The Syndicate

FZ. wrote:LC, remember in Flash, I kept saying that you're playing a game that is too perfect and a little voice inside me keeps saying it's too good to be true? I ended up not following that little nagging suspicion when I should have. That was a very well crafted game where I consider a skilled player doing what you're suggesting JJJ is doing. The difference for me is, I don't think he's playing a perfect game. I have no idea how to convey to you what I mean when I say perfect, but that's where my doubts come from. JJJ has given me a genuine vibe all game. He's not trying to be overly helpful, he's not trying to buddy up to people. He's just doing what he thinks he should. At least that's how I'm reading him.

I do remember that. It was awesome, and one of my best baddie game ever. I have no rebuttal to this post, it appears that you have all the tools you need to make your decision. Remembering how I got the better of you by playing that kind of game is a valuable lesson.

FZ. wrote:
Long Con wrote:
FZ. wrote:LC, you're making me doubt myself with your case, but other than the Kubrick thing, I just don't get a baddie vibe from him.

I think this is the main reason why his lynch has totally lost steam. Such a Civvie vibe! Hey, JJJ, a question for you: are you an experienced enough Mafia player to be able to play a "Civ game" when you are not Civ? FZ, what is a baddie vibe? Is it something only baddies give off, uncontrollably, and Civs never have? Vibe. Vibe vibe vibe. Gut feel? Are you that good?

I can easily explain why he wasn't NK with the reasoning the baddies thought they could get him lynched. As for why baddies didn't take that bait you gave them, I think he was getting votes every day now, as well as the last day, but my thought is, baddies were feeling this train lost its momentum.

As for the Kubrick issue, it reminds me of Death Note game, when Russ died and was revealed to be a role checker and changed my mind about me the day before he died from being civ, to probably being bad. Epi made a really good case with statistic reasoning that even I couldn't ignore. It was probably the best case I've seen in a long time...but it was wrong. I was good, it was circumstantial, and as much as it appeared like a solid evidence based case, it was wrong. I can't tell you how frustrated I was that game. By the way, I could survive a lynch too, and I fought really hard to prevent my lynch that game. So at least consider all of that when you're looking at things.
Believe me, I know that I could be wrong, and that JJJ could be Civ. Like I said before, I truly was posting to let the thread know a very good reason why I suspected him less (before I factored in Lorab's control of the Position that day). I'm not tunnelling here. I have other suspicions. It's just that the evidence is practically glaring at this point. Considering everything JJJ has done that has made people feel like he's Civ, it comes down to one question: is he a skilled enough player to write these things as a baddie?
I'm not that good. I actually think I used to be but not any more. Could I be wrong? Hell yes, and I'm sure JJJ can totally pull it off. That said, all I have is my gut, my reads and how people come off looking to me. If I let your intuition, "evidence" and whatever, be what guides my decision, what's the point in me playing? I joined after the first day, so I don't know how I would have handled that, nor have I read it. I was right about Sig (and should have defended him stronger), I was right in my initial suspicion of Lorab (before I started doubting myself), and I though Epi and llama both acted quite reserved and weird (which is why I wasn't defending llama like I was other civvies), and I understand why now. I was also sure Golden and HB were good. Does it mean I'm going to be right about other things, most likely not, and I've probably suspected some innocent civvies as well, but I have to go with what I believe. Other than not posting the amount I expected from him on the day I joined, JJJ has done nothing to make me question him at all. I need at least something, other than "evidence" to make me consider voting for him. I don't have it.

"Evidence". I don't feel like you have even considered the idea that he is Kubrick at all. "Evidence". My cases even before the Kubrick thing were not fluff and bullshit.

Let me counter your point. If you don't let anyone's intuition and "evidence" guide your decision, is that the ideal way to play? I'm making points for you to consider, which you then act on or not, based on the likelihood of them being accurate. You are not expected to play based on my game, but I do expect you to at least give me a seat at your internal table.

Ricochet wrote:
Long Con wrote:So the real deal is, you all followed a lynch on a player that was bogus. The points that made Llama seem bad were not accurate, and it's only luck that he wasn't a Civ.
No need to be this harsh. Firstly, the result is in favor of the civs, no matter how oddball the case was. One can inadvertedly catch a baddie with small stuff, silly pings or out-of-the-box sussing - sure, it won't rank as Greek masterful rhetoric stuff, and even the baddie might feel it wasn't fair for him to go down this way, but it is what it is. I think our Host SVS would agree with this.

Harsh smarsh. I thought Llama was bad too. Why are you bringing S~V~S into this?

Long Con wrote:It's really interesting that most everyone is ignoring the case that JJJ is Kubrick, despite him surviving a lynch on the day that it is probable that Kubrick would survive a lynch. You remember, right? A case based on "facts", instead of "how we think Lorab might distance in that post".
How a confirmed baddie might have distanced in his/her posts sounds fair of a case to me. Also, the Kubrick facts don't completely sink JJJ's boat, they just create doubt around him.

And what sunk sig's boat? What sunk Llama's boat? Was it more or less than the case on JJJ? The Kubrick thing is far from the first case made on him.

Long Con wrote:I want to REALLY focus on how interesting it is, actually. Lemme go look at how many votes JJJ got today. Last time I checked (a few hours ago), it was down to just me voting for him.

Here's the angle for you, and it really only resonates if you think that my (now) main case on JJJ has any realistic credibility. To recap that case as simply as possible, again: Lorab/Ozymandias was able to control the Day 3 Position. Kubrick survives a lynch on Position 1. JJJ was under suspicion going into Day 3. JJJ survived the lynch on Day 3. JJJ is probably Kubrick.

I happen to think that's enough to seriously consider that JJJ is Kubrick. I also had several other points of solid suspicion on JJJ even before that came up.
Yes, the reasoning here of the process is no-doubt solid. But, as I've said, it doesn't 100% make me pull the nuke switch on him.
Two auxiliary questions: 1) do you think a civ one-time survivor, the kind JJJ is openly claiming, could exist in the game, to balance out Kubrick's bad mad skills? 2) Do you think Kubrick's role could actually be the corrupted one? More precisely, do you think a civ role called Kubrick could encompass all the abilities written there (lynch immunity on one position, night kill immunity on four positions), just like it appears to do as a baddie?

Again, were you 100% on the nuke switch with sig and Llama? Is that even a lynchability-rating system that exists?

1) Absolutely, a Civ could have a lynch-survival. I don't see Kubrick's ability as something that needs a Civilian Balancer Role to maintain fairness in the game - he can survive a lynch on 1 out of 5 Positions. That's WAY less powerful than a common Mafia Godfather type role that will automatically survive the first lynch, or every lynch until the team is dead. But having a 'Duncan Idaho' type role is totally fair game, and he might be that. Of course, not Duncan. Who has a reasonable chance of being in the game, being in the Day 0 poll. And if he is, then maybe there's TWO Civs that survive lynches. Or Duncan is evil or something. Tangential, point made, moving on.

2) What do you mean by "the corrupted one"?

Roger Rabbit - Who Framed Roger Rabbit BADDIE
In position 4, Roger Rabbit can frame a player by making them appear bad to alignment checks.
In any other Position, he may target a player and force them to post using only emoticons for the next Day.

That? Zebra was already dead by the time the Kubrick role was revealed.

Long Con wrote:If JJJ is a Civ, why did no baddies at all decide to back this case and go for his lynch?? If he's a Civ, he's a dangerous one. Look at his awesome all-player ISOs after a baddie dies! Those are very valuable references to have. And yet, a) no one voted for him today, and b) no one has tried to night kill him.

Macdougall threw a (joke?) vote his way long after the Llama train had left the station. Otherwise, just me. Today was filled to the brim with people pretty much ignoring the JJJ case. Are you telling me that no baddie at all would latch on to a case like this to lynch a Civ? He's practically served up on a silver platter.

But no votes. Think about that.
Don't know how to answer your first angle. Llama was, on the downside, a good magnet for baddies votes as well; they gain as much from his death. I suppose JJJ wasn't the main option for them this time? Would baddies just expose themselves by voting JJJ, with no strong momentum for JJJ to be voted, only because they fear his civvieness?

Cool. Cool cool cool.

As for expecting high-posting, high-casing civilians to get swiftly removed during the Night, that's not a civilianesque thing to say to my ears.

So I'm bad now for suggesting that the Mafia might kill dangerous Civs? Why would you say that? Was I asking them to kill prolific Civs? Is that what you saw when you read my post? Really?

FZ. wrote:LC, you're making me doubt myself with your case, but other than the Kubrick thing, I just don't get a baddie vibe from him.

I think this is the main reason why his lynch has totally lost steam. Such a Civvie vibe! Hey, JJJ, a question for you: are you an experienced enough Mafia player to be able to play a "Civ game" when you are not Civ? FZ, what is a baddie vibe? Is it something only baddies give off, uncontrollably, and Civs never have? Vibe. Vibe vibe vibe. Gut feel? Are you that good?

I can easily explain why he wasn't NK with the reasoning the baddies thought they could get him lynched. As for why baddies didn't take that bait you gave them, I think he was getting votes every day now, as well as the last day, but my thought is, baddies were feeling this train lost its momentum.

As for the Kubrick issue, it reminds me of Death Note game, when Russ died and was revealed to be a role checker and changed my mind about me the day before he died from being civ, to probably being bad. Epi made a really good case with statistic reasoning that even I couldn't ignore. It was probably the best case I've seen in a long time...but it was wrong. I was good, it was circumstantial, and as much as it appeared like a solid evidence based case, it was wrong. I can't tell you how frustrated I was that game. By the way, I could survive a lynch too, and I fought really hard to prevent my lynch that game. So at least consider all of that when you're looking at things.

Believe me, I know that I could be wrong, and that JJJ could be Civ. Like I said before, I truly was posting to let the thread know a very good reason why I suspected him less (before I factored in Lorab's control of the Position that day). I'm not tunnelling here. I have other suspicions. It's just that the evidence is practically glaring at this point. Considering everything JJJ has done that has made people feel like he's Civ, it comes down to one question: is he a skilled enough player to write these things as a baddie?

Dom wrote:LC, why do you think JJJ was almost lynched before, then?

I still agree with you on him, but I'm curious as to why you think this way now and not then.

One factor is that Kubrick's role was not revealed until after that.

Dom wrote:thx i also apoogize for the shitty punctuation there

Any thoughts on my latest big post? I'm starting to get into Hitting Myself On The Head With A Hammer mode, and everyone has gone to sleepyville before I got home to post it.

Dom wrote:Hey everyone: would you all say I ask lots of questions or nah?.

My experience with you is that asking a lot of questions is your usual detective style.

Long Con wrote:I could get on board with a Llama lynch, Jimmy. I'd rather lynch you, obviously, but if it ends up not being you, then Llama is a fine contender for me, along with Draconus, and Boomslang.

Very quiet for the past little while. I haven't been able to post as often as I would have liked this round, but I think I'll hang around for awhile, see how this day goes.

Just for fun, I'll explain this statement. Day 4, I was cursed to post a Sonny and Cher lyric in every post I made. Miss once, and my vote is worth nothing, miss twice and I'm roleblocked. The more posts I made, the more likely it was that I miss doing it, so I had to hold back from some quick responses and such. Not to mention it was a hassle, trying to find lyrical lines that would fit into my posts without too much disruption (like "I think I'll hang around for awhile" in the quoted post here). Nearly every single one of their songs is about love/relationships! So many lines that would just be totally weird if I threw them into a post!

DrWilgy wrote:LC, what vote do you think looks the worst out of the Llama voters?

I'm confused by a lot of what I read for that lynch. I never saw a serious tie situation (though I worked tonight from about two hours before the lynch was up, to two hours after), and there's a bunch of references to people breaking/causing/seeking ties. All I see is a massive pileup on Llama.

Point being, if there were ties and tie-breakers, then they are key points along the lynch to look into... otherwise, the later voters generally look like bandwagon-jumpers, so more suspicious.

Final answer: JaggedJimmyJay is the most suspicious of the Llama voters, because he is Kubrick.

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I think we made the best decision I was able to come up with. That's all we can ask for in any lynch.
omg lol this is the most arrogant thing I have ever said. I'm sorry. Bad wording.

LOL! I love it, JJJ. Truly beautiful arrogance, it's perfect.

Anyhoo, probably a good lynch sort of. Llama could have killed baddies, but last night the Broadway Duo probably killed a Civ, so later Llammerstein!

So the real deal is, you all followed a lynch on a player that was bogus. The points that made Llama seem bad were not accurate, and it's only luck that he wasn't a Civ.

It's really interesting that most everyone is ignoring the case that JJJ is Kubrick, despite him surviving a lynch on the day that it is probable that Kubrick would survive a lynch. You remember, right? A case based on "facts", instead of "how we think Lorab might distance in that post".

I want to REALLY focus on how interesting it is, actually. Lemme go look at how many votes JJJ got today. Last time I checked (a few hours ago), it was down to just me voting for him.

Here's the angle for you, and it really only resonates if you think that my (now) main case on JJJ has any realistic credibility. To recap that case as simply as possible, again: Lorab/Ozymandias was able to control the Day 3 Position. Kubrick survives a lynch on Position 1. JJJ was under suspicion going into Day 3. JJJ survived the lynch on Day 3. JJJ is probably Kubrick.

I happen to think that's enough to seriously consider that JJJ is Kubrick. I also had several other points of solid suspicion on JJJ even before that came up.

If JJJ is a Civ, why did no baddies at all decide to back this case and go for his lynch?? If he's a Civ, he's a dangerous one. Look at his awesome all-player ISOs after a baddie dies! Those are very valuable references to have. And yet, a) no one voted for him today, and b) no one has tried to night kill him.

Macdougall threw a (joke?) vote his way long after the Llama train had left the station. Otherwise, just me. Today was filled to the brim with people pretty much ignoring the JJJ case. Are you telling me that no baddie at all would latch on to a case like this to lynch a Civ? He's practically served up on a silver platter.

But no votes. Think about that.

I think lynching Tranq has a good chance of taking out a baddie as well. I'm just saying this to spur on Tranq, it's not my real feelings. It's not time to lynch a lurker yet. Soon though. It's got to be sure.His behaviour is similar to other times I have seen him bad - he likes to plot behind the scenes more than hang out in the thread.

Matt wrote:Oh snap. Does that mean Lorab controlled the verdict on the Night 2 poll to pick her own position for Day/Night 3? So maybe there shouldn't be a question curser today.

I still think it's odd that Boomslang, of all people, kind of took a poke at my "Super Secret Theory", but I suppose I'll chalk that up to coincidence.

I thought at first that you were making it all up in order to flush some baddies out somehow. Seemed like an interesting plan, fun to try. Maybe you should look at Boomslang's poke in that light - if he believed there was something to it...? That might be far-fetched though, and coloured by the fact that I already suspect him. It's really nothing new.

Here's what I think of JJJ's Llama-Dom post.

Lorab did defend Dom and accuse Llama surrounding the "suspish" comment. This may indicate a baddie teammate in Dom, but I think it's more likely to be a buddying attempt with Dom because he's not on her team.

As for Llama, the sprinkled distancing is thick enough to mean something.

Like I said, I'd go for Llama. I'm not so convinced that Dom is bad. We just have to drink to the good times and hope, my friend.

Linki: My theory says Night 2 was on Position 1. The facts state that Lorab controlled the Position that night, so we don't know which Position we were in.

I could get on board with a Llama lynch, Jimmy. I'd rather lynch you, obviously, but if it ends up not being you, then Llama is a fine contender for me, along with Draconus, and Boomslang.

Very quiet for the past little while. I haven't been able to post as often as I would have liked this round, but I think I'll hang around for awhile, see how this day goes.

MacDougall wrote:Something something Donald Trump, something something.

I hear you loud and clear, but I do not understand.

FZ. wrote:
Long Con wrote:
FZ. wrote:If JJJ is on Lorab's team, why on earth would he push her out of all people? It also means that he would need to make sure he was the one to get more votes, which was a big risk when this would be found out, because we can clearly see who were the later votes for JJJ.

LC, I find it worrying that you're able to see all that you have, yet you failed to notice what I just brought up.
You find it "worrying" that I didn't include a point that is not even in the same area that I was looking at and talking about?

I was looking at Night/Position Polls, revealed roles, and lynch results when I made that argument. If I was looking through players' posts and ignored something then your statement would have some validity, but clearly you are referencing something that was completely separate from what I was saying. I'm having trouble believing that you found it "worrying", which makes your statement look like it's just intended to nudge people into thinking I'm deliberately leaving something out for baddie purposes - sometimes a smiling face is just a mask, and vice versa.

Lorab and JJJ were both under heavy suspicion for a while. It makes fine sense for JJJ to go after Lorab if it really looked like both of them were getting too much suspicion. Then, when she goes down, JJJ (or a teammate) could put forth the argument that it's unlikely for them to be teammates. Is this not something that happens in Mafia games you play?
As someone who is so sure JJJ is bad, and knows the ins and outs of the game, I'd expect you to check your theory before automatically voting again and again. You're not even trying to see whether you could be wrong.

That's actually totally wrong, because if you read my first post today you will see that it started out as an acknowledgement that JJJ looks less suspect based on the idea that the game was in Position 4 on the day he was lynched. I was truly all set to lay off him a little, but then I looked into the Lorab Ozymandias power and the timing, and I realized that it actually makes him much more suspect. I guess we'll stay just that way till the day comes along that I look and don't find new reasons to suspect JJJ.

And your suggestion here might happen in games I play, but not in the way this happened. There was absolutely no need for JJJ to risk Lorab that day. She was suspected by some, but there were so many names that day that could have been lynched instead of those two. It would be really mean to push her lynch like that. Sorry, I just don't buy them doing that. That's like bussing your team mate for no reason from the start, just to make yourself look better from the get go. It could be done, but do you really think it's likely? I can't believe you're a civvie and holding on to those convictions no matter what? It's ridiculous

There you go again: a very mild dash of 'Long Con is a baddie for still suspecting JJJ'.

Lorab and Llama were tied behind the Rico Lynch Me Now train, which, when you eliminate Rico from the equation, makes them to the Number One Prospects to be lynched soon after. The fact is, Lorab was a major and consistent suspicion of several people over several days, and it was showing no indication of going away. If you only bus your teammate after it's clear that they're going down, then you are doing it wrong. I think that JJJ was attempting to do it right.

FZ. wrote:If JJJ is on Lorab's team, why on earth would he push her out of all people? It also means that he would need to make sure he was the one to get more votes, which was a big risk when this would be found out, because we can clearly see who were the later votes for JJJ.

LC, I find it worrying that you're able to see all that you have, yet you failed to notice what I just brought up.

You find it "worrying" that I didn't include a point that is not even in the same area that I was looking at and talking about?

I was looking at Night/Position Polls, revealed roles, and lynch results when I made that argument. If I was looking through players' posts and ignored something then your statement would have some validity, but clearly you are referencing something that was completely separate from what I was saying. I'm having trouble believing that you found it "worrying", which makes your statement look like it's just intended to nudge people into thinking I'm deliberately leaving something out for baddie purposes - sometimes a smiling face is just a mask, and vice versa.

Lorab and JJJ were both under heavy suspicion for a while. It makes fine sense for JJJ to go after Lorab if it really looked like both of them were getting too much suspicion. Then, when she goes down, JJJ (or a teammate) could put forth the argument that it's unlikely for them to be teammates. Is this not something that happens in Mafia games you play?

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Long Con wrote:He had no problem with people theorizing he was Duncan before due to his lynch stop, but now he doesn't know what Duncan Idaho is. Uh-huh. You decide whatcha gonna do.
Actually I had every problem with it -- I claimed my role because I was sick to death of people speculating about the freaking lynch stop. And we're still doing it. This has seriously been the most annoying game I've ever played in.

Ok, so you survived a lynch, and a baddie role has been revealed that can survive a lynch, and another baddie has been revealed that could control the Position for the phase in which you were lynched... and you don't want anyone to talk about it. A man's got a right to talk about what's on his mind, and this is pretty relevant stuff to consider.

But oh yeah, I forgot. You already told us that you're a civ that survives a lynch. We must be deaf or something.

juliets wrote:I'm a little confused by what some people are saying about forcing a position. What does it mean to force a position?

Lorab has been lynched. She was:

Ozymandias - Watchmen BADDIE
Every time two civilians in a row are lynched, Ozymandias can force the game into the Position of his choice. If he cannot use this ability, he may spy on a player to see who they target.

The idea is that there are 5 Positions, and we are in one each phase (day and night). Certain roles have powers that are different depending on which Position we're in - see a2thezebra.

a2thezebra has been killed by an odd person with a paper airplane. She was....

Roger Rabbit - Who Framed Roger Rabbit~ A BADDIE
In position 4, Roger Rabbit can frame a player by making them appear bad to alignment checks.
In any other Position, he may target a player and force them to post using only emoticons for the next Day.

The Night Polls are 5 options, and it's likely that these are used to determine the Position for the next phase.

Lorab gets to choose the Position after 2 Civ lynches (Rico and sig). If she is on Kubrick's team...

Stanley Kubrick, A BADDIE:

On Position 1, cannot be lynched. On any other position, cannot be night killed

... then it's likely she would force Position 1. And JJJ was not lynched on the day that Lorab had the opportunity to force the Position.

And that's what I think Lorab did for JJJ. He sends those chills up and down my spine.

Ricochet wrote:JJJ claims he's not Duncan and the N0 poll was restricted to just five roles, of which one is confirmed not included in the game. Bit hard for the signaling tactic to work. The rest of the night polls aren't helpful for signaling anymore, except if JJJ would have wanted to signal that he wants the Bears to win the Super Bowl - but he didn't even vote on N1, according to my sheets. So...

JJJ only recently claimed he's not Duncan. Actually he acted like he didn't know what we were talking about with Duncan Idaho, even though it's been specifically laid out more than once in this game what Duncan Idaho is, not to mention that the name is officially stated to have at least a 25% chance of being in the game.

He had no problem with people theorizing he was Duncan before due to his lynch stop, but now he doesn't know what Duncan Idaho is. Uh-huh. You decide whatcha gonna do.

What you say about the position force is the one thing that creates doubt for me, as well.

The last part about JJJ not voting Pos. 1 on N2 (or ever) sounds a bit like Recruitment mentality: I expect my opponent to plunge towards / lobby for the position that advantages him the most. M'dunno.

I don't know what you mean by Recruitment mentality. I feel very confident in assuming that Lorab's entire team didn't give a damn what Position they were voting that night because Lorab was controlling the Position. This is a fact.

Ricochet wrote:Players signaling their roles, intents or possible abilities through night poll voting is a bit stretchy to demand. Should I count you as a potential Kubrick for voting position 1 twice, for instance? [hollow eyes]

What new reasons compell you to lock on to voting JJJ, now that the curse issue seems clarified?

The "curse issue" was never something I took part in, nor would I have. I assumed in my original theory that the Night 0 Position would default to cursing for Zebra ("at least 80% likely"). I can tell by the clouds, as they say.

Signalling a role, especially that role, is something I would expect. I'd do it. I did it, and so did DFaraday.. I'm not "demanding" it, I'm just saying that, had JJJ voted Duncan, it would have been a positive for me toward him. It's a push to believing he's Civ that could have been there, but isn't.

That's not the "compelling new reasons" that you're asking about though. My new reasons came from when I was analyzing the Positions by Night Post and found that Position 1 wasn't active when JJJ survived. Which is a good thing, and I thought he'd look more Civ for it. But then I thought about Lorab's role, and how she almost definitely did force the Positions that night. If she's on Kubrick's team, then going Position 1 for him would be a strong contender, especially if he's under fire like JJJ.

Yes, actually, you should count me as a potential Kubrick for voting Position 1 twice. I think that kind of analysis of Position voting is a smart thing to do, good information to have. And one might look at the fact that JJJ didn't vote for Position 1 on Night 2... but if they were controlling the Position, then he would have no reason to.

If JaggedJimmyJay is Duncan Idaho, then why wouldn't he vote for that option in the Day 0 poll? 1. It would lend credence to a role claim when there is an attempt on his life. 2. It could cause the baddies to second-guess a kill attempt on him, if they think it might fail. Tell me that you understand.

Sorry to be so JJJ all the time Jimmy, but the fact that new reasons to suspect you keep coming up and compounding the old ones is too much to ignore. *votes JaggedJimmyJay*

Hosts, you know you can do it - tell us if failed kills show up in the night post?

This is the something I just can't miss, I believe that RadicalFuzz was HBoy's night 1 target, as Matt postulates.

HamburgerBoy wrote:I have no information and am not doubtless that she is town.

That's about BR on Day 3.0. An indication that he hid behind her? I don't know, I guess what he said means the opposite. It's phrased weirdly.

It's getting late, and I have been a bit distracted, and HBoy has a lot of posts from Day 3.0 onward. So maybe tomorrow I'll get to scanning those.

Well now I've been thinking, hosts, do powers go through on the night someone dies?

Ok... by the Positions/Night Polls theory, we were on Position 4 on Day 1, Position 5 on Day 2, and Position 5 again for Day 3.

Roger Rabbit - Who Framed Roger Rabbit~ A BADDIE
In position 4, Roger Rabbit can frame a player by making them appear bad to alignment checks.
In any other Position, he may target a player and force them to post using only emoticons for the next Day.

I don't know what Position we started in on Night 0, but it's at least 80% likely that she was able to curse JJJ with the Smilies.

And on Night 1, she was in Position 4, so she could frame a player... did not target sig, obviously. So the only thing I would get from that is that, if there is a Civ rolechecker, be aware that a Grand Coincidence could have happened and your target was also her target, etc. Pretty unlikely though.

And she died Night 1, so that's that for her.

Hamburger Boy was Hider - The Syndicate, a CIVVIE
Hides behind a player each night. If the player is civilian, no harm will come to the Hider. If he hides behind a baddie, he will die

People have been talking about HBoy hiding behind an Indy, but that doesn't seem accurate. He dies when he hides behind a baddie. I assume an Indy has no effect.

Just started combing his posts, and his first post is here. So I think maybe he didn't send a Hiding target in on Night 0, meaning his Day 1 posts will not indicate a found Civvie/Indy. However, his posts (likely more toward Night 1) may give an indication as to who he is targeting.

Dom wrote:
MacDougall wrote:He was adamantly defending Boomslang in ways that made me very confused. Maybe he hid behind Boomslang on night 1?
Then why wasn't Boomslang higher?

To protect him from baddies who would hunt the most Civvish-looking folk?

I want to go through each of HBoy's posts, from the start, to see if there are any clues or hints as to who he hid behind. I pray that he was a savvy enough player to give keen detectives the means to know. Cos it ain't us that's gonna lose this fight, it's the baddies. We just need to use this info.

Info like the fact that Kubrick survives a lynch on Position 1. My theory (and I think I saw Rico(?) going the same way with this) is that the Night Polls are used to decide the Position for the next Phase. If this is true, then we were on Position 5 when JJJ survived the lynch. Which would mean that JJJ isn't Kubrick, which looks good on him.

We have seen the ability to force Positions as well. (Just typing as I think here, haven't looked back to double-check Lorab's ability to force lynches with two Civ lynches.) If JJJ is Kubrick on Lorab's team was he in a Position to get a forced Position 1? Zebra's flip was a night kill, so that wasn't going to disrupt. I think we had two Civ lynches, Day 1 Rico, Day 2 sig. Ok, I thought this post was going toward trusting JJJ more, but this is a real possibility. If there are any Civs or Independents out there that have Positions, then you now have good reason to believe whether or not JJJ was Kubrick. I hope, either way, that this knowledge can influence things going forward.

I hope my previous theory about just one baddie team being Position-related is untrue.

Ricochet wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Lorab has been lynched. She was:

Ozymandias - Watchmen BADDIE
Every time two civilians in a row are lynched, Ozymandias can force the game into the Position of his choice. If he cannot use this ability, he may spy on a player to see who they target.

It is now Night 3. You have 23 hours to get in your night actions.
Ok, here's my theory: there are two baddie teams, and one of them is based on Recruitment Mafia IV, with Positions. Either that, or both teams have Positions, and they can mess with each others' powers sometimes by forcing the Position. The Civs do not have Positions.
Slighty unbalanced for no civilian to have position powers and every baddie to have ones, but overall sounds reasonable, as far as evidence tells us so far.

Long Con wrote:
Ricochet wrote:NOOO*snip*

*snip*

Great result otherwise. I have some idea of what may have happened, and it's not that it was a tie.

So can we lynch Dom now?
Ok, maybe you should not be coy and just say what you mean.
Why do you want to know? Are you a baddie on the prowl?

I don't think it's all that unbalanced. Positions don't really mean more power... there's more variety, but with the cost of not always having access to most powers.

Your proposed reason for me wanting to know is incorrect. I demand that you, our Confirmed Civ, tell us more, whether it's explaining what you meant or letting us know that you don't think it's wise to reveal in the thread.

Hey guys, that was awesome. Reading that 4-way tie, and Wilgy undoing Golden's last-minute attempt to control things was truly hilarious. And it was unintentional? Is that what I'm reading, Wilgy? Truly fascinating. So Wilgy was intending to lynch Metalmarsh, while Golden was doing the switch to Lorab. It's rare to see a move make it so undeniably clear that a player is not a certain team, but Golden was definitely going for Lorab's throat there. Good job, Golden... and Wilgy, that's just suspish as heck.

Moves aside, that four-way tie was a fun thing to do, I'm sorry I couldn't be in the thread during it. FZ and Golden were angry with the Civs. It's angertainment!

S~V~S wrote:Any baddie from any team will be shown as "BADDIE"

So you're saying there's multiple teams...?

Ricochet wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Lorab has been lynched. She was:

Ozymandias - Watchmen BADDIE
Every time two civilians in a row are lynched, Ozymandias can force the game into the Position of his choice. If he cannot use this ability, he may spy on a player to see who they target.

It is now Night 3. You have 23 hours to get in your night actions.

Ok, here's my theory: there are two baddie teams, and one of them is based on Recruitment Mafia IV, with Positions. Either that, or both teams have Positions, and they can mess with each others' powers sometimes by forcing the Position. The Civs do not have Positions.

Ricochet wrote:NOOO*snip*

*snip*

Great result otherwise. I have some idea of what may have happened, and it's not that it was a tie.

So can we lynch Dom now?

Ok, maybe you should not be coy and just say what you mean.

HamburgerBoy wrote:New suspect/re-evaluation: Draconus. I realize I had just defended him earlier, but looking more closely at his day 1 actions/vote, I think he may look the worst out of it. He gave a very soft defense of LoRab (Long Con pointed this out earlier and I dismissed it, sorry) about accidentally getting her wrong the last time she was a civ, and then doesn't really mention her at all after. Although Rico was obviously dominating discussion, the poll was apparently something close to a 3-3-3 split (depending on how many votes shuffled between those candidates), and Draco's vote appears to be the first to put Rico back in the lead. This is especially noteworthy because the LoRab wagon had built later and faster than the others, and could be a scummate hoping to fight that back. Worth noting that after Draco placed his vote, the next six consecutive votes (in the final poll) were all for Rico as well, and zebra was among them (so was Dom; I still have my eye there). Because there's the issue of people potentially not declaring all their votes, and because I haven't super-thoroughly made note considering it's 10+ pages of Mac/Zebra/Rico bullshit to wade through, the actual poll results at the time may have changed a little, but I think it still holds that Draco comes out of it looking bad.

Also, more of a "I'm dumb for not noticing" moment, but Black Rock had actually cast her vote a fair bit before Sorsha, so while that doesn't preclude my suspicions about Black Rock's approach in voicing her own against LoRab, taken together with the fact that multiple regulars have told me she seems on her towngame, and the fact that LoRab did flip scum, I'll put her closer to a town read now. Basically, I feel Dom, Draco, DrWilgy, maybe niju (she also looks bad based on day 1, and I like JJJ's earlier point about her inconsistencies in casing him vs LoRab) are all nice suspects at this point.

Agreed on Draconus.

Nope! I'm going to work now.

To continue a little with the Draconus thing: he wasn't the first to mention a possible tie-vote as a reason for JJJ's survival. HBoy was. Drac just took it to the hosts.

Anyway, GTH on Draconus, he's bad. I think he might be a coasting baddie... kind of like Tranq is accused of being. He has offered very little solid content at this point in the game from what I can see.

Ok, in the interest of expanding the conversation and giving some info to chew on, I'm going to ISO Draconus.

In his first post, he gets the Scandalous, and he randomizes Watari. Makes a joke for his second post.

His third post:

Spoiler: show

Fuzz has already been talked about a bit, some saying his posts are weird, DH and JJJ agreeing that we shouldn't lynch Fuzz Day 1 for it. Then Drac comes in and gives a pretty weak opinion on Fuzz and a defense of Lorab.

Here he gets eyeballed by Rico for his Lorab defense:

Spoiler: show

Macdougall comes after him for that post as well, but Drac sounds reasonable, in this and subsequent posts:

Spoiler: show

If Lorab turns up, Drac may be a teammate...on the flip side, if she's Civ, then he could have been buddying her.

Hang him!

His next bunch of Night 0 posts are light, jokey fare, no real meat to them. Then:

Spoiler: show

He already knows what he's going to say for Day 1. I don't remember right now what it was, but it seems like it must be some well-formed thoughts. I'll look for it when I get to his vote post.

Day 1 it was the Question Curse for Drac, so it may be a bit before I get to that referenced statement. He does want to vote for Rico though. Or jokingly MM, for that classic joke angle.

Then he disappears for a couple of days and:

Spoiler: show

Gone a couple of days again, and:

Spoiler: show

Next he defends JJJ and votes Llama to help him out:

Spoiler: show

Drac wrote:Should probably also mention that if I had to make a rainbow list, Jay would be yellowish and llama would be orange. Again, gut, but this is why I'm willing to vote this way.

Asks the Host about ties after JJJ non-lynch.

Finally, his latest couple of posts have attacked FZ along with DH, which is very different from his game to that point.

Gotta go take my wife to work. Be back in a bit with more thoughts on this ISO.

Ricochet wrote:Must have meant Rogue Mercenary.

Acceptable.

MacDougall wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:In A World Reborn, timmer had his vote on SVS for only a couple minutes, but it allowed MM to nightkill him.
Really? That's ... not cool considering I didn't have that luxury in the very same game. But thanks for that.

You suck LC.

Your role was so completely different than Metalmarsh's role. The comparison you are trying to make here is the only mistake involved.

bea wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:In A World Reborn, timmer had his vote on SVS for only a couple minutes, but it allowed MM to nightkill him.
Really? That's ... not cool considering I didn't have that luxury in the very same game. But thanks for that.

You suck LC.
Sometimes hosts fuck it up. I know him as a host. He's amazing. I'm positive it was accidental. Or he hates you. One of the two FO SHO!

Remember TH mafia?? Remember my shake fist LLLLCCCCCCC posts? Yea.

I'm an awful host, I make mistakes all the time... but that was not one of them. Talking Heads? I don't remember.

Also, Rico, what are you up to??

Brutal Executioner - Warrior Clan
He chooses a player, the kill goes through if they are the right clan.
Position 1: Kill a Sorcerer
Position 2: Kill a Guardian
Position 3: Kill a Brotherhood
Position 4: Kill a Warrior
Position 5: Kill a Children of Serenity

Epic Challenge: Kill one player from each clan, once you have completed this your win condition will be Independent and can win with any team.

Ricochet wrote:Question to any non-JJJ player

Did anyone receive so far strange, coded, spooky, spaghetti, etc. stuff, messages, info or such during a Night phase? Mind you, it could have come via the Hosts, but it was something delivered by a player, so you should normally be able to hint at that.

pls answr

I have received nothing.

Ricochet wrote:Wait, what if LoRab is a seemer, because of all the "seem" wording Epig picked up on?

I don't think that roleclaiming a Seemer is a usual thing to do.

Ricochet wrote:Any non-long-con player, your thoughts on what LC inquired.

Is anyone going to pay any attention to the Confirmed Civ?

These are dark times, Rico.

Ricochet wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Long Con wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but Roger Rabbit was not a scum in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, so the fact that Duncan was civ is irrelevant.
My role was a Civ role in the game it came from, and it is a Civ role now. How many people have received a role whose alignment is different from the original game it came from? Is this a dangerous question to ask?
Can anyone really answer such a question? What's the purpose of this question?
Just curious I guess. There's no real purpose, just trying to find out more info about the game. Your role was an LMS role turned Civ, Roger Rabbit went from Civ to bad.
No it wasn't. Jacob Donner was a mustached pleb civ I killed in that game. huhuhuuu

There's no real purpose or gain from anyone claiming anything regarding that questions. Former civ roles with different alignment this time won't reveal it, for obvious suicidal reasons. And even former bad/indy roles turned civ this time could be eyeballed. So asking this feels like "baddies pls raise your hand"/witchhunt 101.

I think you're overanalyzing it. As I said, I was just curious to see what people would say.

Ricochet wrote:
Long Con wrote:
MacDougall wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but Roger Rabbit was not a scum in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, so the fact that Duncan was civ is irrelevant.
My role was a Civ role in the game it came from, and it is a Civ role now. How many people have received a role whose alignment is different from the original game it came from? Is this a dangerous question to ask?
Can anyone really answer such a question? What's the purpose of this question?

Just curious I guess. There's no real purpose, just trying to find out more info about the game. Your role was an LMS role turned Civ, Roger Rabbit went from Civ to bad.

MacDougall wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but Roger Rabbit was not a scum in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, so the fact that Duncan was civ is irrelevant.

My role was a Civ role in the game it came from, and it is a Civ role now. How many people have received a role whose alignment is different from the original game it came from? Is this a dangerous question to ask?

My vote was where I wanted it before the first lynch was up, and it's in the same place now. Nothing has changed for me yet, although I will be looking into the 11 other voters for you. That's a lot of voters.

LoRab wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Turnip Head wrote:Turnip Head even sat with them, and while blowing the petals off a daisy...
Blowing the petals off a daisy? That's not a thing.
Please tell me which flower I'm thinking of. It's it a daffodil? I wrote the post in like 5 minutes, no time for fact checking!
Dandelion.

Daisies are plucked in a loves me, loves me not sort of way.

I liked it the way you did it though, TH.

Golden wrote:
FZ. wrote:
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:
Golden wrote:I just realised - Boomslang currently has the curse Draconus had on day one.
I hadn't noticed this either. Good eye.

I'm willing to bet the question-curser is on a separate mafia team to Zebra's. Unless Boom was cursed by a team mate (here we go again), that'd be a tick in his favor at least for one side.
Boomslang was being talked about and suspected. He had more to gain than you in terms of using the curse on himself if he's on that team. And again, what is the curse?
Speaking only in yes/no questions.

How do you know it's just yes/no questions, as opposed to just speaking in questions?

Turnip Head wrote:Turnip Head even sat with them, and while blowing the petals off a daisy...

Blowing the petals off a daisy? That's not a thing.

HamburgerBoy wrote:So there's at least a possibility that this was a tie, and that scum knew this could be the result of a tie. If that was the case, one more thing in favor of Jimmy being scum.

I don't think the hosts would tell the scum team(s) information like that if they weren't willing to make it public.

Lame result. Might as well vote the Jimster again. *votes JaggedJimmyJay*

I'm comfortable with lynching JJJ or Llama today, I have suspicion of both of them. I'm also cool with a Boomslang lynch. So all these developments are legit.

Epignosis wrote:Also, RIP Severus Snape. Second death this week at the age of 69 due to cancer.

RIP Hans Gruber.

Sorsha wrote:
Long Con wrote:Llama is saying "buddying", and Sorsha is saying "intentional NK target". Pretty different accusations for the same thing. I just don't think Sorsha's is a thing.
You don't think baddies will paint targets on civs? Try to make them look like super civs so the other team might take them out?

No, I don't recall ever seeing that. The dynamic for an idea like that might be different for a game like this where NK'ed roles are revealed, but the way I see it, the reasons for baddies pointing out Civs in the thread are to do some buddying, and to get some cred after their role is revealed.

Trying to direct the other baddie team's kill by calling a Civ a Civ seems like it could backfire. Maybe the other baddie team will read it as YOU are a Civ who is doing bold things out there, and kill you instead.

I am a big fan of thinking through likely baddie behaviour scenarios and then watching to see whose behaviour matches my prediction. So, I understand your motivation in pursuing this on Llama... I feel like this is the part of the sentence where there's a "but", except I don't have anything to say on that front. I'll be very happy if this works out for you.

There was a game this year where the baddies seemed to be specifically targeting the players at the Civ end of rainbow lists. Perhaps the same baddies are involved. I don't remember which game, unfortunately.

Llama is saying "buddying", and Sorsha is saying "intentional NK target". Pretty different accusations for the same thing. I just don't think Sorsha's is a thing.

Golden wrote:Well, the bits you have put in the quotation marks are exactly what I'd put in the blank.

Huh. Ok, then I guess we'll see. I do see that Sorsha is leaning toward just that possibility. Is she saying the same thing Llama is saying?

Golden wrote:Fair enough, LC.

At this point, llama has gone far past you in my order of suspicion. I could see a world in which the pair of you are teammates... but the impact of your statement, I agree, is not in your words, but only in the fact that it was support for llama's perspective at that time. And you make fair points about the nature of your post.

I'm arguing the point because I believe llama is bad, and I think the choice of Fuzz was deliberately to make me look responsible for putting a target on Fuzz's back. I'm arguing the point because I think I'm just as much a part of the mafia's intended plan of targetting as Fuzz was. I care about being seen as responsible insofar as llama is arguing this is an indicator that I am mafia. But I don't care about the fact of whether the actual behaviour was part of the mafias choice processes. I'd do the same thing again tomorrow. In fact, I did the same thing today (I said I'd use my vote to save JJJ) and I have no fear of either a) it causing JJJs nightkill tomorrow or b) if JJJ is nightkilled, being responsible. Anything you do or say in the game thread could make you or someone else the mafia target. You can't avoid it. All you can do is play the best game you can, as a civ, to unmask the baddies. When I read people as civ, thats what I'm doing.

If people want to see 'declaring someone as a civ read' as being poor judgment, that's up to them. I disagree on many levels. I think the town figuring out who other members of the town are makes a town win more likely. Most of the town wins I've been a part of, there have been so many civs that seem so townie or are so confirmed that the mafia simply cannot kill them all.

I don't think your subjective level of responsibility for Fuzz's nightkill has any bearing on your likelihood of being bad.

So, the idea here is that the baddies look at Golden's declaration of Fuzz as Civ, and they choose to kill Fuzz in order for __________ to happen to Golden as a result.

I don't know what the blank is being filled in as. I don't feel like "a lynch" or "extra suspicion" fits in that sentence. Help me out here, I think I'm failing to understand the issue.

Golden wrote:
Long Con wrote:I agree. Someone being a trusted or proven Civ in the thread is extremely likely to be nightkilled in my experience.
I'm not going to win this fight.

Needless to say, I read both Long Con and llama as bad, and think their key intent here is to discredit.

Llama calls RadicalFuzz 'unlynchable' which is obviously extreme given I think about three players called him civ.
Long Con brings in 'proven civs' which Fuzz was obviously not, and calls them 'extremely likely' to be NKed, which is a clear exaggeration.

There are a whole lot of people who I would say right now are, overall, trusted civs. RadicalFuzz was one. I wasn't even saying he wasn't killed because of the conversation about him being a top civ... I just find it much more likely he was killed for it deliberately to put heat on those who said it and not merely because he was a top civ. And Long Con, I very much doubt even you could deny that the 'extremely likely' kill is going to be based on far more than such a simplistic and (in llamas words) 'obvious' explanation.

Read my post again. Am I stating my opinion, or am I attempting to discredit you?

You're allowed to be wrong about the amount a Mafia team would need to kill a trusted Civ. I don't think you lose any credit for having the opinion you do about that. I think there's some main reasons I have seen the Mafia choose to kill: kill a player who is after one of them, kill a trusted player that is unlikely to be lynched, kill a player who is known to be dangerously effective in hunting you, kill someone to frame another player. Off the top of my head, these are some common reasons for choosing who to kill; these are reasons I have seen come up over and over. And yes, killing someone who is perceived as a 'trusted Civ' in the thread is commonly a reason.

To me, it seems like you are arguing the point because you don't want to be seen as responsible for putting a target on RFuzz's back. Beyond some debatably poor judgement, I'm not accusing you of anything or trying to discredit your opinions or your reputation. You have a thing going with Llama here, but I haven't been part of that at all. I don't want to be dragged into it either. I don't think that it inherently looks suspicious for a player to declare someone a Civ in the thread like you did to Fuzz. I don't think that a baddie specifically calls someone a Civ in order to get them nightkilled - maybe that's a ploy I haven't seen yet, or realized when it was happening.

There is the possibility that you are Mafia and you were buddying with Fuzz. At this point, that's not even enough to put you on my suspicion list.

Search found 238 matches