Monopoly Mafia [GAME OVER]

[Marmot]

Quick rule I am making regarding the challenge. No picture may be put up that would contain the forbidden letter. Any quote from another player (in an unaltered condition) that doth contain that letter will be permitted.

Game on!

Linki: I checked the Monopoly rulebook. Nothing in there that would claim differently.

Linki 2: It will be a game to remember (or maybe not).

[Marmot]

I bet 50 Monopoly $'s that Epi makes it further in this challenge than MM does.

Rob may practice the art of eloquent word formation in our native tongue, and make a living through it...

But I play to win.

Depending on the betting, I could be willing to throw thi

I don't know what thi

[birdwithteeth11]

Good god, what have I walked into.

An unmitigated di....failure.

[Turnip Head]

I feel like pictures with an s are cool, as long as it doesn't have any dollar signs and pics are used tastefully.

Cutting a word off in the middle however is less swag.

[thellama73]

Parker ought to be happy. I won't be able to utter my favorite battle cry.

[Epignosis]

Cutting a word off in the middle however is less swag.

That entry ought to have been interpreted to be funny.

[Marmot]

Parker ought to be happy. I won't be able to utter my favorite battle cry.

When have you ever been in a battle?

[Turnip Head]

Are you officially joining the challenge llama? I'll put a starter bet of $10 on ya

[Marmot]

I feel like pictures with an s are cool, as long as it doesn't have any dollar signs and pics are used tastefully.

Cutting a word off in the middle however is less swag.

Ok, a picture with the letter may be allowed, but only if it would not be intended to relay information that would require it.

[Turnip Head]

I like that rule Marshy, as long as all contestants understand the distinction you're making.

[Marmot]

I will retire to my bedchamber now.

Y'all keep an eye on llama if he might botch it. :P

[Marmot]

In addition, I implore Rob and llama to permit the general utilization of that letter, for each party involved, in the Zelda game, without penalty.

[Black Rock]

You guys sure like to keep it interesting... or distracting. We'll see how it goes.

[Epignosis]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[fingersplints]

You guys sure like to keep it interesting... or distracting. We'll see how it goes.

haha I was just thinking this too

[boo]

Alright. I was re-reading Page 1, and I have a question for the host:

@Boo: It says that, "Civvies that do establish full BTSC (meaning they either find all of their set while everyone is alive, or they acquire the necessary cards by buying them)..." So by that logic, if one set gains full BTSC, could they continue to search for other full sets, and possible gain BTSC with them too? Or is this only possible by purchasing other cards from dead players?

No, the set refers to your starting colour/property. You can collect other sets, and if you get all 3 (or 2 in those cases) build on them, but holding one of them wouldn't let you search and then join with people who hold others.

[thellama73]

Are you officially joining the challenge llama? I'll put a starter bet of $10 on ya

Oh, I'm joining all right.

[boo]

@boo:

1st: Add a die (Allows the player who uses it to add a third dice roll to anyone they want)
2nd: Get a chance card (Allows the player who uses it to give 1 player of their choice a random chance card)

Can the owner of the third dice roll add it to their own roll? Do they have to inform you they're using it before the daily roll, or can they add it after seeing the result?

Can the owner of the Chance card 'give' it to themselves, or just to another player?

They can add the third dice roll to anyone (including their own) roll. They will have to inform me before the roll took place.

Yes, the chance card can go to them or anyone else they choose.

[Turnip Head]

Can we still bid on the dice roll? I'll bid the current + 25 on that.

[boo]

I bet 50 Monopoly $'s that Epi makes it further in this challenge than MM does.

@Boo: Can we actually do thi$?

If $o, I bet $100 that Epig win$.

Sure. Clearly agreed upon rules before betting starts though, and PM bets along with posting them in thread to keep it easier to track (and for bets to take place, bets of equal value on both/all participants need to be included). One rule I would need though is no intentional throwing of any competition where bets are placed.

[boo]

Can we still bid on the dice roll? I'll bid the current + 25 on that.

Yup, bidding goes until 10 minutes before the lynch ends.

That puts the current bid at $85.

[Turnip Head]

Speaking of lynching... I have no idea. I liked the argument between pro-town and pro-individual, but I can see civvie perspectives on both sides of that coin. I also think it's an easy topic for mafia to blend in discussing.

[Long Con]

How much do you wanna bet that the $ posse will check each other tonight?

[keys56000000000]

Keys it almost seems like you are implying that we do it your way, or you are going to stop playing? Before you said you would stop posting, or might as well stop posting, now you are saying you will find somewhere else to play? I am not understanding your meaning in saying this. We do it your way or you won't play anymore?

I introduced the idea of a union because I thought it would be a fun tie-in with the game's theme, and what I thought might have been a good strategy. I pushed it because it wouldn't work without support. Like I said to Nijuukyugou, I don't know where you got the impression that I'm telling you what to do. I don't know if that's you being overdramatic, or if you can actually go back and quote where I've told you what to do. I've just stated the plain fact that new teams aren't civilians. Am I losing my mind here? I've certainly never intended to imply that if you do not do things my way I will stop playing. To be frank, the constant bullshit misunderstandings -- I'm asking people to cheat, I'm forcing people to play my way, I'm trying to take the fun out of the game -- is getting irksome and is why I would consider not playing here.

[LoRab]

I think the idea of being able to form a monopoly is similar to a union. It sounds, from the roles/rules that civ sets can win with other civ sets with whom they have formed a monopoly. Otherwise, the wording doesn't make sense, if civ sets can't join together. Am I missing something?

At this point I am most leery of people implying that those who disagree with their strategy of not searching are bad. I think that keeping the civvies as unempowered vanillas with no earning ability plays right into the hands of the rails/utilities.

Even the implication that playing the game within its design is somehow "cheating" feels very off to me.

I also play mafia for fun as much as for wins, and actually playing seems mor fun to me

Similarly, I think that not really trying to search for each other is more beneficial to the baddies than to the civies, ultimately. We often underestimate the power of BTSC, especially for a civ role.

That said, I don't at all suspect Keys for being the main voice discussing that idea. I learned early on in Keys' mafia career that he often has ideas, especially as a civ, that do not seem to me to be civ ideas. Pretty sure I had an active hand in lynching him for this his first game (I was evil in that game, but at least in games with more than one mafia, I'm always honest about my suspicions, even when evil). It was a few games later that I learned that this was just his style. And to appreciate it. He brings ideas into games that I wouldn't consider--and I'm glad to see him playing.

I do find suspicious those who are jumping on the bandwagon of that idea. I need to reread a bit to see who those people are in particular (I know people were agreeing, but I don't remember who they were). It is to one of those folks that my vote will likely go.

[Marmot]

How much do you wanna bet that the $ posse will check each other tonight?

♫ Don't go lynching my partner ♫

[S~V~S]

Keys it almost seems like you are implying that we do it your way, or you are going to stop playing? Before you said you would stop posting, or might as well stop posting, now you are saying you will find somewhere else to play? I am not understanding your meaning in saying this. We do it your way or you won't play anymore?

I introduced the idea of a union because I thought it would be a fun tie-in with the game's theme, and what I thought might have been a good strategy. I pushed it because it wouldn't work without support. Like I said to Nijuukyugou, I don't know where you got the impression that I'm telling you what to do. I don't know if that's you being overdramatic, or if you can actually go back and quote where I've told you what to do. I've just stated the plain fact that new teams aren't civilians. Am I losing my mind here? I've certainly never intended to imply that if you do not do things my way I will stop playing. To be frank, the constant bullshit misunderstandings -- I'm asking people to cheat, I'm forcing people to play my way, I'm trying to take the fun out of the game -- is getting irksome and is why I would consider not playing here.

I am sorry if I came across that way to you; sometimes I do not sound as clear as I think I do . When I said "cheating" I did not mean *actual cheating* it in that context; I meant that I did not like the idea that people searching for their partners as the game is designed, would be indicative of baddieness, as opposed to lynching actual baddies. I mainly used that word as it was used previously (and not by you):

Llama, it's cool that you're invoking Nash equilibrium, I dig it. However, unless you can show me the spreadsheets where you've gone over every potential scenario in the game, just saying "game theory" doesn't actually mean much. You need to have studied this particular game to know its theory.

You don't. You just need to understand that when individual interest trumps group interest and there's no way to detect cheaters, individual interest wins out.

I think it's a very, very, very poorly considered strategy to focus our lynches on trying to prevent Monopolies. The mafia can prevent monopolies just fine using their kills. Lynches are the only way we have to kill off the railroads and utilities.

Isn't that what we have in most mafia games?

The fact that there's no way to detect cheaters doesn't mean we can't do it. If we all agree that ideally, not forming BTSC is better for the civvies, then we don't need to find cheaters because that's not our worry.

And tbh, I never said I suspected YOU or thought you were forcing people to play your way~ I was trying to understand your meaning. If you feel that you want to stop playing, then I wanted to make sure you did not feel that I was forcing YOU. I certainly never said you were trying to take the fun out of the game, I just said what was fun for ME. Questioning what people say is a big part of Mafia. Again, sorry if I was not clear. What sounds good when I type it sometimes comes across as confrontational, I guess.

Actually, like Lorab, I had someone else in mind, not you at all, over this. I need to make sure I am not remembering it as worse than it actually was, though.

You guys sure like to keep it interesting... or distracting. We'll see how it goes.

haha I was just thinking this too

Yeah, me three. I have no intention of looking for the letter "S" etc.

[HannaK]

The thing that is confusing me, I guess, is all the worrying people are doing about what MIGHT happen if civs form monopolies and become indies rather than worrying about two actual baddie teams that have kills. And I just reread the Utilities, those guys are super powerful. They know roles, plus they have a bidding advantage if those known cards come up for sale.

Are you talking about those cards that come up for sale because of their kill? Because I sorta agree with you but like i wondered previously, wouldnt it become too obvious if one or two people keep winning the bid of cards of people who were killed on even nights?

also question off topic: the time stated for the voting deadline, is that adjusted to the timezone I put in my board preferences (UK)? Or do I need to count like a few hours back because it is based on an American timezone?

[S~V~S]

Go into your user control panel, Board Preferences (third tab from the left) and select your time zone from the drop down and click or unclick Daylight Savings/Summer time. This should reset the poll and the board time as well to your time. It ends approximately 15 hours & 15 mins from now.

And I was talking about searching for your Monopoly card partners; there is some discussion that finding your BTS partners and forming monopolies (which turn the players who form them from civvies to LMS indies) will weaken the civvies and reduce all of our chances of winning; basically what is more beneficial for the group vs what is more beneficial for the individual members of the group.

And as for bidding, I think keeping an eye on it will be prudent, I may even start a spreadsheet (!!!) because keeping track of who landed on utilities will not be easy (last night apparently 3 landed on a utility, but off the top of my head, I only recall 2).

[zeek]

Has MP checked in yet? I know he's very busy at the moment, just realised I haven't seen him post in a while.

In regard it searching for your set: I think its up to each person to decide now. There have been a lot of good points on either side and I suppose its down to interpretation now. Which path will give each individual the greatest chance to win? Thats the basic crux of capitalism after all :P

[Boogs]

90 on dice.

[Boogs]

95 on dice. Forgot it has to increase by 10.

[Marmot]

Has MP checked in yet? I know he's very busy at the moment, just realised I haven't seen him post in a while.

In regard it searching for your set: I think its up to each person to decide now. There have been a lot of good points on either side and I suppose its down to interpretation now. Which path will give each individual the greatest chance to win? Thats the basic crux of capitalism after all :P

What do you think about anyone that would claim to not look for a partner at night? I don't think a baddie would be that apparent, but I am not inclined to believe that player.

[thellama73]

I am voting for Long Con, being an early proponent of the tactic that I think will hurt the town, and I don't believe him.

[DFaraday]

I can see both sides of the issue, but I think Keys has the best point. It's better to be a vanilla civ (or one with a BTSC partner) than part of a small team with no kill.

[Black Rock]

I can see both sides of the issue, but I think Keys has the best point. It's better to be a vanilla civ (or one with a BTSC partner) than part of a small team with no kill.

Do you not have a kill though? There are many ways to die and one way to kill is draining another players money. So wouldn't that be powerful too? Say I decided to play this game as a vanilla civ, do I trust the rest of you to play along? I look at this players list I see a bunch of these guys -

Right now I am going to play this as a mafia game and try and hunt down the baddies. Depending on how things look in the future will depend on who I trust. It's be nice if the civvies joined hands and fought the good fight, but that's not how this game was designed.

[juliets]

Black Rock, speaking of hunting down baddies, do you have any suspicions at this point?

[HannaK]

(I can already tell that the end vote times won't be to my advantage, no way I am staying up till 3 am to see who is getting a lot of votes so I can change mine last minute as well)
Anyway, day 1 votes are always hard and I hate to vote random. So far I don't really see any of the big BTSC debaters as bad per se, so I am gonna vote for Made for bidding quite a lot of money on a special power but backing out when Elochin bid 250, if I were a baddie I wouldn't want people to think I had too much money on my hands either. It's not a very good reason, but it's day 1 and it is a reason nonetheless.

[juliets]

I am voting for Long Con, being an early proponent of the tactic that I think will hurt the town, and I don't believe him.

llama what do you mean you don't believe him? Believe him about what?

[FZ.]

Llama, it's cool that you're invoking Nash equilibrium, I dig it. However, unless you can show me the spreadsheets where you've gone over every potential scenario in the game, just saying "game theory" doesn't actually mean much. You need to have studied this particular game to know its theory.

You don't. You just need to understand that when individual interest trumps group interest and there's no way to detect cheaters, individual interest wins out.

I think it's a very, very, very poorly considered strategy to focus our lynches on trying to prevent Monopolies. The mafia can prevent monopolies just fine using their kills. Lynches are the only way we have to kill off the railroads and utilities.

Isn't that what we have in most mafia games?

I don't understand your point.

I am distressed at the direction this thread has gone. I am barely paying attention to this game with all the other stuff I have going on, and it took me exactly two seconds to see why the "civs ignore all the gifts the host has given you" strategy is terrible. I can't believe how easily the flock is being led into bad decisions.

Look, building hotels is the only way we can get money (barring a few chance cards and an occasional pass go.) The Mafia have ample ability to make money and use it to buy property and other goodies, while at the same time depleting our money. If we run out of money, we die. This strategy hands victory to the railroads and utilities. Please think about it for two seconds before posting a reactionary NO U response. You, MM, Long Con, and Keys are working on behalf of the baddies with this sort of talk.

I thought about it for more than 2 seconds, believe me. This game requires too much thinking for the little time I have left in my day for a second mafia game, so not nice of you to tell me I'm not thinking. The only thing I agree with you on, is that without money, the civs would die, but by the time you get that hotel, the chances of you surviving are lower if "you" is defined by a set of maximum 3 people. The chances of winning as a group are higher. Once we start separating it's divide and conquer for the baddies and we're easy to get rid of because we start suspecting each and everyone who's not in our set, and if say my set is lynched or killed before I find them, the chances of me winning are slim to none.
I'm willing to listen, if you still want to convince me otherwise.

I still need to catch up, so maybe someone else will convince me by that time

[Black Rock]

Black Rock, speaking of hunting down baddies, do you have any suspicions at this point?

At this point? No.

[juliets]

Black Rock, speaking of hunting down baddies, do you have any suspicions at this point?

At this point? No.

Thanks BR. I don't either.

[FZ.]

I can't help but be a little $u$piciou$ of the people voting for Epigno$i$. Fell$ like an ea$y lynch train, if you know what I mean.

I actually find Boogs a little suspicious for voting Epig as well, but on the other hand, don't we all want to bandwagon on a lynch to get something out of it? So voting for someone who didn't get a vote yet seems like bad strategy for a player. That's what you get when all you care about is money and power

[FZ.]

I don't think Epi is bad, or at least I don't think he has BTSC yet... but if he has a majority vote 10 minutes before deadline you can bet your $weet bippy that I'll vote for him and then try to take his card.

Yeah, pretty sure this will be standard. Not criticising at all, but we'll all probably do this at some point and vote patterns won't be that helpful. It's also going to make bandwagons very likely amd less likely to result in a mafia lynch.

I understand the thoughts on Epi but don't necessarily agree. I expected some people to flash the cash early and I'm not that surprised its him. Dunno, as usual he's not defending himself so its hard to tell what to make of it

He bid freaking 500$. That's half of the money we initially got. Just strikes me weird when all people talk about is how we need the money to not die

[thellama73]

Black Rock, speaking of hunting down baddies, do you have any suspicions at this point?

A general remark. I don't believe him about anything. I don't believe that Long Con would like a civvie victory.

[juliets]

Oh ok, I see what you mean llama. Thanks.

[FZ.]

Epig,

Why did you bid so much? Where were you expecting to get more money from for the other stuff?

[FZ.]

Can we still bid on the dice roll? I'll bid the current + 25 on that.

What do you get out of giving someone another dice roll?

[Marmot]

Epig,

Why did you bid so much? Where were you expecting to get more money from for the other stuff?

I have a theory.

The more money he will bet on a power, the more likely another player will check him tonight in the hope that they can partner up with the equal color, being that it would be convenient to have that power on your team. Meaning that the money might return back to him in the future. It might be a gamble, but that'll be the name of the game.

[Epignosis]

Epig,

Why did you bid so much? Where were you expecting to get more money from for the other stuff?

I'm eccentric.

I plan to get rich by people landing on my property.

I have a theory.

The more money he will bet on a power, the more likely another player will check him tonight in the hope that they can partner up with the equal color, being that it would be convenient to have that power on your team. Meaning that the money might return back to him in the future. It might be a gamble, but that'll be the name of the game.

I hadn't thought of that.