The Syndicate

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Some thoughts:

- I didn't like chaindeath in this phase. Dropped two reads that felt random then procceeded to talk about game mechanics. Is he always like that?

- Epignosis seems absent. He is always weird and hard to read, but this time he is that AND absent. He is usually more active, and more of a protagonist in the game (recall Pikmin and Economics). And his d1 vote on Wilgy (although justifiable by Epi standards) could be an easy cop out of he was mafia. So I'm uneasy about him.

- A note on ika, which may or may not be helpful. I've played one game with him (Watchmen). In that game, he replaced a scum player who was under scrutiny for multiple phases, so he came in on a very unfavorable position. He then procceeded to act like the scummiest player ever born. Refusing to explain things, being blunt, etc. People believed he was acting that way because he was in a difficult position and was basically self-destructing. Now, in this game, he is not acting very differently, and is also showing a similar behavior imo. So either that's an easy meta read or... the guy is just like that. He rubs people the wrong way. And if that's the case, maybe lynching him for that is not a good idea. So I think I'll pass here.

- Not sure about gleam anymore, he stopped doing those uber-scummy things like arguing for no-lynching and pigbacking on other's opinions, but he still doesn't feel really town-ish. I need to take a deep look at his posts. And also a few other people...

...tomorrow. Sorry, but I have a headache and I'm not feeling this game rn. I only did a catch up so tomorrow's one is shorter. Good night.

LINKI: and then Epi comes and votes for Nero. You know what, I've been feeling uneasy about Nero too, though I can't point a finger on why (I think he feels somewhat sheep-y). He is one I wanna read the posts of. But this kind of makes me feel better about Epi, lol.

Silverwolf wrote:

Scotty wrote: I don't like the love affair that comes with Silverwolf, however. I could see myself voting their way come tomorrow, if not today.

Why do people keep saying this? It's really starting to annoy me to be honest. Is it not this site's culture to interact with people you are friendly with, without being scumread for it. Or is it just policy because you guys don't like the personal nature of it?

Because this is at least the second person to want to lynch me because of what ika is saying to me and I still do not understand what the issue is.

Sloonei wrote:What so other people think of ika? Am I alone in thinking his behavior stinks of deliberate unhelpfulness? On Day 1 he kept saying he wanted to sort silverwolf first and foremost, which is a reasonable strategy, but on Day 2 he just seems to be saying she's town but not really working together in any capacity with her like he seemed to suggest, and most of the reads he's posting are minimal at best. He is falling back on a meta-defense when I (or anyone else) press him. I can understand differences in culture and playstyle, but this also wreaks of a player who's taking advantage of these differences to hide behind them.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Actually, instead of gleam, I'm switching my vote to Epignosis.

Epignosis wrote:I'm taking my vote off Long Con. I wouldn't want anyone to think that I suspect him.

agleaminranks, come say something.

Epignosis voted for gleam on Day 1 as noted in this post. His vote was a prod for someone who had not posted in the game yet. Gleam does come into the thread a half-hour later, responds to the vote without much care.

But here's what Epignosis has to later on Day 1.

Epignosis wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I'm sorry, your responses could be genuine but you are filling every box of my checklist.

- First you were not trying to hunt scum.
- Then people called you out and you literally accused all three people who were suspecting you. In other words, OMGUS.
- Then you say you are trying to protect civs when you had never posted a single civ read.
- Then you pull the "no lynch" theory out of nowhere. Which is a objectively bad theory because we can't win the game unless we try to lynch people.
- And now you are pigbacking on someone to validade your own points, when that someone doesn't actually have the same opinion as you. I've got lynched twice before as mafia for doing that, and lynched another mafioso for it. I think it's a good scumtell.

I refuse to vote for agleaminranks. Gleam gets lynched early all the time. I think the last time he told us to sit and spin or something.

He refuses to vote for gleam because he gets lynched early all the time, after previously voting for gleam.

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote: If humans were perfect, this game would be impossible.

I'm perfect. Are you?

Well, I'm sick right now, and I consider that apersonal moral failing, so I guess not.

Who is a cop, Epi? Is it Dragon? (hint: yes)

As of this point, I'd say Wilgy, and if Wilgy is bad, gleam is with him after that wild speculation in defense of Wilgy.

On to Day 2, Epignosis then states that if DrWilgy is bad, then gleam is with him. The same gleam Epignosis refused to vote the previous Day.

Epignosis wrote:I will say that I don't understand the six votes on gleam. Did he break wind or something?

Then Epignosis states he doesn't understand why gleam has six votes.



I smell waffles.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:The point is, it feels more like this is how ika IS. As a person. Not that this is his meta. Because he acts that way regardless of whether he is in a normal situation or in a situation where he is about to be lynched anyway. The meta, in this case, is that it's not a meta at all, it's just how the guy is.

There are some players who are just scummy by nature. They are the sigs and the MMs of mafia. They get lynched early and just can't help it. Ika feeels like that.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:And lets me add: the feeling I get about the people voting for ika is rage (or fake rage in the case of possible bads among them). People are angry at ika because he won't give the responses they want. This lynch doesn't feel rational. It feels like cultural shock.

I'm not buying a lynch based on cultural shock. Not today.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:The point is, it feels more like this is how ika IS. As a person. Not that this is his meta. Because he acts that way regardless of whether he is in a normal situation or in a situation where he is about to be lynched anyway. The meta, in this case, is that it's not a meta at all, it's just how the guy is.

There are some players who are just scummy by nature. They are the sigs and the MMs of mafia. They get lynched early and just can't help it. Ika feeels like that.

Nerolunar wrote:Wait, quite a few people have been voicing disagreement against the Gleam wagon. Is this a coordinated cop effort to steer the thread in a specific direction?

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:The point is, it feels more like this is how ika IS. As a person. Not that this is his meta. Because he acts that way regardless of whether he is in a normal situation or in a situation where he is about to be lynched anyway. The meta, in this case, is that it's not a meta at all, it's just how the guy is.

There are some players who are just scummy by nature. They are the sigs and the MMs of mafia. They get lynched early and just can't help it. Ika feeels like that.

To be fair, I haven't been lynched early in a game since Dune Mafia, and even that game was because I was mafia, and played like shit.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:And lets me add: the feeling I get about the people voting for ika is rage (or fake rage in the case of possible bads among them). People are angry at ika because he won't give the responses they want. This lynch doesn't feel rational. It feels like cultural shock.

I'm not buying a lynch based on cultural shock. Not today.

Sloonei wrote:I haven't looked at indiglo's posts yet, so let's do that now. This is the one that stands out most to me:

indiglo wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:My general strategy is to point out things that I don't like.

Gleam do you understand my confusion at your policy of "I'd rather not lynch civs Day 1 than try to lynch scum" in this format? I mentioned it earlier but that was in the big spoilered post and I want to make sure I get the chance to talk to you about this.

Mmm, I had missed you addressing me in that spoiler post. Apologies.

Yeah, the way you put it makes sense. I was kind of operating under the principle that both mafia families were the traditional "civilians" of the game , and that's kind of how they're being treated by everyone here. But it is, in the end, going to boil down to which family is left standing. It's not something I'd really considered, nor anyone else as far as I can see. The cops are the more imminent threat.

This is what I am still pondering about this game. The set up is such that yes, hunting cops is preeminent. Beyond that, I am just really not sure how to even begin to approach things. Beyond cops there are no "baddies" to hunt. Not sure what kind of patterns to look for, or even what to look for. I've not played a game set up like this, so at first I'm just kind of trying to figure out how tf to even approach it.

This part worries me a little bit. I do not get your gripe that "beyond cops there are no baddies to hunt." What does this mean? Should there be more bad guys? This post hints that you are preoccupied with sussing out something more than just who's a cop and who's not. What else are you trying to figure out, and why? This is a unique setup, but the Town vs. Scum dynamic isn't really changed at all.

Well, you yourself admit it's a "unique setup" - so I'm not sure how my mentioning it would be strange to you? But to answer your question, I'm looking at win cons, and each Mafia Family has to eliminate the other Mafia Family. That is what I'm not sure how to approach. Once the cops are gone (and I think getting scummy reads on them should be very similar to any other scum/mafia reading in any other game) I'm not sure how to figure out which peeps are in my Mafia Family and which peeps aren't. That's my issue. (Of course, I may very well be dead by then, which would make the point moot )

I honestly do not like how Matt was badgering (crap, now I forgot who he was badgering ) about having so many reads so quickly. Like, being super close minded about the tunnel vision and not open to hearing the whys of it. Just focusing on the time of it, rather than the actual mechanics of what went on. Because something similar happened to me in a game recently - and I got mislynched because of it. Can't know if this is a similar case, but it just left a bad taste in my mouth and this reminded me of that.

This is one of the most substantial reads you've given so far and I dig it. Care to follow up on Golden, the badger victim, or share any other reads you've got?

I am working on catching up now. There is so much posting in this game, that it has been taking all my mafia time just to catch up, which then leaves me with precious little time to do rereads. I am not complaining though, an active game is nice, plus with 48 hour days you have to expect a fair bit of participation. Well, I know as a host I hope for games this active, so it's nice for Daisy & MP.

Scotty wrote:Nothing personal is being thrown around here. It's the nature of the game to banter and question motives. I know I mean nothing personal, and Quinn means nothing personal.

I take it personal that anyone would think as such.

indiglo wrote:

Sloonei wrote:I haven't looked at indiglo's posts yet, so let's do that now. This is the one that stands out most to me:

indiglo wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:

RadicalFuzz wrote:My general strategy is to point out things that I don't like.

Gleam do you understand my confusion at your policy of "I'd rather not lynch civs Day 1 than try to lynch scum" in this format? I mentioned it earlier but that was in the big spoilered post and I want to make sure I get the chance to talk to you about this.

Mmm, I had missed you addressing me in that spoiler post. Apologies.

Yeah, the way you put it makes sense. I was kind of operating under the principle that both mafia families were the traditional "civilians" of the game , and that's kind of how they're being treated by everyone here. But it is, in the end, going to boil down to which family is left standing. It's not something I'd really considered, nor anyone else as far as I can see. The cops are the more imminent threat.

This is what I am still pondering about this game. The set up is such that yes, hunting cops is preeminent. Beyond that, I am just really not sure how to even begin to approach things. Beyond cops there are no "baddies" to hunt. Not sure what kind of patterns to look for, or even what to look for. I've not played a game set up like this, so at first I'm just kind of trying to figure out how tf to even approach it.

This part worries me a little bit. I do not get your gripe that "beyond cops there are no baddies to hunt." What does this mean? Should there be more bad guys? This post hints that you are preoccupied with sussing out something more than just who's a cop and who's not. What else are you trying to figure out, and why? This is a unique setup, but the Town vs. Scum dynamic isn't really changed at all.

Well, you yourself admit it's a "unique setup" - so I'm not sure how my mentioning it would be strange to you? But to answer your question, I'm looking at win cons, and each Mafia Family has to eliminate the other Mafia Family. That is what I'm not sure how to approach. Once the cops are gone (and I think getting scummy reads on them should be very similar to any other scum/mafia reading in any other game) I'm not sure how to figure out which peeps are in my Mafia Family and which peeps aren't. That's my issue. (Of course, I may very well be dead by then, which would make the point moot )

I honestly do not like how Matt was badgering (crap, now I forgot who he was badgering ) about having so many reads so quickly. Like, being super close minded about the tunnel vision and not open to hearing the whys of it. Just focusing on the time of it, rather than the actual mechanics of what went on. Because something similar happened to me in a game recently - and I got mislynched because of it. Can't know if this is a similar case, but it just left a bad taste in my mouth and this reminded me of that.

This is one of the most substantial reads you've given so far and I dig it. Care to follow up on Golden, the badger victim, or share any other reads you've got?

I am working on catching up now. There is so much posting in this game, that it has been taking all my mafia time just to catch up, which then leaves me with precious little time to do rereads. I am not complaining though, an active game is nice, plus with 48 hour days you have to expect a fair bit of participation. Well, I know as a host I hope for games this active, so it's nice for Daisy & MP.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Actually, instead of gleam, I'm switching my vote to Epignosis.

Epignosis wrote:I'm taking my vote off Long Con. I wouldn't want anyone to think that I suspect him.

agleaminranks, come say something.

Epignosis voted for gleam on Day 1 as noted in this post. His vote was a prod for someone who had not posted in the game yet. Gleam does come into the thread a half-hour later, responds to the vote without much care.

But here's what Epignosis has to later on Day 1.

Epignosis wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I'm sorry, your responses could be genuine but you are filling every box of my checklist.

- First you were not trying to hunt scum.
- Then people called you out and you literally accused all three people who were suspecting you. In other words, OMGUS.
- Then you say you are trying to protect civs when you had never posted a single civ read.
- Then you pull the "no lynch" theory out of nowhere. Which is a objectively bad theory because we can't win the game unless we try to lynch people.
- And now you are pigbacking on someone to validade your own points, when that someone doesn't actually have the same opinion as you. I've got lynched twice before as mafia for doing that, and lynched another mafioso for it. I think it's a good scumtell.

I refuse to vote for agleaminranks. Gleam gets lynched early all the time. I think the last time he told us to sit and spin or something.

He refuses to vote for gleam because he gets lynched early all the time, after previously voting for gleam.

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote: If humans were perfect, this game would be impossible.

I'm perfect. Are you?

Well, I'm sick right now, and I consider that apersonal moral failing, so I guess not.

Who is a cop, Epi? Is it Dragon? (hint: yes)

As of this point, I'd say Wilgy, and if Wilgy is bad, gleam is with him after that wild speculation in defense of Wilgy.

On to Day 2, Epignosis then states that if DrWilgy is bad, then gleam is with him. The same gleam Epignosis refused to vote the previous Day.

Epignosis wrote:I will say that I don't understand the six votes on gleam. Did he break wind or something?

Then Epignosis states he doesn't understand why gleam has six votes.



I smell waffles.

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:And lets me add: the feeling I get about the people voting for ika is rage (or fake rage in the case of possible bads among them). People are angry at ika because he won't give the responses they want. This lynch doesn't feel rational. It feels like cultural shock.

I'm not buying a lynch based on cultural shock. Not today.

Quin wrote:

Scotty wrote:Nothing personal is being thrown around here. It's the nature of the game to banter and question motives. I know I mean nothing personal, and Quinn means nothing personal.

I take it personal that anyone would think as such.

I don't know, when Wilgy stole my fish hat I took that pretty personally.

indiglo wrote:OMG DID I CATCH UP?????

Epignosis wrote:Sorry Wilgy. I can't vote for you anymore. Something else came up.

Nerolunar wrote:Wait, quite a few people have been voicing disagreement against the Gleam wagon. Is this a coordinated cop effort to steer the thread in a specific direction?

Go on...

Nerolunar wrote:Wow.

Well, if you can´t reference to posts and find bits of proof then how do you want us to agree with you? Why do you want to do ISO´s if you don´t want to analyse them?

Man.

Uh-huh. Nerolunar. Is the thread being steered? Who is doing the driving?

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:What the hell have I been reading the past few pages?

Have you figured it out yet?

No. A grammar and spelling manual would do wonders.

ika wrote:i do analize them

Ooooow.

Sloonei wrote:

indiglo wrote:OMG DID I CATCH UP?????

Who should we all be voting for today?

indiglo wrote:

Sloonei wrote:

indiglo wrote:OMG DID I CATCH UP?????

Who should we all be voting for today?

Cops. All the cops.

indiglo wrote:

Epignosis wrote:Sorry Wilgy. I can't vote for you anymore. Something else came up.

Nerolunar wrote:Wait, quite a few people have been voicing disagreement against the Gleam wagon. Is this a coordinated cop effort to steer the thread in a specific direction?

Go on...

Nerolunar wrote:Wow.

Well, if you can´t reference to posts and find bits of proof then how do you want us to agree with you? Why do you want to do ISO´s if you don´t want to analyse them?

Man.

Uh-huh. Nerolunar. Is the thread being steered? Who is doing the driving?

Sloonei wrote:

Epignosis wrote:What the hell have I been reading the past few pages?

Have you figured it out yet?

No. A grammar and spelling manual would do wonders.

ika wrote:i do analize them

Ooooow.

So this is maybe interesting. Epi bounced back and forth on his Gleam / not Gleam vote. But then Nero flips opinions one time, and Epi notes it as odd. I would really like more input from Epi on both those things. And also from Nero.

Thanks bunches and bunches.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:Actually, instead of gleam, I'm switching my vote to Epignosis.

Epignosis wrote:I'm taking my vote off Long Con. I wouldn't want anyone to think that I suspect him.

agleaminranks, come say something.

Epignosis voted for gleam on Day 1 as noted in this post. His vote was a prod for someone who had not posted in the game yet. Gleam does come into the thread a half-hour later, responds to the vote without much care.

But here's what Epignosis has to later on Day 1.

Epignosis wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I'm sorry, your responses could be genuine but you are filling every box of my checklist.

- First you were not trying to hunt scum.
- Then people called you out and you literally accused all three people who were suspecting you. In other words, OMGUS.
- Then you say you are trying to protect civs when you had never posted a single civ read.
- Then you pull the "no lynch" theory out of nowhere. Which is a objectively bad theory because we can't win the game unless we try to lynch people.
- And now you are pigbacking on someone to validade your own points, when that someone doesn't actually have the same opinion as you. I've got lynched twice before as mafia for doing that, and lynched another mafioso for it. I think it's a good scumtell.

I refuse to vote for agleaminranks. Gleam gets lynched early all the time. I think the last time he told us to sit and spin or something.

He refuses to vote for gleam because he gets lynched early all the time, after previously voting for gleam.

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote:

Epignosis wrote:

thellama73 wrote: If humans were perfect, this game would be impossible.

I'm perfect. Are you?

Well, I'm sick right now, and I consider that apersonal moral failing, so I guess not.

Who is a cop, Epi? Is it Dragon? (hint: yes)

As of this point, I'd say Wilgy, and if Wilgy is bad, gleam is with him after that wild speculation in defense of Wilgy.

On to Day 2, Epignosis then states that if DrWilgy is bad, then gleam is with him. The same gleam Epignosis refused to vote the previous Day.

Epignosis wrote:I will say that I don't understand the six votes on gleam. Did he break wind or something?

Then Epignosis states he doesn't understand why gleam has six votes.



I smell waffles.

ika wrote:i will also defend her form that kind of crap too and if it end up coming here we will jsut leave. i joined a while back and invited her here. if this is hwo it is then i will jsut leave and she will come with me.

im going before i get irate and go into cap lock

Sloonei wrote:Would anybody be able to articulate a case against Nero? I'm reading him as town so far, and all I see is an honest townie trying to figure out the game when I look at his posts.

Epignosis wrote:
Show me where I bounced back and forth on my Gleam / Not Gleam vote.

Go.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:The point is, it feels more like this is how ika IS. As a person. Not that this is his meta. Because he acts that way regardless of whether he is in a normal situation or in a situation where he is about to be lynched anyway. The meta, in this case, is that it's not a meta at all, it's just how the guy is.

There are some players who are just scummy by nature. They are the sigs and the MMs of mafia. They get lynched early and just can't help it. Ika feeels like that.

To be fair, I haven't been lynched early in a game since Dune Mafia, and even that game was because I was mafia, and played like shit.

Sloonei wrote:

Turnip Head wrote:

Epignosis wrote:What the hell have I been reading the past few pages?

Yeah man I'm pretty lost. I'm thinking I'll toss a vote onto Metalmarmot for now. He's trying too hard to be a good little civ, I see right through his charade

Care to elaborate, Mr Turnip?

Sloonei wrote:I propose some of us also turn and stare awkwardly at ika and Turnip Head until each of them gives us something substantial to work with.

thellama73 wrote:This thread seems to have become a less pleasant place since I was last here. I'll check in again in the morning.

MovingPictures07 wrote:FYI we have had 3 players ask for replacement. I've been searching, but I haven't been able to find one yet, and I'm beginning to doubt that we will be able to replace 1, let alone all 3 of these players any time soon. If you know anyone who isn't playing and would like to, please let me and Daisy know.

Sloonei wrote:What so other people think of ika? Am I alone in thinking his behavior stinks of deliberate unhelpfulness? On Day 1 he kept saying he wanted to sort silverwolf first and foremost, which is a reasonable strategy, but on Day 2 he just seems to be saying she's town but not really working together in any capacity with her like he seemed to suggest, and most of the reads he's posting are minimal at best. He is falling back on a meta-defense when I (or anyone else) press him. I can understand differences in culture and playstyle, but this also wreaks of a player who's taking advantage of these differences to hide behind them.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

agleaminranks wrote:Addressing some things real quick:

Silverwolf, you spun your wheels pretty hard when I asked you to explain why you voted for me with no prior explanation. Then you said that you refused to elaborate, only when another person chimed in did you backtrack and say it was to see how someone reacted. Then when you were asked about what you thought of my reaction, you said it was just OMGUS.

You also said it was impossible to start a bandwagon that early in the game. I beg to differ. All it takes is a margin of one or two votes to start a bandwagon.

Could everyone else please go back to the very beginning of the day period and look at my criticism of Silverwolf's behavior. I honestly, truly believe she is acting completely irrational, and the fact that no one else is pointing it out is absolutely fucking mind boggling. I honestly thought it would speak for itself.

Marmot, would you please explain your vote too and quit with the shitposting.

Also Scotty, how was I acting like a, whatever it was you called me? Wet pancake or something? The hell does that even mean?

I need to go to work and then to some school matters. I probably won't be around until much later tonight.

Sure.

Epignosis voted for you on Day 1, hoping you would say something. You said something 30 minutes later, and didn't seem perturbed by Epignosis's vote. I think it was a coordinated action. I know you have 6 votes now instead of 1, but you did not shrug off my vote like you did Epignosis's.

Turnip Head wrote:

Sloonei wrote:Would anybody be able to articulate a case against Nero? I'm reading him as town so far, and all I see is an honest townie trying to figure out the game when I look at his posts.

Why are you reading Nero as town?

Matt wrote:Ika and Silver, don't leave Personally I don't have a problem with the way you two are playing, I'll admit it threw me off guard but whatevs it's kind of endearing. That'd be hilarious if ya all were the Lovers.

Matt wrote:I'm still suss as all fudge @ Golden, but nobody seems to agree. Too bad, peeps, Golden is crazy bad. I'm not gonna do the slugfest rounds with him for 5 pages straight though, I just don't have the energy.