The Syndicate

Hedgeowl wrote:

Elohcin wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:
You're welcome, we all really enjoyed it. I honestly think most of our failures had nothing to do with you or the way you set up the game. Our first big loss was MP being frozen and then lynched while a bullet bill. If neither of those things had happened we'd have been far better off. Then there was the tied lynch between BWT and myself. If it weren't for that then we'd have won in water world I think (based on presumable numbers) or at least won shortly after. I personally remained optimistic about our chances up until the tied lynch and regularly pointed out ways we could still win. Honestly we could've even had the game right at the end if Elo hadn't come back and SVS had trusted LT.

From the beginning, I thought that among the baddies were Roxy, Rusti, and LT. So, if the game had played out differently, I could have been convinced that Roxy was the last baddie, but LT was already under so much suspicion.

I was pretty convinced Rox was civ after the MP lynch and so many had voted for her. Once Russ started the Rox, SVS, and Lt baddie train, that made me think more and more that maybe LT really was the other baddie. After MP flipped bad only way I thought SVS was bad, was if she and MP had manufactured that long back and forth in the very beginning, but SVS seemed pretty sincere, in her "WTH are you talking about?" responses to MP.

I think you're right Bullz, this game was actually much closer than we realized. The last night kill surprised me. How did that happen btw? Also, it seems a risky move to have picked 10 as the voting number. There were only 11 voters total that day. Why not go for something safer and more guaranteed like 6 or 7?

Yes, I meant letter Rob! Water?? Hilarious we avoided it the whole game.

Snow, I will try not to ruin your next game through my mistakes.

Hedge, just out of curiosity, what about my case on Roxy, LT, and S~V~S made you think that LT was bad specifically? I thought I was being clever with that.

Bullzeye wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:When Boo was around no one made sure that most people got at least one vote. Due to this oversight Boo stole all my coins, about 80 I think. I was then out of the game forever. Thanks guys. I saw it coming and obviously you didn't.

It was around 60 IIRC, but if it makes you feel any better that's about the only time our plans actually worked and even then it almost didn't. Russti was Boo that day, and Hedge said in the thread she was voting for him but apparently didn't in the poll so we still got to rob someone. We chose you because you'd won that vote contest thing so probably had the most out of anyone but us. Most of our plans got screwed up by those meddling civs.

Actually Hedge, I remember seeing your vote by my name. There's no record of it now, but I still believe you did vote me and somehow it got lost when Epi transferred it to the Polls thread. So it's at least possible you didn't mess up.

Oh, and Hedge, it was good logic to think that we killed Nev because of Bioshock, but it wasn't true. He basically said he was sure I was a civ on Day 2 or 3, and we killed him to shut him up. It actually never even occurred to me that my GIANT POSTS would be considered a role hint, and I'd have done it no matter what my role was, so I was shocked he took it that way.

Epignosis wrote:

LittleTiger wrote:

Epignosis wrote:I think the bad guys did a hell of a job running the civs this way and that.

To the bad team:

1. Knowing the win condition, I would have thrown one or two people under the bus early for easy civ cred.

Except the ONLY real power we had was our numbers - for getting civvies lynched, for getting coins, for getting roles, for votes when we could afford roles.

2. I would NOT have bought water roles. Those EASILY out bad guys. That's how Bullz and Russ showed their hand.

Then why were they roles? As Bullz said, by that time, we knew we were not going to win, so our objective became to take out as many civs as we could before the end of the game. Given they had a vote power of 4 and we were only in Water Land one time... what else were we supposed to do with them?

As a host:

I thought I was wrong in making ties no lynch, but then I thought, "Lynches are the province of the civs," so they should have control over it, so I kept ties at no lynch.

The game would have been long over if ties had resulted in a lynch - I liked the tied lynch = no lynch

1. That is false. Your army was Goomba.s No power in numbers. I planned it that way. You got coins whether you were dead or alive. Anyone did. That's why I loved my game. +Dead people got to play.

2. They were roles to see what you would do. I would NEVER have used such roles. They out you. Is it not ironic that a civ group feared going to Water Land, left it for last, and that's how Bullz and Russti showed themselves?

Epi, first of all thanks for a great game. The concept was terrific, and I had a great time in BTSC. I do agree with LT that the odds were very much stacked against us, and we did choose the water roles only to take out civs because we had given up hope. They were already hard on our trails, and we just wanted to take down as many as we could. Otherwise you're absolutely right, the water roles would have been a terrible idea.

I think by far the biggest problem for us with this game was too many outed players. Besides the water roles, some of our possible roles were automatic outs (like Podoboo) and others were bound to show over time (eg Boo and Goombas), unless we ALWAYS voted with the majority, which would've taken some seriously acrobatic explanations. More importantly, though, there were lots of civs that outed themselves. Llama's wasn't his fault because of his role, but Vomps, Hedge, and I think one or two others proved their civvieness by talking about items they had won or bought, which we had no chance at. This was a HUGE problem for us, because it made them unlynchable and gave all civvies players they could automatically trust and follow. Our kills were so expensive that we usually had to wait multiple days to kill a confirmed civ. I think either allowing us to compete for items or banning discussion of items won or bought could have made the game much more even.

I also think our roles were somewhat unresponsive to changing game conditions. We often purchased roles with a specific strategic goal in mind, and purchasing one night, waiting to see if votes played out so that we could use the role, and then using it the next night often didn't allow us to accomplish those goals. Boo and lynch-related kill roles are a great example. I think at one point w bought a Boo for a player with no suspicion on them, and the next day they got discussed in the thread and were voted. I'm not sure exactly how you could've tweaked the game in that specific instance, but it really hamstrung us when we needed coins so badly. Credit to the civs there as well. The fact that they saved discussions for the day time and didn't give any indication of their plans at night really hampered our planning, and it was good strategy by them.

I hope you take those points only as constructive criticism. As I said, I had an awesome time in the game, I thought you did a great job building a very imaginative concept, and I'm very thankful that you hosted it. I don't begrudge the winners at all, I just wanted to say that I agree with LT that our chances to win were very small from the beginning.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:I don't think you two should be complaining. At least you've won before.

Back to the zombie bar with you, Mr. Baddie Mcbaddikins!

Yes, captain! I'll take 2! I wonder if bea still has some of that riesling left....

You too, hedge :-)

Aww, you guys......it doesn't matter who I vote, so I'll pull a Russti first and randomize! Fun

Bullzeye's logic there seems good to me. Of all the hypocrisies perpetrated in this game, that one seems the most egregious. Voting Vompers

Yeah Hedge, it was a fun but very tough quiz. BWT, I get that you've been busy, but I think you should just read back on the thread yourself. It's really not that bad, espeically considering Day 1 was a lot of OT. I think it's inconsiderate to ask us to rehash our positions because of your absence and threaten us with your vote if we don't comply, and I'm not going to do it. Vote me if you must, but I'd prefer you do your own readthrough and make an educated decision.

And Bullz, no idea about MP. I mean, he is our foe, so technically we'd all we right in voting him, but since he still seems dead t might not be very productive.

Linki: Never mind.

Yay for saving the site! Good job LT and MP.

So just so I'm 200% clear, who are we looking to get tomorrow? I'd be better able to voice my agreement or lack thereof if I knew.

And S~V~S, is there anything I can say or do to make you feel better about me? I understand your viewpoint after I went after you so hard earlier in the game, but I am trying to prove myself helpful.

birdwithteeth11 wrote:Alright. Some explaining on my part is required.

First off, I had mentioned earlier how busy I was going to be with work this week. That and the fact that the grass king turned me into a goomba meant I couldn't post or vote at all yesterday. Hence why none of you heard anything from me.

As for today's vote, I know for a fact at least 1 of the people who voted for me is bad. Because when I saw Bullz and I were tied for the vote yesterday, I tried to PM Epig to buy some mushrooms. I found out that as a goomba, I was unable to buy or use items. So unless something else happened that I was unaware of, I don't see how at least 1 baddie didn't vote for me. Therefore, my vote for Day 8 will be going to either Russ, Mongoose, or Bullz.

I know you all have posted about this to some degree (or at times, lack thereof), but before the next lynch is up, I would like to hear from all 3 of you who some of your top suspects are, and reasons why in this game, you have tried to help the civvie cause.

There's a lot wrong with this post. BWT, if you were Goomba'd yesterday you'd still have been able to post and vote, your vote just wouldn't have counted. I believe you meant you were frozen.

Explain the logic of how at least one baddie must have voted for you, given the tie? It's by no means logically guaranteed, from what I can see.

I'm still a bit worried you're bad, honestly. Others seem to have thrown out that suspicion because 'Goose and I, who are also under suspicion, voted for you. But the logic that doesn't connect and the disregard for previous thread activity (Really? We should each make a case for why you won't lynch us at this point?) in this post do nothing to make me think you're civ.

Linki: Thanks for your input, Hedge. My somewhat snide comment was, in part, meant to point out that we could've used S~V~S or LT's help last lynch. S~V~S is right that there was still a very slight chance I'd die when she voted (and LT about 'Goose, although the chance was even smaller), but I think at this point we need all the coordinatioon we can get to make sure we do get baddies.

Fair point about BWT, Hedge. I think it is noteworthy that 2 Roxy voters went for BWT yesterday and 2 did not.

And chin up about Water World! I agree that it could be very bad, but with coordination and a little good guessing by the Grass or Ice King we may still be ok.

RIP Lizzy.

Hedgeowl wrote: Interesting thoughts from LT. Doesnt make me suspect you less. In fact everyone is doing a great job between lt, russti and, mongoose of not looking any less suspicious. am lazy this afternoon, but I wrote stuff about Bullz earlier if you want to look it up for why we are looking at him. I will say this right now, if mongoose, russti, and lt vote for bwt, you can be sure I am not voting for him. With two possible baddies amongst the four its a huge red flag. If we are wrong about bullz, then heck it could be all 3 of them!

Linki- well LT it's your move now. Are you voting for bwt too?

I have to say, this is a damn frustrating post. Hedge, I'm pretty sure everyone you mentioned has responded to your concerns. I really don't know what you want here. This basically says to me that it's not possible for any of us to do anything that will change your mind. That's really a shame, because the entire thread is listening to you right now since it's fairly obvious you're civ. I agree that there are definitely baddies in that group. I guess I just want you to know that it's no fun having absolutely no chance of convincing you I'm not one.

I also thought this was extremely well-put:

Mongoose wrote: So everyone suspects BWT but then when Russti and I decide to vote for him, that makes that us suspicious? Come on, y'all.

That's a bit ridiculous, and again, frustrating.

Also, LOL @ S~V~S for throwing away her vote and then calling out LT for doing the same.

Ok, I went with BWT. It basically came down to a coin toss for me, but since S~V~S and Roxy trust LT and they're almost certainly good I felt better going with BWT instead. I hope I'm right.

Mongoose wrote:

Hedgeowl wrote:Hey russ, i know I am going to vote for bwt, mongoose, lt or you today. have not decided 100%. I am doing a reread of MP and he casts suspicion on everyone except Mongoose so far. I havent read half of it yet. The main concern for me now is you leading the charge so well against a probable civ, roxy. Of the 4 you seem the most likely and if I am right and two of the 4 are baddie then we have a pretty good shot at getting someone today or the next. I know thats hard for you to address or defend.

After the lynch are you still thinking svs and lt are bad?

I'm probably doing their work for them (being suspicious), which is why they've not addressed me yet. Let erroneously take the heat and they live for another day. I'm really not bad, even if I've made some stupid decisions. I don't think Roxy is our best candidate today for sure, but I don't think Russti is either.

Hedge, I won't be voting for Russti (or myself today), but if you are going to vote for BWT or LT today, and I'm going to vote for one of them today, I think we should *attempt* to vote in tandem and not split the vote.

Thanks for the candor, guys. You're right, Hedge. I don't think there's much I can really say about the situation I'm in. Hopefully I can just prove myself over the next few days. I do think we as a group are in a good spot, with 1 baddie down and 2 more to follow pretty quickly.

I do not think S~V~S is bad after last lynch. There's an off chance that she and LT are teammates and that they suckered Roxy into voting with them before, but there are others I'd look at before her. I do think LT still could be, especially since she voted for Roxy yesterday. It does at least seem like the case I had against those 3 is pretty much bunk, though, so if LT is bad it's likely not for reasons I previously thought.

I do think that BWT could also be bad. My read on him was inconclusive before, but as I mentioned in that post there are a few minor pings in his voting record. To address Vomps, I doubt he was silenced because he's posted so little that there seems to be no point in silencing him. He's probably just not around, and I personally doubt it says much about his alignment either way.

I'm having trouble trusting my reads at the moment, but I do think those 2 are the most likely baddies of the 4 of us. Have to decide now which to vote.

I'd also be interested to see a case against me, just to be able to respond to it. I seem to be on a lot of people's minds. I get that to everyone else there's a 50% chance I'm bad because of the previous lynch. Is there anything setting me apart from any of the other voters in that group ping-wise? I'd hate to die, and to see everybody waste a valuable day lynching me when we can get a baddie instead.

Well I leave for class at 1 and won't be back until after the poll closes, so I have to vote fairly soon. As I said, you guys are way ahead of me at the moment as far as in-game events and player reads, so a general idea of where things are headed would be nice, since I don't like throwing votes away.

Yes, I did switch my focus from S~V~S to Roxy yesterday, and yes it was mainly because there was a lack of support for lynching S~V~S. As I said earlier in the game, I think it's cowardly to cast a throwaway vote if you're at all confident of your reads (which I was).

This result makes me feel better about you, Roxy, and LT. It's a little strange that you missed the vote. (Roxy I understand, given her ailment. Hope you feel better soon Rox!) However, I don't think it really says much about your alignment, and what Hedge pointed out about 2 Goombas being among the Roxy voters is pretty compelling. It seems I've been suckered and mistakenly led a baddie bandwagon.

I'm at a loss as to where to go now, though. I've been getting good vibes from 'Goose so far this game, but I do think BWT and LT could certainly be bad. I've seen your thoughts on me and 'Goose, so what do you think about either of them?

Also voting desert. Awesome news that we got a baddie! And with only 2 votes too. Good job Lizzy and Hedge.

Hedgeowl wrote:After reviewing the voting chart I have I do find it strange that svs, lt, and roxy seem to be voting together. However i could be wrong, but I am alittle worried we are being railroaded in this direction by russti. I will wait to see how the voting goes, because while i'd like to vote Bullz, I may vote MP if the vote is turning against someone I think is most likely civ.

Fair concerns, Hedge. I'll just submit that I'm not trying to railroad anyone, I'm just calling it like I see it, and to me they look bad. Obviously I hope I'm right and that my evidence is compelling, but I do think all civs should look at the available info on all players and make their own decisions.

Ok, it seems that a lot of people are very concerned I could be wrong about S~V~S. Taking that into consideration, I'm voting Roxy. I do make mistakes on individual players sometimes, but I feel confident that something is off about that bloc.

Here, BWT. Both quotes from me: "Ok, my current suspect list. Obviously, as mentioned, I think that LT and Roxy are likely bad. LT because of her strange, un-civ-friendly World Map vote, which I admitted at the time of my vote was a bit weak by itself (but better than the case on Elo). Roxy's strong defense of LT and subsequent attack on me makes me think it's more likely that LT is bad, and that those two are likely teammates. "

"I also think Roxy bears watching in part for her willingness to accept Vomps thinking she's civ. In a game where Snowie has been lynched because he was "acting too civ" and Elo seems about to be lynched for the same thing, I would think players would be more hesitant about that. People are also blaming me for having gotten coins in the Day 2 poll (which, again, is not my fault), and it seems a bit hypocritical to do that and then, 3 days later, trade back rubs and say "Oh, aren't we all so happy to be in a big civ party together." If anyone cares to read back on her posts, she has suspected every single player who suspected her this game, and now thinks Vomps is civ because he thinks she is."

Oh, the poll runs til 7:30pm tomorrow (EST). That'll be nice. Not so much pressure on the discussion, then. But it would still be nice to talk things over by then.

Yeah, where are people looking today? I still think that someone (or -two or -three) in the LT, S~V~S, Roxy voting bloc must be bad, but I'd like to have some discussion about which of the 3 others are most suspicious of before I go ahead and vote. Or more discussion about anyone else, for that matter.

BWT, thanks for the response. Your reason for voting Desert Land actually makes me feel worse about you than before, but the rest of it is pretty much what I thought. As I said, I'm not sure on you yet, I'll just keep you in mind.

'Goose, I thought it was brought up before that Bowser's kill was probably a one-time thing? I lost that bit of the thread, though, so if someone could find it that'd be great. If so, then there will be only 1 baddie killing tomorrow night.

Ok, I read over BWT, since MP and 'Goose brought him up. Starting with votes: he missed the Day 1 poll. He was very uncertain about who to vote on Day 1, and his last post before the poll ended was that it "seems a bit early for a vote". His next post, on Night 1, said that he had been busy with work and a cold and needed to catch up. From that point on he's voted twice for Lizzy and in the two most recent polls for Elo.

His World Poll behavior is a bit strange. I and others called LT out for voting Desert World when the Desert King, agleam, was dead. Turns out BWT did the same thing, on Day 2. I don't know how I missed that.

Another interesting point: in the Coin Poll, he gave coins to me, Elo, and our two dead confirmed civs, Snowie and agleam. He got coins from Snowie and Roxy. Elo has now flipped civ as well. That could be him having good instincts, or knowing who is civ and voting their way to get civvie cred. I just thought it was strange that on Day 2 he wanted to give Elo coins for civvieness, but on Day 4 and 5 he was convinced she was bad. I know opinions change in mafia, and he posted that he was convinced in part by MP pulling Elo's quotes about being civ and happy to be seen as civ.

I really couldn't find anything in his posts to use as evidence that he's either good or bad. You can all read yourselves, but besides what I put in quotation marks above there doesn't seem to be anything worth pulling. You could call that blendy, but the general tone to me seems to be that he's asking questions and trying to generate discussion.

In short, I'm undecided on him for now. Nothing sticks out as insanely suspicious. As with LT, I think the Desert vote alone is a somewhat weak ping, but I'll be keeping it in mind. I always have a general sense that BWT is probably bad, which may not be fair to him, but in most games we've played together that feeling has been right. However, he does seem to be keeping up with the game more than usual (since Day 1, anyway).

Anyone else care to read back and supplement my opinion? He's kind of got me at a loss.

By the way, voting Dark World.

RIP, Elo. We really need to get a baddie soon.

Vompatti wrote:I have a bad feeling about this.

Me too, Vomps. I hope we can get one of the 3 remaining voters to vote S~V~S. I fear we've been hoodwinked.

voting S~V~S

Linki: Thanks, I think?? O.J. was almost definitely evil though, so maybe that was a backhanded compliment.

I also think Roxy bears watching in part for her willingness to accept Vomps thinking she's civ. In a game where Snowie has been lynched because he was "acting too civ" and Elo seems about to be lynched for the same thing, I would think players would be more hesitant about that. People are also blaming me for having gotten coins in the Day 2 poll (which, again, is not my fault), and it seems a bit hypocritical to do that and then, 3 days later, trade back rubs and say "Oh, aren't we all so happy to be in a big civ party together." If anyone cares to read back on her posts, she has suspected every single player who suspected her this game, and now thinks Vomps is civ because he thinks she is.

I'd personally like to vote one of those 3 tomorrow. I'm most sure of my S~V~S case, and I hope we can drum up the votes to make doing so worthwhile.

Ok, my current suspect list. Obviously, as mentioned, I think that LT and Roxy are likely bad. LT because of her strange, un-civ-friendly World Map vote, which I admitted at the time of my vote was a bit weak by itself (but better than the case on Elo). Roxy's strong defense of LT and subsequent attack on me makes me think it's more likely that LT is bad, and that those two are likely teammates.

I think the third piece of the puzzle is S~V~S. I was getting weird feelings from her as early as Day 2, when she repeatedly seemed to misunderstand Nev's stated reason for voting Gleam on Day 1 despite multiple explanations by him. This struck me as strange because LT has seemed highly intelligent to me in every game we've played, and Nev's point was very clear to me and a few others at the time. (Mongoose, maybe? I don't remember exactly.) For reference, http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=192&p=27531#p27531 is an excerpt from their back-and-forth, where S~V~S mentions how good she is at reading people. I hope that link works right.

She also voted only for Snow and Gleam in the Coin Poll on Day 2. Despite having a good gut and being great at reading people, she can't even pick 2 people who are somewhat likely to be civ and vote them? Sounds fishy to me. Not to mention, as others have previously pointed out, that it was beneficial to vote for 4 in that poll because the odds of choosing civs are higher than those of choosing baddies even if you randomize.

Then, the next day, she's suddenly reading people again. http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=192&p=27531#p27531 (Please work!) she defends LT from a case brought up by Elo and 'Goose. She has an extremely civ read on LT, it seems, despite being unwilling to vote any coins to her in Day 2. Strong enough, in fact, that she's willing to vote LT's voters in her first post after this is brought up. She once again seems to misunderstand someone's logic, asking why going to a land with a dead King is bad and refusing to understand 'Goose's typo post (once again, a case where what the other person meant seemed obvious to me).

Here's a pair of interesting quotes:

S~V~S wrote:Mongoose, Elos case against LT feels contrived to me, it feels opportunistic. The fact that she is not acknowledging those of us who know LT better (and know LTs situation that may make her distracted) is worrisome to me. I also don't see LT playing the "poor me, my life sucks" card to get out of a baddie corner, tbh, it just isn't something I think she would do in her current situation.

I guess Elo could be right about LT, but not for the reasons she is saying, and I would be surprised if she was right. Those reasons are all kinds of not valid IMO.

In this one, she thinks Elo's case against LT (which is that Desert vote and her tone, which Elo says is different from previous games in which they had civ BTSC) is "contrived", "opportunistic", and "not valid", and that Elo should listen to people who know LT better.

S~V~S wrote:I am voting Elo. I think I might have a feel for teammates, but first to get past this. I did not play MOTU, but followed closely being the Mod, and her post tone here is so different from that that along with her total lack of actual reasons for her suspicions is sending back down Elos way.

Here she again seems totally disregards any of Elo's points, and says that Elo is probably bad because her tone is different than in previous games-the SAME reason Elo wants to vote LT! This really blows my mind.

So in conclusion, I think that S~V~S is very likely bad. Her logic seems very situational, something she criticized Nev for. My thoery is that she and Roxy both jumped to a teammate (LT's) defense on Day 3 and currently seem very likely to succeed in getting Elo lynched over it. I'm most sure about S~V~S and LT of those 3.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
- More than a few were chiming in that Russ 'seemed civvie' without giving much reason at all, and he received the most votes of anyone during the night minigame to receive coins, even though we have no idea of knowing his alignment. The way that poll went down still bothers me for that reason. That's another strike against Elo as well, that some seemed so willing to give her coins -- especially since it's not even like with llama where his role seemed able to be deduced, even if there was possibly another option, occam's razor suggests an explanation for him. I don't see any such one for players giving trust to Elo or Russ. If it's because they seem 'helpful', they both always seem that way, IMO.

- There's no denying that Russ was perhaps trying to claim the Giant King role, and I do not believe that to be true based on how votes have gone down.

- His reasons for his votes seems off and is far from satisfactory to me, especially his bandwagon onto LT and ever since his initial voting for me on Day 1 and then backing off. Again, this is another item that applies to Elo. I still don't get how anyone could tell LT's alignment based on what she was saying and it baffles me that others found her arguments persuasive.

Dear God. Test is over and I'm not frozen anymore, so here goes. Hi again, everyone!

I'll start by addressing the "case" against me.

First off, thank you, MP, for summarizing so succinctly. I have no reply to your first bullet point. I don't know why people would think I was civ more than others, and I'm also not really sure why them thinking that makes me bad. I do try to be helpful, as you mentioned, but beyond that I'm as lost as you.

Once again, I was IN NO WAY, EVER trying to claim the Giant King role. I was simply trying to engage in in-game banter, something I thought I had been doing too little of. Again, I cannot be blamed for other people's perceptions. I never ever meant it to seem like I was the Giant King, but I don't think it's fair to blame me that people assumed that. I even stated a while back when Nev first brought this up that I am not him.

Can we please stop using jargony terms for my vote? Rox calling it a drive-by really pisses me off, to be honest. Bandwagon at least makes sense, even if it's wrong. I did arrive online 8 minutes before the poll closed, and used 5 of those minutes weighing cases. I decided that it was best to vote before posting because I have heard of people being caught in linkitis and missing polls. I think Rox has complained of this, ironically. I think it's craven and useless to throw a vote on a player who has no chance of being lynched if 2 candidates are leading the poll and it's last minute like that. I felt (and still feel) better about Elo than LT, so I voted for LT. I then IMMEDIATELY wrote a post explaining my vote for everyone to see. The only reason this farce of a case exists is because Roxy managed to type "Hey, Russti voted." before I finished writing my case. Roxy actually seems mad at me about the case on LT, which is based on her World Map vote from the day before that lynch. Personally, I can't think of any reason for Roxy to be going after me like this unless she was mad because I put her teammate in the lead for the vote. (You'll notice if you read the poll that she was very quick to tie it back up.)

Another post coming with my current suspicions.

Hi everyone! I'm really sorry I missed that poll. Things have been crazy. I have 2 tests tomorrow,and it's been hell trying to get the one for my distance course proctored because my emails kept getting lost. I'll be very busy again today studying and tomorrow taking my tests, but by the next Day I plan to be 100% back in action. I suppose it didn't matter anyway, because it looks like the baddies switched the lynch. I hope that was a one-time thing; otherwise we could be in very big trouble.

Bullz - 2
S~V~S - 2

Pipe sounds good to me as well at this point, though I think waiting until after the lynch is wise.

Voted Ice, for 2 AND ONLY 2 reasons:

1) It was a pretty fun world. Especially the levels where you could melt ice blocks with coins in them using a Fire Flower and get the coins.

2) I think Water and Desert Worlds are bad ideas, for reasons previously discussed in the thread.

I'm not sure how my vote for LT didn't make sense. The logic was pointed out by others: LT voted to go to Desert World after agleam, the Desert King, was dead. That is a vote that harms the civvie cause, because giving a power to a dead King robs us of a chance to give a power to a King who can use it. It's possible her vote wasn't thought out that hard or was a mistake. However, there was little else to go on today, in my opinion. There's also been lots of sticking up for people in this game, so because I was pressed for time and didn't want to pore over thread evidence to detangle the implications of everyone's support for other players, I decided to go on the hard evidence I had. I stand by my vote.

Roxy and MP: Did I miss anything regarding the lynch or my reasoning behind my vote, or do you just dislike my vote because you disagree with whom I chose to vote for?

Mongoose wrote:If that's true, it means:

a) that the Giant King didn't vote.

OR

b) Giant King voted for a third party, but that person used one mushroom causing a three-way tie.

Let me know if you find any fallacies in my thinking.

'Goose, I think this is very good logic and worth keeping in mind. It's also worth noting that a voter for either of the players who got 3 votes could have purchased a fire flower, causing a 2-way tie at 4 votes.

Very sorry everyone. Had no time today. Voted LT because I agree that voting desert is harmful to the civ cause right now, and I trust goose more than her. I think spreading was smart with boo out there, and I really hope the Giant King has good instincts/reasoning. Will post more observations later

*BWT AND LT COULD ALSO HAVE GOTTEN MY THEORETICAL 5TH VOTE, I SUPPOSE.

WELL, GOOD THING I USED ALL MINE THEN! I WENT WITH SNOWY AND AGLEAM, OF COURSE, AS WELL AS 'GOOSE AND THELLAMA. MAINLY BECAUSE THEY'RE THE LIVING PLAYERS I TRUST MOST, BUT (I NOTICED THIS AFTER VOTING) ALSO BECAUSE THEY ALL HAVE ANIMAL NAMES OR AVATARS. IF I HAD 5 VOTES THE 5TH WOULD LIKELY HAVE GONE TO HEDGEOWL TO CONTINUE THE PATTERN.

Nevinera wrote:Oh wow. Just noticed how the votes were laid out.
Russ had me convinced he was someone particular based on his votes and behavior, but that looks pretty unlikely now.

I kind of think that was intentional on his part, and I'm leaning toward voting for him tomorrow because of it.

Now wait just a minute! If I'm reading this right, you're saying I misrepresented myself as the Giant Land King. That's simply not true. From Day 0 I have made no bones about the fact that I voted Giant Land consistently for no other reason than this: when I was younger and played Super Mario Bros. 3, Giant Land was by far my favorite. It also presented opportunities for shenanigans and general good fun. Those things would be ture no matter my role.

I never once claimed nor implied that I am the King of Giant Land. I am not he, I simply saw no advantage to voting a Land other than my all-time favorite one.

Vompatti wrote:ARE YOU A GIANT?!

I AM! BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GIANT ENOUGH TO SURVIVE LIZZY'S GENERATOR!

LIZZY, I ALSO LIVED IN SWEDEN! UNTIL ABOUT A MONTH AGO. WHERE DID YOU LIVE? PRATAR DU SVENSKA?

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO, BUT I NEED TO DO IT NOW. SNOW COULD DEFINITELY BE FOOLING ME, BUT RIGHT NOW MY GUT READS CIV EVEN THOUGH HE'S BEEN READING BACK ON/MISSING THINGS. IT IS JUST GUT, AND I HAVE NO PARTICULAR EVIDENCE THAT HE'S GOOD. LIKE I SAID, I'M LESS GOOD AT READING HIM LATELY, BUT I DO LIKE TO THINK I STILL CAN READ HIM SOMEWHAT.

I DISAGREE WITH THE CASE ON NEV AND DON'T UNDERSTAND THE ONE ABOUT BULLZ. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO READ ON LIZZY, JUST LIKE IN BIOSHOCK, AND SHE'S BEEN AMUSING ME MORE THIS GAME. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK SHE'S MORE LIKELY TO BE BAD THAN SNOWY, SO I'LL PICK HER. SORRY LIZZ!

BTW VOTED AIR LAND. IT'S FUN TOO! I'D ALSO BE EXCITED TO GO TO ICE, BUT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'LL HAPPEN TODAY.

YAY GIANT WORLD! IN HONOR OF IT ALL MY POSTS WILL BE GIANT. HOPEFULLY MY IDEAS WILL BE GIANTLY GOOD.

I THINK S~V~S BEARS WATCHING, ESPECIALLY IF NEV IS LYNCHED AND FLIPS CIV, BUT I DOUBT I'LL VOTE HER TODAY. I FINALLY UNDERSTAND NEV'S VOTE AFTER READING HIS 3RD MOST RECENT POST, AND I THINK HIS LOGIC DOES MAKE SENSE. IT'S TRUE THAT MP HAD PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THAT HE HAD SOMEWHERE TO BE AND NEEDED TO VOTE EARLY, WHEREAS AGLEAM VOTED EARLY EVEN THOUGH HE WAS OSTENSIBLY AVAILABLE LATER. SO I WON'T BE VOTING NEV SOON BASED ON S~V~S'S ARGUMENT. AS SOME OTHERS MENTIONED THOUGH, SHE SEEMS TO BE TENACIOUS MOST OF THE TIME, AND THE FACT THAT I DISAGREE WITH HER DOESN'T MEAN SHE IS BAD.


I'M CURRENTLY READING LLAMA AS PRETTY CIV. I THINK SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT HIM STEERING THE THREAD. HE'S STEERED THE THREAD IN EVERY GAME I'VE PLAYED WITH HIM THOUGH, SO I DON'T THINK THAT INDICATES HIS ALIGNMENT. I DO LIKE HIS ADVANCED THEORY ABOUT BADDIES NOT WANTING TO BE PART OF CIV LYNCHES ON DAY 1, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD DEFINITELY KEEP AN OPEN MIND ABOUT AT LEAST SOME BADDIES HAVING VOTED FOR AGLEAM. FOR NOW I WON'T VOTE BASED ON VOTE RECORD ALONE, UNTIL WE GET MORE POLLS UNDER OUR BELTS.

I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS ABOUT INSINCERITY WITH SNOW DOG. I THOUGHT IN OUR FIRST FEW GAMES THAT I COULD READ HIM PRETTY WELL, BUT THAT'S LESS TRUE LATELY. I MAY VOTE HIM TODAY, BUT IT WOULD BE NICE IF A BETTER CANDIDATE PRESENTED THEMSELVES.

JUST TO BE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING RIGHT, THE CASE ON BULLZ IS THAT HE VOTED AGLEAM AS A BADDIE BANDWAGONER AFTER ACCUSING GLEAM OF BADDIE BANDWAGONING? I GUESS I'D LIKE MORE DETAIL ON WHY HIS VOTE IS MORE SUSPICIOUS THAN THAT OF OTHER GLEAM VOTERS. FOR EXAMPLE, LLAMA'S VOTE CAME RIGHT AFTER HIS AND WITH LESS EXPLANATION.

MP HAS LOTS OF IDEAS, IT SEEMS. MAYBE I'M JUST NOT READING HARD ENOUGH, BUT I HAVE TROUBLE GRASPING SOME OF HIS CASES. IT DOES MAKE ME FEEL A TEENY BIT BETTER ABOUT HIM THAT HE'S TRYING TO BE HELPFUL, BUT I'LL STILL HAVE AN EYE HIS WAY.

AND ROX, I AGREE WITH YOU ABOUT AVOIDING WATER ALTOGETHER, AND YOUR POINT ABOUT LIZZY IS GOOD. I'M HAVING REAL TROUBLE MAKING HEADS OR TAILS OF HER AND VOMPS SO FAR.

THAT'S IT FOR NOW! SORRY FOR THE LONG POST. TOAD WAS RIGHT. (GREAT MESSAGE BTW!)

Snow Dog wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:I'm reminded again of why I was hesitant to re-join this site after pianomafia. I don't know why you all have it in for me, but this group of players, without fail, has never let me live past the first day. Every fucking time.

You can all sit and spin.

I didn't vote for you. I even agreed with and appreciate the effort you made this game.

I agree with Snowie. I thought it was nice to see you participating and I hope you won't entirely give up on us. RIP

So I suppose now there's no point in going to Desert Land, right? We should probably save that for last (besides Water Land of course).

Vomps, you were right about Roxy randomizing. Darn it! We were so close, too.

Yay, our first Mini-Game! As a really big Mario Party fan, I'm all about these.

I have to vote now; reading back I'm finding MP's discussion with Hedgeowl mildly pingy. As I said, I thought she seemed sincere, so I think it's a bit strange MP couldn't see her side of it at all.

votes MP

Gah, I don't know what to think! I see Gleam's point and understand his thoughts, but personally I think it's more likely to just be Vomps and Lizzy being them.

Hedgeowl wrote: So I am not really sure what is the best strategy here, but here are the pros amd cons I see:

1. We go to water soon and risk the water specific roles while we have plenty of civ votes. The chances of us lynching a civ in the first few days are greater I would assume anyway. Or it gives baddies an easy way to lynch civs cause the vote will be divided.
2. We avoid water and hope we win before then. If we cant avoid it, baddies might not even use the roles late in the game cause they may have more coins for better roles.

I think this was a great analysis and shows that the water and non-water arguments are both strategically viable. I'm an optimist, so for now I support putting it off, but the bolded part above makes me see the advantages of doing it now. Civs are usually lynched early, and we'd have a (very) slight chance of defeating the baddies anyway.

I suppose the risk depends on how confident we are that we'll be able to find them. Maybe if things are going well and we're lynching baddies we can delay while we hope to get more of them, and if we're off track we try to get it over with so we have a fighting chance later on.

Mongoose wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:I hope something exciting happens before the day is up! I read the Roxy/MP/Hedge and Vomps/Lizzy discussions with interest, but I'm having trouble deciding what it all means. Hedge is reading sincere to me at the moment, but I'm not sure if that means anything as far as MP or Roxy's alignments.

Vomps and Lizzy just love each other, I think. Either of them could be either alignment and they'd still be backing each other up.

More discussion, please!

What do you think about Snow Dog, Russti? He has been a bit quiet. Of course, there's lots of RL explanations for that, and I would want someone to give me the benefit of the doubt.

Also, while I don't think voting for water on Day 0 or Day 1 would be damning, but I think subsequent votes for Water World could be as the baddies will continue to amass coins and then be able to buy the villains that wreak such havoc in Water World.

If we absolutely have to visit each world (can you confirm, MP?) by the game's resolution, maybe we should make a pact to choose it on Day 2 and get it over with when the damage will hopefully be de minimis. If we can skip it and not look back, I'd have no problem with that though.

Mongoose, Snow Dog has been quiet but it's still Day 1. I probably won't vote him today because I think it's fair to give people a day to really dive in, especially in speed games. If he's still quiet later on I'll definitely eyeball him, though.

It looks from the world poll like it may be too late to visit Water World on Day 2 even if we wanted to. I think it may be possible to avoid it altogether. There are 8 worlds and 15 players, so I think it's reasonable to hope we could be rid of the baddies before we're forced to go.

Linki: what Snow said.

Oh, and I picked Giant again. I still love Giant World.