question about boogs. In the games I remember him in he was active which is why I brought it up earlier when he only had 1 post in this entire thread. Now he has two I guess. I haven't played with him all that much lately though (that i can remember) so maybe he has become like this. Anyone whose played with him lately, is this normal for him these days?

The weird thing aboug boogs also, is that he has not missed any votes, so how he has been able to vote and not even post a reason for day 5 and 6?
but for day 7 he said he likes ties, so what was the reason for the previous days? why the need to make a tie ?

---

linki
That is something intersting to consider SVS

[thellama73]

I never said a thing about low posters, SVS. I've already corrected BWT on this once. Please stop misrepresenting me.

[Sorsha]

Also, @ Sorsha, look at the PM you got right after the "Who's Going to Fight" poll in which you were chosen ended. That PM told me how my fight would be decided. Not after, BEFORE. Maybe you missed it? My fight was a Level 1 vs Level 1 (I fought INH, maybe cops start at a higher level? Cause I thought I kicked his nameless ass )

Mine was more like "you can possibly increase your chances of victory."

[thellama73]

I see the thread has exploded today, I am loooking forward to catching up.

Something just came up, a boat ride, can't say no, it's a beautiful day. I have to vote now. I am going to vote Llama; I did not love his "Trust the Police" rhetoric, and then his wide eyed "Oh I never thought of that" reply just pinged me more.

I think the idea thta the police may be compromised is a good one, Tyler can only recruit once a night. It would have taken a long time for him to get a majority of them on his team. In the mean time, he would have been recruiting people who are not getting a lot of suspicion or else the police would have been killing them.

How do you know how often tyler recruits~ did he tell you? Five cops, 1 dead, leaving 4~ it;s day 8, INH died Day 5........if you are right about once a day recruiting, maybe they killed INH becasue they knew he was a cop since they already had recruited a cop. It seems an amazing coincidence that out of appx 30 people they picked one of the cops to randomly kill.

I want to read what you said today, a quick roll throught tells me its quite a lot. But if its a theory totally based on supposition and/or "facts" like this one about how often Tyler recruits as a justification for lynching low posters, I might have to vote for you again. Low Posters, saviors of baddies everywhere

I did not like thellama call what I was saying nonsense, it actually got it my nerves

Yeah, I get that a lot.

I dont think anyone likes to be call nonsense, I rather say I dont agree with what you are saying or I think you are wrong
But I had been having a treatment to grwoth a ticker skin to protect my nerves lol,
plus and everyone has a free will to have their opinion, even if I dont agree

It is my experience that Llama like to squash discussion when he's bad, and making people feel foolish over their ideas is one way to do that. I noted this when he said it to you, actually.

Also, @ Sorsha, look at the PM you got right after the "Who's Going to Fight" poll in which you were chosen ended. That PM told me how my fight would be decided. Not after, BEFORE. Maybe you missed it? My fight was a Level 1 vs Level 1 (I fought INH, maybe cops start at a higher level? Cause I thought I kicked his nameless ass )

In any case back soonish, dinnner, dog walk, phone a friend.

Linki, no not really, i think maybe he has already posted more in the speed game that started Saturday?

I have a lot to say here.

First, yes, my theory is based on assumptions. All theories are based on assumptions, otherwise they are not theories, they are facts.

Every game I have played with a recruiting role allows that role to recruit nightly. I am assuming that is the case here. Is it possible I am wrong? Of course! It is also possible that Tyler was only able to recruit once, and that we already killed DH, so we only have Tyler left to find. It is possible that DH was not really a recruit at all, and we were tricked. It is possible that Tyler has no interest and winning the game, and has deliberately adopted a strategy to make himself lose. It is possible that there is no Tyler and the host has been lying to us all along. All these things are possible, but it is safer to assume the most probable state of affairs. My theory makes more sense than any other I have seen put forward and I stand by it.

Second, Unfurl, you seem like a nice and smart person, so I do not want you to be misled.

SVS accuses me of discussion squashing in every game. It is not true. It has never been true. I have never once tried to squash discussion in any game I have ever played on this site. NOT ONCE. It is flatly untrue, and frankly, it pisses me off to no end that she keeps saying it when she ought to know better by now.

I am sorry if I offended you by calling your statement nonsense, but I play an aggressive game. I have always played an aggressive game and I will always play an aggressive game. I enjoy heated debate. I enjoy argument. When I tell someone "No! You're wrong!" I expect them to come back and tell me that I am the one who is wrong, and then we can have a debate about it. This is fun for me. This is not discussion squashing, it is my idea of a good argument. I WANT people to argue with me and defend their points. That is why I challenge them. Not to silence them, but to provoke them into defending themselves.

I hope this clears things up.

[S~V~S]

Going back to address suspicions against me now.

2)Llama, for:

Quiet people are quiet, it always happend, but if we go lynching quiet people rather then suspects, we are really handing the game to Tyler

That's nonsense, because the police are an effective method for dealing with "suspects", which means Tyler will concentrate on recruiting "non-suspect" or, in other words, quiet people.

Okay, here's the thing (are you ready to hear the thing? Cause here it is): The police can search someone every night to see if they are bad and kill them if they are, right? There have been no police kills lately, so I am going to assume they have been failing at this job. Who would the police likely search? Presumably the people they find suspicios in the thread, the same people they re voting to lynch. This leads me to conlcude that someone who has taken a lot of votes (like Bullz, for example) is almoost certainly innocent (until Tyler reads this and immediately recruits Bullz.)

...because to me, those sound like the suppositions of somebody who is either Tyler or part of his inner circle. What makes you think Tyler is going to focus on recruiting "non-suspects" anyway?

Because I'm assuming Tyler is not an idiot.

If Tyler recruits someone who is getting a lot of attention, the police will check that person and kill them. No more recruit. Think it through, BWT.

So, if you think Tyler would be an idiot for behaving contrary to your theory, anyone else who thinks contrary to your theory would be an idiot as well? How do you think people will react to your theory with the word "idiot" out there? Maybe Tyler is an "idiot", or his definition of "idiot" is different than yours.

And still pushing the whole, "Ignore the suspicious people, the police will get them". The police haven't gotten anyone since DH, Llama.


Linki~ I have not caught up yet totally, I am reading your posts in isolation first, and searching them for keywords, then I will read todays posts in order. It's how I like to catch up when i reread an individual. So far though, it sounds like you have found a new euphemism for "low posters", "less suspicious people". So in future, I will say, "Less Suspicious People, friend of baddies everywhere "

So not sure what to think of this~ I could talk myself into "typical Llama"~ but your insistence on trusting the police concerns me.

I do not think i am misrepresenting you, but like i said, I have not finished reading. I am not sure what I think of you, but i also know I won't be voting anyone just becasue they're less suspicious people anytime soon. I intend on voting for "more suspicious people". Thats just how i roll

Linki @ Sorsha, huh. Mine clearly said something along the lines of what BWT said, neutral third party.

[thellama73]

Less suspicious people is not a euphemism for low posters. Low posters are often inactive and would not be beneficial to recruit. Less suspicious people are helpful, but not taking lynch votes.

I could talk myself into "typical SVS" but your inability to understand what words mean concerns me.

[S~V~S]

Ah the No U.

I do understand what words mean.

[thellama73]

All I ask is that you don't put words in my mouth when trying to get me lynched.

[birdwithteeth11]

Less suspicious people is not a euphemism for low posters. Low posters are often inactive and would not be beneficial to recruit. Less suspicious people are helpful, but not taking lynch votes.

SVS (and I can't believe I'm taking a side on an argument/discussion between the two of you again), but this is how I took Logan's meaning of the phrase. To me, "low posters" are certainly people who can be more or less suspicious depending on the circumstances. But "less suspicious people" are people who tend to fly under the radar through a variety of methods. While it could certainly be via not posting, I tend to find it's more often from appearing to be helpful, but trying to steer the thread in a certain direction or distracting us from what our main goal is.

I think Timmer, unfurl, and Long Con are 3 people worth going back and reading over. I plan on looking specifically at each of their theories and if any of them actually lead us to viable options to catch Tyler and his recruits. If any of them are not directly addressing those points, I will strongly consider voting for them today.

Linki

[S~V~S]

I would agree with a lot of what you say here, but you leave out that fact that DH we know was a recruit. He was the most vocal person in the game at the time along with you and drawing a lot of attention trying to form voting block alliances and become a powerful fighter. So whatever you might think is the best strategy i am not sure Tyler thinks the same. Plus the strategy can change anytime, like now that you have endorsed a specific recruitment method. There has been a lot of speculation about how Tyler recruits from fighters, winners, only in the early phase, etc. but here you say he recruits every night. Is this something you are assuming for the sake of your theory?

I assume he recruits every night because I have never seen a recruiter role work differently, not for the sake of my theory.

Yes, I pointed out before that the strategy can and will change once we expose it, but it cannot change the people already recruited. It will take time for new recruits to follow the new pattern.

I have actually seen different scenarios.

I'm going to lay out my rationale for voting for less suspicious players (not "quiet players," as I have been misrepresented as saying) one more time, since no one seems able to grasp it.

Imagine you're Tyler. It's Night 1. You have a pool of 29 players to choose from to recruit. You also know that each night the police can check one player and if they learn he is a recruit, can kill him.

Player X is shouting and being unreasonable and everyone thinks he might be bad. Player Y is being helpful and friendly and everyone trusts him. Which one do think the police are more likely to check with the hope of killing a recruit? I would say, and I imagine Tyler would say, Player X.

It would therefore be suicide to recruit Player X, who would have a high probability of immediately dying when checked by the police. It would be smarter to recruit Player Y.

Repeat for Night 2, Night 3, Etc.

Now, to address SVS' point, suppose that Tyler inadvertently gets a policeman on one of the early nights. He then gains the advantage of their BTSC and will certainly start trying to recruit other policemen. The police are unlikely to search each other early in the game, so he is pretty safe, but it would still be wiser to recruit policemen who are not likely to get lynched soon before moving on to the others. If Tyler recruits a poiliceman and he is lynched the next day, we will all learn that the police have been compromised, and the police will start checking each other as suspects, undermining Tyler's double-agent strategy. It is better to maintain the subterfuge as long as possible, by starting with the police least likely to get themselves lynched, i.e. nice, helpful, unsuspicious ones.

Why am I the only one who sees that this makes sense?

Your whole theory is based on trustworthy policeman (and I apologize, i see it was not low posters per se, just really less suspicious people. I still disagree, but apologize for "Low Posters"). I still plan on suspecting more suspicious people.

It feels like you are trying to lull us into complacency (see, a big word!) re the police, and shift the focus away from more suspicious players and towards less suspicious players. I have played tons of recruiting games, and been a recruiter in several. I don't see that panning out.

Linki, All I ask is that you let me finish catching up before you accuse me, K? I bolded and larged up the apology

[thellama73]

I still plan on suspecting more suspicious people.

That's fine. I am not trying to tell you how to play or vote. I was just explaining what makes sense to me. If I were Tyler, I would never recruit someone I thought would get lynched the next day.

But then I'm not Tyler, am I?

[S~V~S]

Less suspicious people is not a euphemism for low posters. Low posters are often inactive and would not be beneficial to recruit. Less suspicious people are helpful, but not taking lynch votes.

SVS (and I can't believe I'm taking a side on an argument/discussion between the two of you again), but this is how I took Logan's meaning of the phrase. To me, "low posters" are certainly people who can be more or less suspicious depending on the circumstances. But "less suspicious people" are people who tend to fly under the radar through a variety of methods. While it could certainly be via not posting, I tend to find it's more often from appearing to be helpful, but trying to steer the thread in a certain direction or distracting us from what our main goal is.

I think Timmer, unfurl, and Long Con are 3 people worth going back and reading over. I plan on looking specifically at each of their theories and if any of them actually lead us to viable options to catch Tyler and his recruits. If any of them are not directly addressing those points, I will strongly consider voting for them today.

Linki

<3

I know right? But I am just concerned about how he seems to think the police are upstanding citizens with the civvies interests at hear. Let the police handle it, we can lynch the non suspicious people, since the police will take care of the suspicious ones

WTF??

I do agree that looking at things from a different perspective can't hurt. We had one day of basing suspicions on the thread after several non productive days of DH association. But suspecting people solely because they are not suspicious is not something that makes sense to me as it relates to a theory I don;t believe to be true.

Linki

[thellama73]

But I am just concerned about how he seems to think the police are upstanding citizens with the civvies interests at heart.

I have to say, I am amazed at the amount of pushback I am getting at this idea. The police explicitly exist to kill Tyler and his recruits. That is their sole purpose. I agree that we need to take seriously the idea that some of them may have been recruited, but I don't see why suggesting that the police will do what their roles allow them to do (hunt baddies) is so controversial. It's like saying "Why are you assuming that the Serial Killer with a Last Man Standing win condition is trying to kill all of us? That's a stretch! "

[thellama73]

The police haven't gotten anyone since DH, Llama.

This suggests that the police haven't been checking the people Tyler has been recruiting, which lends support to my theory that he is recruiting people who are not attracting suspicion.

[S~V~S]

Your optimism is admirable, it is also suspicious. As it also lends credence to my theory that maybe the police are not actually on our side anymore.

Again, theories. Until we get another baddie, no one really knows.

[S~V~S]

But I am just concerned about how he seems to think the police are upstanding citizens with the civvies interests at heart.

I have to say, I am amazed at the amount of pushback I am getting at this idea. The police explicitly exist to kill Tyler and his recruits. That is their sole purpose. I agree that we need to take seriously the idea that some of them may have been recruited, but I don't see why suggesting that the police will do what their roles allow them to do (hunt baddies) is so controversial. It's like saying "Why are you assuming that the Serial Killer with a Last Man Standing win condition is trying to kill all of us? That's a stretch! "

You don't think it possible that they all could have been compromised? This is the part I am having trouble with, tbh.

[S~V~S]

You are saying we should sit back and let THEM do the baddie hunting, while we lynch less suspicious people.

You honestly don;t see why that may look suspect?

[thellama73]

But I am just concerned about how he seems to think the police are upstanding citizens with the civvies interests at heart.

I have to say, I am amazed at the amount of pushback I am getting at this idea. The police explicitly exist to kill Tyler and his recruits. That is their sole purpose. I agree that we need to take seriously the idea that some of them may have been recruited, but I don't see why suggesting that the police will do what their roles allow them to do (hunt baddies) is so controversial. It's like saying "Why are you assuming that the Serial Killer with a Last Man Standing win condition is trying to kill all of us? That's a stretch! "

You don't think it possible that they all could have been compromised? This is the part I am having trouble with, tbh.

Yes, I do think it is possible by now. I do not think it is possible by Night 2, which means that there are recruits that were recruited before the entire police force was compromised, which means that Tyler must have had to consider them at least a partial threat to his recruits at one point in time, which means that he would have recruited someone he did not think they would be likely to discover (assuming thta Tyler doesn't want his recruits to be discovered, which I admit is an assumption, but I think a fairly reasonable one to make.)

linki: I am not saying that at all. I am suggesting that we do the baddie hunting, by hunting for the people Tyler would be most likely to recruit. My argument does not hinge on the police killing baddies, it hinges on Tyler at one point believing that the police might kill baddies.

[Hedgeowl]

Quiet people are quiet, it always happend, but if we go lynching quiet people rather then suspects, we are really handing the game to Tyler

That's nonsense, because the police are an effective method for dealing with "suspects", which means Tyler will concentrate on recruiting "non-suspect" or, in other words, quiet people.

This was the post that started the confusion for me Llama. You do say "non-suspect", but also quiet people, which to me read as low posters. Then it the post below you say you didn't say quiet people.

I'm going to lay out my rationale for voting for less suspicious players (not "quiet players," as I have been misrepresented as saying) one more time, since no one seems able to grasp it.

(Snipped)

In your response to unfurl you are responding to her wording about quiet people, so I am still confused as to what you really meant. Unfurl was talking about quiet people, but you were talking about non-suspicious people and not quiet people?

[thellama73]

Quiet people are quiet, it always happend, but if we go lynching quiet people rather then suspects, we are really handing the game to Tyler

That's nonsense, because the police are an effective method for dealing with "suspects", which means Tyler will concentrate on recruiting "non-suspect" or, in other words, quiet people.

This was the post that started the confusion for me Llama. You do say "non-suspect", but also quiet people, which to me read as low posters. Then it the post below you say you didn't say quiet people.

I'm going to lay out my rationale for voting for less suspicious players (not "quiet players," as I have been misrepresented as saying) one more time, since no one seems able to grasp it.

(Snipped)

In your response to unfurl you are responding to her wording about quiet people, so I am still confused as to what you really meant. Unfurl was talking about quiet people, but you were talking about non-suspicious people and not quiet people?

Fair enough question. Unfurl posted shortly after this post by me, and I took her post to be a response to me.

Okay, here's the thing (are you ready to hear the thing? Cause here it is): The police can search someone every night to see if they are bad and kill them if they are, right? There have been no police kills lately, so I am going to assume they have been failing at this job. Who would the police likely search? Presumably the people they find suspicios in the thread, the same people they re voting to lynch. This leads me to conlcude that someone who has taken a lot of votes (like Bullz, for example) is almoost certainly innocent (until Tyler reads this and immediately recruits Bullz.)

For this reason, I am going to vote for someone who has taken NO suspicion, someone who the police would have no reason to check.

That person is Dom.

When I responded to her, I adopted the terminology she used, even though it was not exactly what I meant. I admit now that that was a mistake, but I didn't foresee the issue becoming so contentious.

[birdwithteeth11]

linki: I am not saying that at all. I am suggesting that we do the baddie hunting, by hunting for the people Tyler would be most likely to recruit. My argument does not hinge on the police killing baddies, it hinges on Tyler at one point believing that the police might kill baddies.

You had me up to that point there. Personally, I would much rather try and find Tyler with his recruits. If he dies, the game ends and his recruits all automatically lose. Going after his recruits might help narrow it down as to who he is, but somehow I doubt it. Especially if it is the case that he can keep recruiting until he dies.

[thellama73]

linki: I am not saying that at all. I am suggesting that we do the baddie hunting, by hunting for the people Tyler would be most likely to recruit. My argument does not hinge on the police killing baddies, it hinges on Tyler at one point believing that the police might kill baddies.

You had me up to that point there. Personally, I would much rather try and find Tyler with his recruits. If he dies, the game ends and his recruits all automatically lose. Going after his recruits might help narrow it down as to who he is, but somehow I doubt it. Especially if it is the case that he can keep recruiting until he dies.

Okay, that's a pretty good point.

[birdwithteeth11]

And yeah, the more I think about it, I think there is some truth that your entire theory hinges on the police not being compromised. If that is indeed the case, than your entire idea goes kaput.

That being said, I still plan on re-reading the theories from the 3 people I mentioned to see if I get anything out of it. I'm willing to try a new idea/method for one day period and see if I start getting answers to questions this way.

Linki: Yes it is. It came from me. :P

[Russtifinko]

^Glad to see you again as well, Russ!

See, I'm just of the opposite perspective. Eliminating BTSC between a baddie team essentially makes them all SKs for the purposes of in-thread behavior. Personally, I tend to have a better track record with suspecting solo baddies; however, I can never convince enough other players to believe me lol

I like SVS's notion of a baddie leader that simply PMs anonymous instructions to his cronies, regardless of if it's true or not. Just sounds like it'd be a cool role and make for an entertaining game.

Yeah, it would be pretty interesting. People have been saying the baddies would lynch each other if that were the case; I don't know why that's true. You can definitely have roles who know each others' identities without sharing BTSC; MP did that in Bioshock.

[a2thezebra]

Snack time for me, I'll catch up soon.

[Russtifinko]

Hey guys, just got back from my trip (Mongoose says hi) and I will try to catch up tomorrow. Tired now.

One thing I iwll say now is that I do not like the way the Dom lynch went down, and I will be looking into several people because of it. Good night!

Hi Goosey!

Ok, here is Long Con's Grand Unified Theory Of How Fighting Works. From what I've read, a lot of people know some things about fighting, so I thought over what I know about it, and here's my theory. There are several elements that seem to affect fights. I hope I'm allowed to talk about them all, but from what I have seen, the 'possibly secret' parts have already been pretty well discussed.

1. Fighting Level - we all (I assume) started with a fighting level. I further assume that most of us started at level 1, and that winning increases your level. People who have won can confirm or deny that, if they're allowed. I also assume that a higher fighting level means you're a better fighter. A level 1 fighter CAN beat a level 2 fighter, I had that host confirmed.

2. Individual Challenge - fighters each get to have a personal challenge against their opponent, which, when judged to win by an independent party, assists them in their fight.

3. The Unknown Factor - some base decision-making thing that is somewhat random, or, even better, players earn without knowing it. I already gave my opinion of what I thought would make sense: the amount a person posts during their fight.

4. Ummm.. I was thinking it over in the car, and I thought I had four factors, but I can't remember what the other factor might have been. Maybe there was only three.

So, it's something like this: (# of posts during the fight + winner of fight-challenge gets ten points) x fighting level = your fight outcome. The player with the higher outcome wins the fight. The greater the difference between the outcomes, the greater the injury to the loser. Too great a difference, and they die.

And that's my theory.

I like this theory and motion that we accept it as standard canon. I will say that, based on my experience, it's weird to me that people are denying knowing at all why they won. It certainly wasn't all spelled out for me, but very bug hints were given. So I'e got my eye on Sorsha now.

[Russtifinko]

LC, that makes a ton of sense what I understood of it. I think I got the basics, but when things turned into a math formula I kinda went numb in the brainz.

Now that DH has been killed by the police and Project Mayham killed INH - I notice - they are not consecutive night killings. I wonder if something has to be achieved to earn a kill? Or if there's some way kills have been blocked on the nights where there is no kill? Or a limit on kills? Dunno...just seems odd to me.

So many things to work out. *aspody head*

This idea also fits with what LC was saying about MP rewarding active players. I think it's super plausible. Could be related to posting, voting, or whatever else MP can come up with.

One thing, though: DH was bad, right? So the police killing him wouldn't have anything to do with the baddies earning an NK, unless I'm misunderstanding you.

[Russtifinko]

What I don't understand is why people were following my (basically random) vote for Dom. Given the fact that he flipped unrecruited civ, I think it looks bad. Furthermore, no one even gave a reason for following me.

I should vote now, could be my last chance. Not too sure about who's guilty here, so I vote Dom, because I think I owe him one.

That makes no sense.

As far as I can tell, Boogs gave no rationale for his vote at all.

Can you two explain your votes? Because I think they both look pretty shady.

LOL. You do this every game now, llama . I don't think you're allowed to call it a gambit any more.

[thellama73]

What I don't understand is why people were following my (basically random) vote for Dom. Given the fact that he flipped unrecruited civ, I think it looks bad. Furthermore, no one even gave a reason for following me.

I should vote now, could be my last chance. Not too sure about who's guilty here, so I vote Dom, because I think I owe him one.

That makes no sense.

As far as I can tell, Boogs gave no rationale for his vote at all.

Can you two explain your votes? Because I think they both look pretty shady.

LOL. You do this every game now, llama . I don't think you're allowed to call it a gambit any more.

This is not the Llama Gambit at all. I didn't vote for Dom to see if people would follow me, but since he flipped civ and the people who followed me gave no real reason for it, I find them suspicous and I suspect I will vote for one of them.

[birdwithteeth11]

Hey guys, just got back from my trip (Mongoose says hi) and I will try to catch up tomorrow. Tired now.

One thing I iwll say now is that I do not like the way the Dom lynch went down, and I will be looking into several people because of it. Good night!

Hi Goosey!

Ok, here is Long Con's Grand Unified Theory Of How Fighting Works. From what I've read, a lot of people know some things about fighting, so I thought over what I know about it, and here's my theory. There are several elements that seem to affect fights. I hope I'm allowed to talk about them all, but from what I have seen, the 'possibly secret' parts have already been pretty well discussed.

1. Fighting Level - we all (I assume) started with a fighting level. I further assume that most of us started at level 1, and that winning increases your level. People who have won can confirm or deny that, if they're allowed. I also assume that a higher fighting level means you're a better fighter. A level 1 fighter CAN beat a level 2 fighter, I had that host confirmed.

2. Individual Challenge - fighters each get to have a personal challenge against their opponent, which, when judged to win by an independent party, assists them in their fight.

3. The Unknown Factor - some base decision-making thing that is somewhat random, or, even better, players earn without knowing it. I already gave my opinion of what I thought would make sense: the amount a person posts during their fight.

4. Ummm.. I was thinking it over in the car, and I thought I had four factors, but I can't remember what the other factor might have been. Maybe there was only three.

So, it's something like this: (# of posts during the fight + winner of fight-challenge gets ten points) x fighting level = your fight outcome. The player with the higher outcome wins the fight. The greater the difference between the outcomes, the greater the injury to the loser. Too great a difference, and they die.

And that's my theory.

I like this theory and motion that we accept it as standard canon. I will say that, based on my experience, it's weird to me that people are denying knowing at all why they won. It certainly wasn't all spelled out for me, but very bug hints were given. So I'e got my eye on Sorsha now.

That's a good point about Sorsha. I had forgotten how she reacted to this idea originally. Might be another good place for me to look.

[birdwithteeth11]

What I don't understand is why people were following my (basically random) vote for Dom. Given the fact that he flipped unrecruited civ, I think it looks bad. Furthermore, no one even gave a reason for following me.

I should vote now, could be my last chance. Not too sure about who's guilty here, so I vote Dom, because I think I owe him one.

That makes no sense.

As far as I can tell, Boogs gave no rationale for his vote at all.

Can you two explain your votes? Because I think they both look pretty shady.

LOL. You do this every game now, llama . I don't think you're allowed to call it a gambit any more.

This is not the Llama Gambit at all. I didn't vote for Dom to see if people would follow me, but since he flipped civ and the people who followed me gave no real reason for it, I find them suspicous and I suspect I will vote for one of them.

Boogs is someone I actually wouldn't mind looking at. The fact that he's posting in his speed game, and has otnly posted twice in this thread concerns me. That doesn't seem like him at all.

[Sorsha]

Hey guys, just got back from my trip (Mongoose says hi) and I will try to catch up tomorrow. Tired now.

One thing I iwll say now is that I do not like the way the Dom lynch went down, and I will be looking into several people because of it. Good night!

Hi Goosey!

Ok, here is Long Con's Grand Unified Theory Of How Fighting Works. From what I've read, a lot of people know some things about fighting, so I thought over what I know about it, and here's my theory. There are several elements that seem to affect fights. I hope I'm allowed to talk about them all, but from what I have seen, the 'possibly secret' parts have already been pretty well discussed.

1. Fighting Level - we all (I assume) started with a fighting level. I further assume that most of us started at level 1, and that winning increases your level. People who have won can confirm or deny that, if they're allowed. I also assume that a higher fighting level means you're a better fighter. A level 1 fighter CAN beat a level 2 fighter, I had that host confirmed.

2. Individual Challenge - fighters each get to have a personal challenge against their opponent, which, when judged to win by an independent party, assists them in their fight.

3. The Unknown Factor - some base decision-making thing that is somewhat random, or, even better, players earn without knowing it. I already gave my opinion of what I thought would make sense: the amount a person posts during their fight.

4. Ummm.. I was thinking it over in the car, and I thought I had four factors, but I can't remember what the other factor might have been. Maybe there was only three.

So, it's something like this: (# of posts during the fight + winner of fight-challenge gets ten points) x fighting level = your fight outcome. The player with the higher outcome wins the fight. The greater the difference between the outcomes, the greater the injury to the loser. Too great a difference, and they die.

And that's my theory.

I like this theory and motion that we accept it as standard canon. I will say that, based on my experience, it's weird to me that people are denying knowing at all why they won. It certainly wasn't all spelled out for me, but very bug hints were given. So I'e got my eye on Sorsha now.

That's a good point about Sorsha. I had forgotten how she reacted to this idea originally. Might be another good place for me to look.

What does LCs theory have to do with me?

[Mister Rearranger]

I'm not dead yet, right?

No? Cool, carry on.

Trying my best to keep up. This back-and-forth is providing a lot of reading material haha.

[timmer]

Okay, so I've tried to read back but this day feels like a lot of people are talking just to talk. Honestly, who has ANY clue who Tyler is recruiting, so why argue about the merits of different strategies, etc.? And arguing about whether the police are trustworthy or not? Fuck da police, let's get down to business here.

So here's something that's been bothering me. What does Project Mayhem do? The recruits don't seem to have roles. Alex has shown he would add new roles to the role list, like he did with the decoder, and there aren't new baddie roles. So what do they do? I don't think it would just be a group of 4 or 5 recruits or whatever all sitting around with a single group night kill to discuss. And look at Tyler's role description: "Wins when Project Mayhem is complete and when all unrecruited Policemen are dead." When Project Mayhem is complete? what does that mean?

So I started thinking that maybe recruits have certain tasks that they have to achieve, for "project mayhem" to be complete, and in the case of a mafia game, maybe those tasks could play out under our very noses.

Next I decided to try to find some weird stuff that might indicate some kind of "mission" going on. I' still working on a few larger theories, but one thing that I noticed, and I hate to pick on Boomslang when he said he'd be away for a few days, but the actions of both Vompatti and Boomslang since we merged have been odd.

Night 5, the first night here, most everyone voted for Boomslang to fight. No biggie. But look at who didn't:

NIGHT 5

Who should fight?

Boomslang
15
timmer (11), Russtifinko (16), Sorsha (21), juliets (22), thellama73 (25), Bullzeye (28), Hedgeowl (31), DisgruntledPorcupine (32), Kylemii (34),
S~V~S (37), bea (39), birdwithteeth11 (41), Boomslang (44), Spacedaisy (45), Leamiteo (47) 31%

Hedgeowl
15
Keterman (6), timmer (12), Russtifinko (17), Sorsha (20), juliets (23), Bullzeye (29), Hedgeowl (30), DisgruntledPorcupine (33), Kylemii (35),
S~V~S (36), bea (40), birdwithteeth11 (42), Boomslang (43), Spacedaisy (46), Leamiteo (48) 31%

Vompatti
1
Vompatti (5) 2%

Next, night 6's fight poll:

NIGHT 6

Boomslang
1
Boomslang (24) 4%

Canucklehead
10
Canucklehead (6), Kylemii (10), bea (15), Sorsha (16), S~V~S (17), Russtifinko (19), birdwithteeth11 (20), Dom (23), Keterman (25), Black Rock
(26) 36%

Elohcin
11
Elohcin (2), Bullzeye (3), Long Con (4), timmer (5), Hedgeowl (7), unfurl (8), thellama73 (11), juliets (12), insertnamehere (14), Leamiteo (21), DisgruntledPorcupine (28) 39%

Vompatti
1
Vompatti (9) 4%

Again, Vomps quietly voted for himself. But this time, Boomslang did as well. Boomslang's post about it:

As I did not win my fight and can fight again, I vote for me.

But look where he voted? His was the 24th vote, look at how many votes Elohcin and Canuckle had already. His statement makes no sense.

And then night 7:

NIGHT 7


Who should fight?

Boomslang
2
Boomslang (5), Mister Rearranger (7) 6%

Keterman
12
Keterman (8), S~V~S (10), Long Con (12), juliets (15), Sorsha (16), Bullzeye (18), thellama73 (20), Black Rock (22), birdwithteeth11 (25), Canucklehead (26), unfurl (28), bea (31) 38%

Mister Rearranger
14
Mister Rearranger (6), Keterman (9), S~V~S (11), Long Con (13), juliets (14), Sorsha (17), Bullzeye (19), thellama73 (21), Black Rock (23), birdwithteeth11 (24), Canucklehead (27), unfurl (29), Kylemii (30), bea (32) 44%

Vompatti
1
Vompatti (2) 3%

This time, Boomslang didn't post at ALL about it. He just voted himself. And so did Vompatti.

These repeated self-votes are pinging the hell out of me, like they are on some mission where they have to vote themselves to fight as many times as they can or something. In fact, Vompatti has now voted himself to fight every single night except for night 2 where he voted for spaghetti. And DH, when he went to Penns Grove said "I voted Vomps, he wants to fight" despite Vompatti having not said anything. I'd wager that that could show that DH and Vomps were together as recruits and DH knew Vompatti was doing some kind of self-voting mission thing.

I've got more work to do, but no one else has consistently self-voted like Vomps and Boomslang, and with so little or such shoddy-sounding explanations.

[bea]

LC, that makes a ton of sense what I understood of it. I think I got the basics, but when things turned into a math formula I kinda went numb in the brainz.

Now that DH has been killed by the police and Project Mayham killed INH - I notice - they are not consecutive night killings. I wonder if something has to be achieved to earn a kill? Or if there's some way kills have been blocked on the nights where there is no kill? Or a limit on kills? Dunno...just seems odd to me.

So many things to work out. *aspody head*

This idea also fits with what LC was saying about MP rewarding active players. I think it's super plausible. Could be related to posting, voting, or whatever else MP can come up with.

One thing, though: DH was bad, right? So the police killing him wouldn't have anything to do with the baddies earning an NK, unless I'm misunderstanding you.

yea Russ - I don't think I really expressed that well. As far as the police go - if they are not compromised - I was kinda picturing them as like a civ ninja. I've seen sometimes the ninja role gets wrote with the cavit that a kill won't go through if the target is a civ x number of times or something like that. To help reduce friendly fire.

But - the other bit - that project mayhem has to *earn* the kill. Complete assignments and then a kill is won. That kinda makes a lot of sense. It would also be a way for Tyler to have a hand in what was going on w/o having btsc. He recruits and gives his recruits assignments. If the assignment is completed, the player earns the kill.

Timmer has a good point too about the vompy/boom votes. That could very well fit into the idea that a recruit has a specific task to complete.

[bea]

Also - I need to re-read the back and forth between llama and svs. My brainz are fried. I swear wed can't get here soon enough. And their thing feels more like it should be a coffee sort of re-read rather than a "OMG, I feel like I'm going to pass out and die." sort of first read.

[S~V~S]

Yes, I do think it is possible by now. I do not think it is possible by Night 2, which means that there are recruits that were recruited before the entire police force was compromised, which means that Tyler must have had to consider them at least a partial threat to his recruits at one point in time, which means that he would have recruited someone he did not think they would be likely to discover (assuming thta Tyler doesn't want his recruits to be discovered, which I admit is an assumption, but I think a fairly reasonable one to make.)

linki: I am not saying that at all. I am suggesting that we do the baddie hunting, by hunting for the people Tyler would be most likely to recruit. My argument does not hinge on the police killing baddies, it hinges on Tyler at one point believing that the police might kill baddies.

But that is based on YOUR idea of who he is likely to recruit; I never recruit civvie sounding people, becasue they have a harder time changing course and get caught easier. I have seen recruits get caught out after one post. I would be more likely to recruit people with a little suspicion. Not a lot, but a little.

Everyone is different. I get your point now, but we have to recall that he recruited DH during this time frame as well. He was killed Night 4, the night before INH, the cop, was killed. DH was no shrinking violet "quiet player" or non suspicious player, whatever you want to call it. So if you are correct about the nightly thing, Tyler could have recruited up to 3 other non violet players.

I am pushing back against this so much becasue I really hate the idea of lynching non suspicious players becasue of a theory I don't agree with, based on an assumption I believe to be flawed, I guess.

[thellama73]

But that is based on YOUR idea of who he is likely to recruit; I never recruit civvie sounding people, becasue they have a harder time changing course and get caught easier. I have seen recruits get caught out after one post. I would be more likely to recruit people with a little suspicion. Not a lot, but a little.

The difference is that in your previous games with recruits, there weren't a team of people who could instantly kill off your recruits just by using a night power on them. It would have been safer because your recruits would still actually have to get themselves lynched, which is a considerably higher barrier to clear.

I'm tired of this conversation and I'm voting for Long Con because I think his vote for Dom after me seems opportunistic, and his explanation didn't satisfy me one bit. Why would you place a second vote on someone, knowing that n this game, the vote is spread out and two votes is sometimes enough to get someone killed, over a grudge from a previous game? It doesn't pass the smell test.

[thellama73]

Also, SVS, I wish you would devote the same amount of energy to disputing the numerous, absolutely ridiculous theories of "who Tyler can recruit" based on nothing but wild guess from people like Timmer, Hedgeowl and Long Con.

It doesn't strike you as odd that they keep saying things like "well, let's assume that Tyler can only rercuit people whose name starts with J and who were born between April and June during a full moon on leap year"? And you thought I was making too many assumptions!

[birdwithteeth11]

Alright, I've slept on it and thought a bit more on it, and unfortunately, llama, I don't think I can continue on with your theory. It hinges too much on the cops not having been compromised (which is something I worry has happened). If you can provide evidence to the contrary of how there is absolutely, positively, no way that this has happened yet, I'll hear it out. But otherwise I'm going to go in a different direction for today's lynch.