Battlestar Galactica Mafia - GAME OVER

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

But whatever, game's over. People were wrong about things. People were right about things. Mafia.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I've been watching the series since the game ended.

Show spoiler:

Spoiler: show

I'd like to file a personal grievance with Glorfindel for fracking shooting me.

[Long Con]

Wow, okay. I guess it really is just a pipe dream that people would just read my posts and understand what I am saying in them, and analyze the correctness of the intended communication. That is so frustrating, I didn't think my communications were so complex.

It's not that readers may not understand what you're posting, it's really a matter of whether or not they believe you're telling the truth. For example, going with Drumbeats' sortie plan made you uneasy, because he could have been manipulating everything to come out for his good and our bad (our = civs). As you know, the same thing could have been true about what you were saying in the thread. (As it turned out, his plan was solid, truthful and without malice, yet it's impossible to know that during game play.) So just like Drumbeats' plan, what you are communicating may also be a manipulation designed to come out for your good and our bad.

Well... that's not entirely accurate. I wasn't pushing an alternate plan that was of my own devising, as DrumBeats' plan was entirely laid out by him. I didn't have an alternate plan, I was very clear on the point that an alteration of his plan in ANY way was a smart idea, in order to eliminate the possibility of him being a baddie leading us all by the nose.

I can hear you are extremely frustrated, and I appreciate that. I am also extremely frustrated with what happened to me in the game. So I'm not saying what I'm saying to make your frustration seem wrong or out of place, because I don't think it is wrong or out of place, my goal here is just to explain where my head is at in a mafia game, and where I think other peoples' (or other civs') heads may be at in a game context.

That's cool - what made you frustrated in this game?

You happened to be telling the truth, at the same time, since no one can read your mind, no one knew this. I have not seen in recent memory a role design where it automatically dies at a certain point in the game. So that role mechanic would not have even entered my mind, no matter how much you were indirectly or directly hinting at it, I just never would have come up with that idea unless and until it was 100% spelled out for me. (In fact, I have to say that I really respect the fact that you went ahead and played your role, knowing you wouldn't last long from the get go.) It's just that no one else knew that, and couldn't take what you said at face value... because, well, mafia. There are lots of unknowns when you're civ. You yourself even said you were as surprised as anybody that Cain flipped "civ". So I think many other civs felt the same way, and since we didn't know you'd self-destruct, you were taken out just in case, to make our win cons easier.

Does that make sense and help at all?

It does make sense, but again it's not entirely accurate. I never claimed that I was going to automatically die, I claimed that I could PROVE myself to all the Civs. No one knew, or could have known, that my proof would be my death. They just had to give me a couple of days to see if I was telling the truth or not. It's not really that much to ask. Lynching me wasn't a priority, even if you knew that I was Cain and altering all the Win Conditions, that doesn't even have any effect at all until literally the end of the game.

[Long Con]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

[Long Con]

Yea. Sorry. I didn't explain that very well lc. :/. I thought it was you were Starbuck or bad. Lol. Not and. I was willing to wait in case it was the former. I also thought for a long time that zeebs and wigly were Baltar and 6. So shows what I know about anything....

Gotcha - thanks for being willing to wait.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

I've highlighted the point where we separate. The game of Mafia is not about determining whose proposal is the most logical; it's about determining who is bad. If I have any reason at all to believe that you aren't being entirely sincere in your content, then that means more to me than whether you're making a logical point. I think you've granted your own insincerity too on some level at least -- you weren't entirely motivated by a concern that DrumBeats might be bad and that it might be a problem to trust in his strategy. You had other reasons for interfering as you've said yourself.

I genuinely do not believe that the concern you proposed about DrumBeats was sufficient to justify your actions. What is logical is not always smartest. Usually perhaps, but a townie must judge every scenario individually. I had no reason whatsoever at that point in the game to doubt DrumBeats, rightly so apparently, and I was not interested in honoring paranoia or tinfoiling against him. I was more concerned with your behavior.

I think some of us could tell that you did what you did for reasons beyond just wariness of DrumBeats. What we were wrong about is what those other motives were. But that's how the game works, right? People make reads, they act accordingly, and there's nothing more to be said really.

[Golden]

This may sound... I dunno... voyeuristically mean or something.

But I actually get a little joy, as a host, being able to clearly see different motivations coming together and clashing, knowing that both are sincere. LC's example is one of those. Rico and Matt's entirely different responses to the Cylon Amnesty Act were another.

I also like it when people make theories that are completely understandable and logical, but badly wrong. Or when people are saying something that is actually clearly correct, but no-one is listening. All these things remind me how hard this game really is to get right... and in some small way makes me feel better about the goal for me when I play being more about the experience and not the outcome (beyond trying my hardest for my team).

[S~V~S]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

But whatever, game's over. People were wrong about things. People were right about things. Mafia.

This. I will apologize to you if it makes you feel better LC, but I don't really think I did anything wrong. At the time I thought your impassioned pleas were impassioned bullshit because this is Mafia and bullshit each other is what we do. The last thing it was was personal, about you or about me. It was about how I perceived your behavior.

I have been INTENTIONALLY railroaded tons of times in games, not unintentionally like you were, and that is part of the game. Ask G Man, I fervently believed everything I said about you. You can't take it like I did anything wrong cause I don't think that I did.

[S~V~S]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

But that isn't how *I* play. I don't play a logical game. So we are all different.

[Long Con]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

I've highlighted the point where we separate. The game of Mafia is not about determining whose proposal is the most logical; it's about determining who is bad. If I have any reason at all to believe that you aren't being entirely sincere in your content, then that means more to me than whether you're making a logical point. I think you've granted your own insincerity too on some level at least -- you weren't entirely motivated by a concern that DrumBeats might be bad and that it might be a problem to trust in his strategy. You had other reasons for interfering as you've said yourself.

I genuinely do not believe that the concern you proposed about DrumBeats was sufficient to justify your actions. What is logical is not always smartest. Usually perhaps, but a townie must judge every scenario individually. I had no reason whatsoever at that point in the game to doubt DrumBeats, rightly so apparently, and I was not interested in honoring paranoia or tinfoiling against him. I was more concerned with your behavior.

I think some of us could tell that you did what you did for reasons beyond just wariness of DrumBeats. What we were wrong about is what those other motives were. But that's how the game works, right? People make reads, they act accordingly, and there's nothing more to be said really.

I'm not talking about me and my motives. I'm talking about each individual's responsibility to make the smarter move when the opportunity presents itself so obviously. That's not what happened, and luckily it didn't blow up in the Civs' faces. It didn't have to be left to luck.

And I'm not talking about how to play the game of Mafia as a generality, I'm talking about a specific situation that was unique to this game. More like checkers than Mafia, let's say. You can do random moves in checkers, or you can try to do it logically. Doing it logically will be more likely to result in a win, though both ways COULD result in a win.

[Long Con]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

But whatever, game's over. People were wrong about things. People were right about things. Mafia.

This. I will apologize to you if it makes you feel better LC, but I don't really think I did anything wrong. At the time I thought your impassioned pleas were impassioned bullshit because this is Mafia and bullshit each other is what we do. The last thing it was was personal, about you or about me. It was about how I perceived your behavior.

I don't want any sort of apology from you, especially not one that you are setting up to be insincere in advance. I also never said it was personal.

I have been INTENTIONALLY railroaded tons of times in games, not unintentionally like you were, and that is part of the game. Ask G Man, I fervently believed everything I said about you. You can't take it like I did anything wrong cause I don't think that I did.

Railroaded?

That's actually a really funny thing to say: "You can't take it like I did anything wrong cause I don't think that I did." What if you DID something wrong, AND you were wrong about whether or not it was wrong? You are not infallible, are you?

You already admitted to being intentionally deceptive regarding what you said about me, which is something you did differently than if you were Civ... so that's something I wanted to clarify that's already been laid to rest. The only thing I really would like from you is to finally admit to a great deal of roleplaying in your arguments with me earlier, since you have thus far avoided talking about that at all.

[rabbit8]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

lol, Come on LC. This post was for real?

[S~V~S]

LC, it was not roleplaying. That is why I have not talked about; I am not even sure what you mean when you say this.

I thought you were bad, I had reasons for thinking so, and I posted and acted on them. You are acting like we are still playing and you are trying to trick me into admitting something. There is nothing to admit. I thought you were bad. In all sincerity.

[S~V~S]

Also the "railroading" thing was poorly worded on my part; you seem to be thinking I did this on purpose, and I did not. I kinda think you are overreacting, and maybe I did not want to say that. I mean that when I said what I said about you & my suspicions of you, I believed what I believed, and I acted on it. It was not an intentional push to remove you regardless of role. I wanted to remove your role.

I would have wanted to remove your role if I was a civ.

[Ricochet]

Does anyone in here need a lawyer?

Or maybe a new game for a good ol' rematch?

[Long Con]

Long Con, I felt your reasoning for interfering with the process DrumBeats had laid out looked more like a cheap excuse to interfere than an honest concern -- even if it might have been "logical" on the surface. Even baddies are logical sometimes, especially me.

All I expect is that, when I put something forward that is undeniably logical, that my fellow logic-appreciating players acknowledge that the logical move is usually the smarter move. I don't think that's too much to ask. Instead, I mostly got ignored, despite laying out in extremely simple terms why it was smarter to protect ourselves. If DrumBeats' plan had ended up being a baddie thing, then I would have practically been the only one to attempt to stop him, and he would have been gloating at the end of the game that everyone was a fool to follow along with his plan. It's pure luck that it didn't end up that way - I prefer to tone down the 'luck' and go with ideas that eliminate the possibility of baddie control. I guess not everyone feels the same way.

lol, Come on LC. This post was for real?

LC, it was not roleplaying. That is why I have not talked about; I am not even sure what you mean when you say this.

I thought you were bad, I had reasons for thinking so, and I posted and acted on them. You are acting like we are still playing and you are trying to trick me into admitting something. There is nothing to admit. I thought you were bad. In all sincerity.

Forget it then, just wishful thinking on my part I guess. I'll adjust my expectations in the future.

[S~V~S]

So are you saying that you have to lower your expectations in order to deal with me thinking as I think?

[Long Con]

Well, I said I would "adjust" my expectations, not "lower". My former expectations were that I would be part of the game by making posts and people would read them and that their responses would indicate that they were understood or not. I was disappointed many times by the fact that this was clearly not happening, so to avoid disappointment in the future, I'll go in with the mentality that people really won't be that likely to read my posts. Then, IF it happens that my posts are read, I'll be pleasantly surprised instead of disappointed. I'd like that better.

The way this applies to you personally would be that I was pretty clear what I meant by "roleplaying" during the game when I accused you of it, here for instance, and here. Then you say "I am not even sure what you mean when you say this", and it's just more evidence of what I'm talking about in the first paragraph. You were conversing with me without reading my posts, and the things that I tried to communicate to you were not received by you as a result.

You were introducing concepts to the game that have no relevance at all to a Mafia game, like saying "bullying is not Civvie behaviour". That kind of thing has no correlation with the achievement of any Win Condition in the game of Mafia; that is your personal fanciful idea that Civvie players are the heroes of the story, and that heroes act nobly and generously by their nature. Roleplaying.

[rabbit8]

I skim everyone's posts, FYI....

I have a hard time with reading comprehensions so it makes it much easier on me.

[Golden]

I have always assumed most people skim read my posts. Even I can't be assed reading them It's why I tend to make the same point multiple times.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I would be shocked if people read all of my shit.

[S~V~S]

Well, I said I would "adjust" my expectations, not "lower". My former expectations were that I would be part of the game by making posts and people would read them and that their responses would indicate that they were understood or not. I was disappointed many times by the fact that this was clearly not happening, so to avoid disappointment in the future, I'll go in with the mentality that people really won't be that likely to read my posts. Then, IF it happens that my posts are read, I'll be pleasantly surprised instead of disappointed. I'd like that better.

The way this applies to you personally would be that I was pretty clear what I meant by "roleplaying" during the game when I accused you of it, here for instance, and here. Then you say "I am not even sure what you mean when you say this", and it's just more evidence of what I'm talking about in the first paragraph. You were conversing with me without reading my posts, and the things that I tried to communicate to you were not received by you as a result.

You were introducing concepts to the game that have no relevance at all to a Mafia game, like saying "bullying is not Civvie behaviour". That kind of thing has no correlation with the achievement of any Win Condition in the game of Mafia; that is your personal fanciful idea that Civvie players are the heroes of the story, and that heroes act nobly and generously by their nature. Roleplaying.

I read your posts. I thought you were bullshitting

And we each have our own way of playing. Yours is not any more valid than mine, or anyone elses. For me win cons are only part of the equation, and that is always the case. To be honest, some of my least favorite playstyles are the ones that make achieving win cons their priority, becasue there is so much more to this game. And I DO think bullying is not civ behavior. I don't think it should be bad behavior either, but I loathe it when civvies do shifty things just to win, or mean things. Perhaps we are using different definitions or role play. If that is your definition, then I am sorry, that is what I do.

The good guys SHOULD be noble. I believe that with all my heart. The bad guys SHOULD be shifty. The SK SHOULD be insane. Well, maybe not that one. But you get my drift.

Again, this coems down to playstyle. And I have always had this playstyle. Remember SOT when the Keeper recruited me as a Meat Puppet? A lot fo people got mad atme, but I acted as I felt Kahlan would have acted in that scenario. So maybe you're right and it is roleplay. But each of us decides what is appropriate in our own game, not in each others.

This is my game, and it pretty much always has been. I am sorry if you do not like it, but it is how I play,and I think it DOES have a place in a Mafia game and it is relevant.

[S~V~S]

EBWOP, HOW you win is important imo. I have had wins that were ashes in my mouth, and I have had losses that were amongst my favorite games (like SOT, or BSG) becasue I played my hardest and had fun doing it.

I am here to have fun with friends; winning is good, but playing a good game is my primary objective.

[Long Con]

I skim everyone's posts, FYI....

I have a hard time with reading comprehensions so it makes it much easier on me.

I have always assumed most people skim read my posts. Even I can't be assed reading them It's why I tend to make the same point multiple times.

I would be shocked if people read all of my shit.

This is why I need to adjust my expectations. I may also deal with this issue by suspecting and voting for those who seem to be ignoring my posts.

I read your posts. I thought you were bullshitting

And we each have our own way of playing. Yours is not any more valid than mine, or anyone elses. For me win cons are only part of the equation, and that is always the case. To be honest, some of my least favorite playstyles are the ones that make achieving win cons their priority, becasue there is so much more to this game. And I DO think bullying is not civ behavior. I don't think it should be bad behavior either, but I loathe it when civvies do shifty things just to win, or mean things. Perhaps we are using different definitions or role play. If that is your definition, then I am sorry, that is what I do.

Ok, but do you really want to play a game where player A is just trying to see how many song lyrics they can catch people posting, player B is only interested in building the biggest quote-pyramids, and player C is after people who use the letter Q in their posts.... and they're all basing their suspicions on those things? Maybe that would be the best game ever for some people, but it would be frustrating and nonsensical for me.

The good guys SHOULD be noble. I believe that with all my heart. The bad guys SHOULD be shifty. The SK SHOULD be insane. Well, maybe not that one. But you get my drift.

You can believe it all you like, but that does not and will not ever make it a real factor in winning a Mafia game. Anyone can have fun in any way they like, but if someone gets me lynched for using the letter Q then that's not real Mafia anymore. It's more accurate to understand that players are nicer, or are more bullying, or more insane -- not roles. Not alignments. When you start getting that confused, then you end up taking actions that do not further your own Win Condition.

Again, this coems down to playstyle. And I have always had this playstyle. Remember SOT when the Keeper recruited me as a Meat Puppet? A lot fo people got mad atme, but I acted as I felt Kahlan would have acted in that scenario. So maybe you're right and it is roleplay. But each of us decides what is appropriate in our own game, not in each others.

When you accuse me based on your individual roleplaying fancy, it becomes my issue. I'm not going to just come in and stomp on your pretty daisies for no reason - it's YOUR choice to decide to threaten my game with it. When you do, expect me to call you out on it harshly.

This is my game, and it pretty much always has been. I am sorry if you do not like it, but it is how I play,and I think it DOES have a place in a Mafia game and it is relevant.

It has as much place, and is as relevant as, G-Man's meme-posting all game. Posting meme-pics all game doesn't have anything to do with my alignment or yours, and neither does roleplaying.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

To be fair, I did read your posts and I still thought you were bad.

[S~V~S]

I am who I am LC; I don;t try to tell you you or your game are wrong or incorrect. It is possible for people to read your posts and still think you are bad. That does not make them bad Mafia players.

I am sorry if me playing my game as myself, for myself, is upsetting to you.

And re nobility; I know it isn't a factor in winning Mafia games. That was kind of my point. It isn't whether you win or lose,it's how you play the game. I think that is an important concept.

And for the last time,my suspicion of you had EVERYTHING to do with your posts, and your actions, and your role as the lore portrayed it to be, not my fancies. As I said,I thought you were bad. It's Mafia, it happens.

[Golden]

It isn't whether you win or lose,it's how you play the game. I think that is an important concept.

This is what my main goal is too... I want to play in the spirit of the game but there is the odd occasion (like Frog, for instance), where I've just voted for someone because they are hurting my fun.

Mostly, as well, I care more about doing what I can to help the team win than getting my own individual win. And I do genuinely want everyone to enjoy the game.

I could understand LCs frustration in the game. I actually think most of the in-game tension between LC and anyone came from one central thing... LC never ever said in the thread that he believed some cylons could be good, and so he never got the message from me that most of you got. He didn't get a message from epi telling him to say it because he was untargettable. It was his unwillingness to say it (and even find out that others win cons were changing, even though his own were not) that I think led to a lot of people seeing him as bad. At that point, anything he did (like the sortie) was seen through that lens and confirmation bias made him look even worse than he already was.

I could see LC's ship crashing long before it did, simply because I could see so much of what was going on behind the scenes. It felt like the game setup was at massive odds from what he was presenting in the thread (because of things to a large extent he was unaware of), and his lynch seemed relatively inevitable to me before Cain had even been revealed.

[Long Con]

My issue is not about whether or not someone suspected me. JJJ, if you really read my posts, then I appreciate that. There seems to be some confusion about my point here. I've played many games and been suspected many times for my posts.

I am who I am LC; I don;t try to tell you you or your game are wrong or incorrect. It is possible for people to read your posts and still think you are bad. That does not make them bad Mafia players.

Well, believing I'm bad when I'm Civ doesn't make anyone a good Mafia player either, but that's another discussion altogether. I don't think that people who suspected me are bad Mafia players.

I am sorry if me playing my game as myself, for myself, is upsetting to you.

And re nobility; I know it isn't a factor in winning Mafia games. That was kind of my point. It isn't whether you win or lose,it's how you play the game. I think that is an important concept.

That idiom applies to the idea of having good sportsmanship in a game, not the idea of purposely viewing the game in a personal way that is separate from the stated Win Conditions. I could get a hit in baseball and dance and twirl around the bases instead of running, and that would be playing the game as myself, for myself. (Assuming I like that kind of thing.) Guess what though - the rest of the team would probably not appreciate it at all. I could just shrug and say "I gotta be me, sorry if it upsets you", but it wouldn't change a damn thing about what the rest of the team thinks about my dancing. Mafia is a team game, not a solo one... aside from Indy roles and such.

And for the last time,my suspicion of you had EVERYTHING to do with your posts, and your actions, and your role as the lore portrayed it to be, not my fancies. As I said,I thought you were bad. It's Mafia, it happens.

I have no problem with most of your gameplay, or that you found me suspicious, or that you were very smart and determined that I was Cain.

My accusation of roleplaying only applies to the instances in which you were doing it, not to your entire game.

"I oppose any plan that forces, or attempts to force, people to do things they don't want to do, like voting for them to push them to make a statement. That's bullying, and it is NOT civvie, imo." Like this statement, for example. You try to equate "bullying" with having a baddie role in the game, and that's just not realistic. Baddies can act nice and sweet, and Civvies can act abrasive and threatening. My point is that trying to draw a connection between an attitude like that, and a person's alignment, is as wise as assuming that the Civvies are all in the first half of alphabetical order of player names. Because it is based on your personal ideals of how the heroes of the story should act, it is roleplaying.

[rabbit8]

I play to win. Every game.

[rabbit8]

That idiom applies to the idea of having good sportsmanship in a game, not the idea of purposely viewing the game in a personal way that is separate from the stated Win Conditions. I could get a hit in baseball and dance and twirl around the bases instead of running, and that would be playing the game as myself, for myself. (Assuming I like that kind of thing.) Guess what though - the rest of the team would probably not appreciate it at all. I could just shrug and say "I gotta be me, sorry if it upsets you", but it wouldn't change a damn thing about what the rest of the team thinks about my dancing. Mafia is a team game, not a solo one... aside from Indy roles and such.

Crushing the opponent should be the driving factor when playing, play to win. They do celebrate when they hit a home run....odd comparison, you would not be playing the game if you did not run after hitting the home run, for yourself or anyone else.

If I got a touchdown I would spike the fuck out of the ball.... If you can stop me I can't celebrate.

Sportsmanship is shaking hands at the end of a game and playing fair, IMO. If I can score fifty points and you can't, I'm driving the score up just to make sure I win.

So?

[rabbit8]

I fucked up and submitted, lol.

"I oppose any plan that forces, or attempts to force, people to do things they don't want to do, like voting for them to push them to make a statement. That's bullying, and it is NOT civvie, imo." Like this statement, for example. You try to equate "bullying" with having a baddie role in the game, and that's just not realistic. Baddies can act nice and sweet, and Civvies can act abrasive and threatening. My point is that trying to draw a connection between an attitude like that, and a person's alignment, is as wise as assuming that the Civvies are all in the first half of alphabetical order of player names. Because it is based on your personal ideals of how the heroes of the story should act, it is roleplaying.

I agree with your point that certain behaviors are not bad or good in and of themselves.

I don't think this is bullying. I do think it's a misguided thought process and how some people honestly see things. If only the world was all rainbows and unicorns, my friend. Or I think sometimes people are trying to manipulate things, thus mafia.

Golden always wanted to lynch me early when we first started playing together for these very reasons, I did not act sweet and shit.

Golden..

[S~V~S]

I am sorry if me doing me causes unhappiness for others. And unicorns & flowers are awesome.

[Long Con]

It isn't whether you win or lose,it's how you play the game. I think that is an important concept.

This is what my main goal is too... I want to play in the spirit of the game but there is the odd occasion (like Frog, for instance), where I've just voted for someone because they are hurting my fun.

I once knew a guy named ika...

My main goal in the game is to win, and to figure things out. Often my goal will be to plant pieces of information with which I could prove my role in order to gain allies in the event of my imminent lynch. If my death will mean that I will lose the game, then I will put staying alive as a top priority.

Mostly, as well, I care more about doing what I can to help the team win than getting my own individual win. And I do genuinely want everyone to enjoy the game.

I could understand LCs frustration in the game. I actually think most of the in-game tension between LC and anyone came from one central thing... LC never ever said in the thread that he believed some cylons could be good, and so he never got the message from me that most of you got. He didn't get a message from epi telling him to say it because he was untargettable. It was his unwillingness to say it (and even find out that others win cons were changing, even though his own were not) that I think led to a lot of people seeing him as bad. At that point, anything he did (like the sortie) was seen through that lens and confirmation bias made him look even worse than he already was.

I could see LC's ship crashing long before it did, simply because I could see so much of what was going on behind the scenes. It felt like the game setup was at massive odds from what he was presenting in the thread (because of things to a large extent he was unaware of), and his lynch seemed relatively inevitable to me before Cain had even been revealed.

That's where roleplaying got me.

[Golden]

Golden always wanted to lynch me early when we first started playing together for these very reasons, I did not act sweet and shit.

Golden..

I'm used to you now, bitch.

Frog was a special case. He was basically was flooding the thread with how we should lynch the lowest posters regardless of content, that all the math in his head basically guaranteed they were bad, then got drunk and posted about 100 drunk posts. And most or all of those low posters ended up being town.

I think I've learned to moderate fun with winning quite well. I strike a balance... I think there is a point where people kill the fun so much that it literally disrupts your ability to win.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I definitely play to win. For me, that's where fun comes from. I really don't have as much fun when I'm not giving maximum effort, and obviously that effort will always be oriented towards winning the game. Hopefully I offset that attitude some by promoting team work and trying to incorporate others into my madness, but I know it can be tiresome to some people. I've certainly heard it before.

There's also the problem that Mafia is largely about expectation, and whenever I cannot meet those expectations of me I am going to end up spending a bunch of time defending myself. Focusing just on having fun tends to get me in trouble. :P

[Long Con]

I am sorry if me doing me causes unhappiness for others. And unicorns & flowers are awesome.

It only specifically causes me unhappiness if you use it as a reason to lynch me, and then deny that you are doing it. Although now I believe that it is likely an indicator of your baddie game, and I'll call you on it in the future. Unrelentingly.

[Epignosis]

I really think you two need to stop.

[S~V~S]

I agree.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I've had a lot of fun watching the series, but "Unfinished Business" is the worst episode ever.

[Golden]

Up to season 3 already?

Seasons 3 and 4 begin to have some real duds. The first two seasons feel virtually flawless to me. Three and four are still good, just not as consistent.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

The episode seems to be all about character development, which usually would be great. They just focus so much on Starbuck and Lee, and those characters just don't interest me that much.

I'm so glad I was Adama in this game. Coolest character by far.

[Ricochet]

I like the episode where Romo Lampkin does... uhm... yeah.

[insertnamehere]

I like the episode where Romo Lampkin does... uhm... yeah.

Don't besmirch the good name of Romo Lampkin! He's played by Mark Sheppard, who at this point is sci-fi cult TV royalty.

Plus, he defends Gaius Baltar, and anybody who does that is A-OK in my books.

[bea]

I like the episode where Romo Lampkin does... uhm... yeah.

He is one of my most favorite characters. When I signed up for this game I gave Golden a "dibs on" list as a joke. He was on it.

Mark Sheppard is amazing.

[Golden]

There is your winners banner, all ye winners!

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Super cool! I'm on it because I'm a big deal.

[Long Con]

RIP Tom Zarek.