The Syndicate

I definitely want to play another of these, but I will be spending quality time with family and friends (better friends than all you suckas!) the day after Thanksgiving, so I'm out on that one.

Metalmarsh89 wrote: Thanks for voicing your opinion though. I thought the speed of the game would make up for getting a plain role. I was wrong. So we will come up with some other ideas for next time for sure.

I don't agree with splintsy on this. I think the vanilla roles were fine and appropriate.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Do tied lynches no result in a death?
No, they would be decided randomly.

But this is a mafia background that I'm used to. If there are equal number mafia and civs at the start of a day phase, then mafia wins. Even if it was a no death, the civs have 0 chance at that point.
Flase. If SVS and Splints voted for Roxy and Rox and Epig voted for SVS, and the ranomizer picked Rox, the night phase would have started 2 civs, 1 baddie. The civs could have been protected or the baddies could have ben blocked, and even if not, the following day lynch would have been a 1 v. 1 tie, which could have gone to the civs. Unlikely, but greater than 0 by a wide margin.
I know, but being that the mafia reduced the civs numbers down to equal their own, it would be most unfortunate for the baddies to have almost certain victory snatched from them by chance, considering they played the better game up to the point. They played the game better, so they get the win. This is the reasoning I am accustomed to. I am open to change, such as no lynches for a tie, or even a no lynch option. But that would be for a later game.

Well, I disagree. I think the game should continue as long as there's a chance for either team to win, especially given the significant handicap imposed on civs by the tight time limit (what is chance? Isn't it chance that we didn't correctly guess who the baddies were and lynch them, to a certain extent?) But your game, your rules.

I actually don't mind vanilla. Gives me less to keep track of.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:If MP had the role block, why did he flip vanilla?

(sorry if it sounds like I'm nit picking. I had a great, great time. Just curious.)
MP didn't flip as anything. But he was an obvious civvie since he was NK'd.

Good point. Now get to my other obnoxious post about endgame possibilities.

MM respond to my questions!

If MP had the role block, why did he flip vanilla?

(sorry if it sounds like I'm nit picking. I had a great, great time. Just curious.)

fingersplints wrote:Also I think i would prefer to have had the linkitis feature. It took me longer to scroll back up and figure out where I had left off then it would have to reviewed what was posted quick.

Agreed.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:
thellama73 wrote:Do tied lynches no result in a death?
No, they would be decided randomly.

But this is a mafia background that I'm used to. If there are equal number mafia and civs at the start of a day phase, then mafia wins. Even if it was a no death, the civs have 0 chance at that point.

Flase. If SVS and Splints voted for Roxy and Rox and Epig voted for SVS, and the ranomizer picked Rox, the night phase would have started 2 civs, 1 baddie. The civs could have been protected or the baddies could have ben blocked, and even if not, the following day lynch would have been a 1 v. 1 tie, which could have gone to the civs. Unlikely, but greater than 0 by a wide margin.

Made wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I knew you were bad, Roxy. Rob surprised me.
Mine is the other way around I thought it was juliets and Epi. but I wasn't good at picking the baddies this game. that first round threw me off
Oh, I was absolutely terrible. It wasn't until after I had died that I realized about Roxy.

I think these sort of lightning games are REALLY hard for the civs, since there is so little to go on.
For future games, I think the Meta will require Civvies to ignore arguments that come at the last 10 minutes, as it seems things said towards the end get votes consistently.

One thing I hate is the way everone piles on. The first two people to get votes are almost always the top vote getters. Come up with your own opinions, people!

Roxy wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I knew you were bad, Roxy. Rob surprised me.

jk were you not mentioning it to help the civ's?

I realized it immediately after I died. :P

fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I knew you were bad, Roxy. Rob surprised me.
Mine is the other way around I thought it was juliets and Epi. but I wasn't good at picking the baddies this game. that first round threw me off

Oh, I was absolutely terrible. It wasn't until after I had died that I realized about Roxy.

I think these sort of lightning games are REALLY hard for the civs, since there is so little to go on.

I knew you were bad, Roxy. Rob surprised me.

Do tied lynches no result in a death?

Wat, there are still two civs and two baddies left. Why is it game over?

Made wrote:Just a thought, we are wearing costumes of ourselves, but underneath, behind our facades, we are who we really are. Every thing is clear when the mask are gone... that's pretty deep...

Join me at the zombie bar, Made? I like the cut of your pseudo-philosophical jib.

Thanks for the game, MM! I had a lot of fun.

Re: Lightning Mafia - Halloween Edition [Day 2] - 8:18 PM

As my parting goodbye, remember: SVS is bad.

Well shoot. I as really looking forward to this game.

Roxy wrote:I like ties but I am standing by my original vote post at this time I will discuss Juliets next lynch bc of something i noticed last round

OMG SHE DIDN'T IMMEDIATELY SAY WHAT SHE WAS THINKING! SHE MUST BE BAD!

Roxy, will it change your mind if I promise you that I am good?

Also, I frequently get lynched for "suspecting too many people" or "throwing out too many suspicions" so not immediately accusing everyone who pings me is a survival technique (that appears to be failing spectacularly here.

)

fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
fingersplints wrote: I am immediately posting everything I am thinking
Then, and please please please don't take this the wrong way. You are thinking a lot less things than I am. It is physically impossible for me to type everything I am thinking about this game in the designated hour. I have to filter.
You should be able to type a bunch of it though is all I am saying. How does not mentioning suspicions til nearly the end of the lynch helpful? The only purpose it has is so that the person you "suspect" has no time to respond or retaliate.
I'm not even sure you are bad. I just don't think that holding onto suspicions is a good thing to do.
Less than a half hour in is not "nearly the end of the lynch."
Less than half an hour is more than half. So if someone just decided to start posting well into Day 2 of a lynch that'd be ok by you?

Less than a half hour is less than half, since the day periods are hours. I don't think your analogy is apt, since I had other things to write about and I have so little time to get it all out. 20 minutes is not the same as 24 hours. I wanted to see what else she said before latching on too tightly to a suspicion.

Guys, seriously, please don't lynch me. I'd like to win this one. Also, SVS is bad.

fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
fingersplints wrote: I am immediately posting everything I am thinking
Then, and please please please don't take this the wrong way. You are thinking a lot less things than I am. It is physically impossible for me to type everything I am thinking about this game in the designated hour. I have to filter.
You should be able to type a bunch of it though is all I am saying. How does not mentioning suspicions til nearly the end of the lynch helpful? The only purpose it has is so that the person you "suspect" has no time to respond or retaliate.
I'm not even sure you are bad. I just don't think that holding onto suspicions is a good thing to do.

Less than a half hour in is not "nearly the end of the lynch."

Roxy wrote:Oh but I do think you are frustrated a bit you just are hiding it - your post tone has improved immensely since the very first time we played. Its harder to see the real intent of your posts.

I am confident right now, which is a good place to be. Although I am a little less confident now that I see I am one vote away from being killed.

Also: thank you?

Also, I see that I already have two votes. I urge others not to vote for me please. SVS is the droids you're looking for.

fingersplints wrote: I am immediately posting everything I am thinking

Then, and please please please don't take this the wrong way. You are thinking a lot less things than I am. It is physically impossible for me to type everything I am thinking about this game in the designated hour. I have to filter.

Rox, I agree that she sounds genuine in her frustration. THAT's a big part of why I suspect her.

Roxy wrote:SVS is sounding the most genuine in her frustration and llama is all cool as a cucumber.

Probably because I am not frustrated.

fingersplints wrote: Ok so why do you keep conveniently waiting until someone brings up a suspicion before posting about it? That is not very civvie like behavior. The civvies need to work together in the thread. Not hoard their suspicions til the last moment

I was not intending to "hoard" anything. There's not a lot of time in this game, and I can't immediately post everything I am thinking. I don't think it is very convenient at all, actually.

Additionally, there are good reasons not to let people know you are onto them too early.

fingersplints wrote:SVS is sounding reasonable. You are not.

Of course I'm not sounding reasonable. Have you met me?

fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:I am reading SVS as angry that she is being caught for BS reasons. I recognize it from myself. I don't really mind being lynched as a baddie if the civs did good detective work. I HATE it when I get lynched for the wrong reasons. I think that's what we are seeing here, and I am voting SVS because of it.
But she could also be mad because she is a civvie? I feel like you are now doing what you did to me the first day. Why are you jumping on others suspicions like this? First MP now Epi

Personally, I get madder when I am bad. That's just my experience, but I think SVS and me are a lot alike.

I don't remember when Rob first said he suspected her, but I certainly did not jump on it. I suspected her a long time before I posted about it.

I always think SV is bad too, so my reasons are at least as good as Rob's.

fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I meant seriously, one of your reasons for suspecting me was that I was No U-ey, and that was bullshit.
It's frustrating when people are right in their suspicions, but for the wrong reasons, isn't it?
It's also frustrating when people are adamant in their wrong suspicions.

Not as frustrating. Why are you so sure SVS is good?

I am reading SVS as angry that she is being caught for BS reasons. I recognize it from myself. I don't really mind being lynched as a baddie if the civs did good detective work. I HATE it when I get lynched for the wrong reasons. I think that's what we are seeing here, and I am voting SVS because of it.

S~V~S wrote:You are wrong. Dead wrong. And for the record, I think trapping people is weak, even when that isn't what actually happened.

Well, I'm not voting for her anyway, so there's nothing to worry about.

fingersplints wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote: And now I have talked myself out of voting for her and will instead be likely voting for you.
Good. Let's trade.

(Also, Made brought up your name at 6:01, you said you were voting for him at 6:56)
Do you mean when he said he was voting her, me or mp for not liking halloween?

I do mean that, but I mean it in a more or less jokey way.

I am a jokey sort of fellow, you may have noticed.

Epignosis wrote:No-U bars by Eloh. Enjoy that No U-ey goodness, with a satisfying, lynchy center.

I would buy one.

S~V~S wrote:I meant seriously, one of your reasons for suspecting me was that I was No U-ey, and that was bullshit.

It's frustrating when people are right in their suspicions, but for the wrong reasons, isn't it?

Roxy wrote:sounds delicious Epi

llama I am not sure you really learned anything in your trap except to waste a lynch talking about a trap instead of suspects of which now you are mine

We have almost a half hour left, Roxy. I don't consider anything to be wasted. I think the first half has been very informative.

Eager to hear your thoughts in the second half.

S~V~S wrote: And now I have talked myself out of voting for her and will instead be likely voting for you.

Good. Let's trade.

(Also, Made brought up your name at 6:01, you said you were voting for him at 6:56)

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I am not, actually, she might be. Why do you say that? I am a high poster :P
You are, but I feel like your posts have been careful to stay out of the main line of fire, prodding others but not saying much yourself, and I thought your vote on Made was NO U-y.
You answered it once, and this is no longer the case, is it?

And for the last time, she brought that up not because of your "trap" but becasue i asked her a question.

It doesn't matter why she brought it up. She brought it up. And I said it twice, you just didn't notice, which is forgivable in a game like this.

S~V~S wrote:SHE WAS ANSWERING A DIRECT QUESTION I ASKED HER, "WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ON EPI"?

That has nothing to do with your trap. And that is about her, not me.

It don't have anything to do with you. I've told you elsewhere why I suspect you.
It does have something to do with my trap, because she commented on the post I made. Whether it was in response to a question is not relevant.

Roxy wrote:llama what are you on about inre: your "trap"?

Rob said chatzy was down. I said "How do you know that?" all suspicious like. Of course, I know very well how he knows that. He's hosting a game, and besides, he's not that sloppy.
But people looking for an easy civ lynch might be willing to seize on that and vote for him based on it. Juliets is the only one who seconded my (fake) suspicion, which I find suspicious.

S~V~S wrote:
juliets wrote:
S~V~S wrote:I am not sure, but i also think, by poe, that one of Epi or Juliets are bad.

Epi & Juliets, what is your opinion on each other?
The comment about chatzy was weird. How did he know it was down? I don't think he ever answered that.
What trap? She was answering a question I asked her.

The trap was seeing if people were eager to suspect Rob based on an obviously trumped up reason I threw out.

S~V~S wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:And why are you answering for Epi, Llama?
Because my comment was meant as a bit of a trap to see if people would jump on Epi for an obviously trumped up reason, and I think juliets fell into said trap.
I asked her & Epi what they thought of each other, and that is what she was replying to, iirc. And what does that have to do with me? She is one of my two suspects, lol.

I told you twice why I suspect you. Why do you keep asking?

juliets wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:So Llama, what do YOU think? About other than Splints?
I think that you and juliets are the two baddies. That's what I think.
What could possibly make you think I'm a baddie?

You're blendy and you fell into my Rob trap.

S~V~S wrote:And why are you answering for Epi, Llama?

Because my comment was meant as a bit of a trap to see if people would jump on Epi for an obviously trumped up reason, and I think juliets fell into said trap.

Search found 105 matches