Mafia Championship Scrimmage [END]

#301

Frog wrote:lol... oh god this again. :-P

You two (Ika + Silverwolf) got lucky you were mechanically cleared in that last hydra game. It seems like almost every game you two are in, this play style doesn't bode well. ** This is their (Ika + Silver) standard town meta. :-/

I'm calling it a night. Cheers.

It's their standard everything meta.

#302

Marco wrote:@SilverWolf, what is your read of ika?

Null, He defends me regardless of alignment. It's NAI.

Golden, I'll answer you tomorrow. I welcome questioning and discussion and interactions. I do not welcome misreps and that's what you are doing.

I am not getting into a fight with you.

No, Soneji hasn't posted anything. I call out lurkers who post but don't post content and fly under the radar, not those who don't post at all. That's more like RL related.

MP has posted but I don't like his content which I pointed out and you ignored while ASSUMING that I only voted him on RL which is a misrep that will piss me off every time.

#303

Golden wrote:
Frog wrote:lol... oh god this again. :-P

You two (Ika + Silverwolf) got lucky you were mechanically cleared in that last hydra game. It seems like almost every game you two are in, this play style doesn't bode well. ** This is their (Ika + Silver) standard town meta. :-/

I'm calling it a night. Cheers.
It's their standard everything meta.

How the hell would you know anything about my scum meta? You've only ever played ONE town game with me and there's another TOWN game I played on this site and that's it.

Frog has played with me on SC2. ika has played with me here, SC2, mafiascum.

You continuously are trying to paint me as scum in ways that don't look genuine. As long as you continue that, I'm keeping my vote on you.

#304

Silverwolf wrote:
Marco wrote:@SilverWolf, what is your read of ika?
Null, He defends me regardless of alignment. It's NAI.

In that case, I feel as if he may be abusing this meta as scum, knowing you're town for sure. Something to think about.

#305

Golden wrote:
Silverwolf wrote:Golden, I suggest you read my fucking posts before you ask questions. One thing that will irritate me to now end is not getting time to read, post, and develop my reads. You immediately attacking me is scum motivation as it distracts me from doing that. Anyone who knows me knows that. I welcome interaction, I welcome questioning, but being attacked, voted, misrepped, for simply asking a question will set me off and piss me off to no end.
You clearly don't welcome questioning. I asked you a number and you told me off for getting defensive instead of answering them.

I did not 'immediately attack you as scum' - as I've pointed out. I'm not 'looking for a reason to vote you'.

It's really simple SW - I don't like your MP vote AT ALL, or your reasoning for it. I find it as scummy as heck. Trying to make it out like I'm being personal against you is not helpful to me, it doesn't help prove me wrong. Just engage with me on a game level. If you are emotionally frustrated at taking my vote, please talk to Dom. I want clear headed SW as much as the next person. I have a lot of respect for your town game.

But, you do not get a pass from suspicion. You cannot ask me not to suspect you because it will 'distract you'. Taking suspicion is part of the game.

I have read your 'fucking posts', so stop telling me to iso you to understand you.

There is nothing scummy about me trying to get MP to participate. What I find scummy is your interference in that and your constant defensive of him. I never once said I want a pass from suspicion. Again, don't put words in my mouth. I gave a game related reason for not liking one of MP's votes and I have seen scum come into games plenty and make excuses for not posting. I'm trying to get him to post. Period.

#306

Golden wrote:
Silverwolf wrote:Golden, I suggest you read my fucking posts before you ask questions. One thing that will irritate me to now end is not getting time to read, post, and develop my reads. You immediately attacking me is scum motivation as it distracts me from doing that. Anyone who knows me knows that. I welcome interaction, I welcome questioning, but being attacked, voted, misrepped, for simply asking a question will set me off and piss me off to no end.
You clearly don't welcome questioning. I asked you a number and you told me off for getting defensive instead of answering them.

I did not 'immediately attack you as scum' - as I've pointed out. I'm not 'looking for a reason to vote you'.

It's really simple SW - I don't like your MP vote AT ALL, or your reasoning for it. I find it as scummy as heck. Trying to make it out like I'm being personal against you is not helpful to me, it doesn't help prove me wrong. Just engage with me on a game level. If you are emotionally frustrated at taking my vote, please talk to Dom. I want clear headed SW as much as the next person. I have a lot of respect for your town game.

But, you do not get a pass from suspicion. You cannot ask me not to suspect you because it will 'distract you'. Taking suspicion is part of the game.

I have read your 'fucking posts', so stop telling me to iso you to understand you.

I do hope you realize this kind of post is only going to tick her off more.

#307

Silverwolf, you said you found MP cautious about avoiding a hammer vote. Yes, you did. One post about MP before your vote post.

Here is the sum total (snips) of what you said about MP in your vote post.

Silverwolf wrote:MP needs to post more content and not keep making excuses for not doing so.

MOVING PICTURES

You need to post more.

You did not call back to the post you made ages ago about his hammer vote being suspicious. You made it very clear your vote was because you felt he 'needed to post more content' and was 'making excuses for not doing so'.

Do you really think it is unreasonable for me to believe your vote is for the latter reason, not the former? How is it fair to say I'm misrepresenting your vote when you, yourself, represented it entirely as being about him 'making excuses' for not posting content.

Here is MP's last post:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Just a heads up regarding my schedule, for those that care: I'll be around in about 5.5 hours from now to post Smashfest matches, but I may or may not be sufficiently finished with work by then to call it a night; if I am, I'll check in here, and no earlier. If I am not, I'll be back sometime later this evening. See you all sometime.

This does not read like an 'excuse' to me. It reads like a stated fact about when he will be back to the thread. I do not like that you represent it as an 'excuse'.

Ika says you care about and understand rl things. It does not seem like you do in respect of MP? Do you have any reason to believe he is not telling the truth about his schedule?

#308

@ika, why do you only care about SilverWolf and what might tick her off?

#309

Marco wrote:
Silverwolf wrote:
Marco wrote:@SilverWolf, what is your read of ika?
Null, He defends me regardless of alignment. It's NAI.
In that case, I feel as if he may be abusing this meta as scum, knowing you're town for sure. Something to think about.

I'll keep this in mind. He did this as scum in Turf Wars. He will do this as town also but I need to see a lot more content before I get any sort of read on him one way or another.

#310

Silverwolf wrote: I'm trying to get him to post.

Votes do not get people to post who don't have rl time to post.

Silverwolf wrote:I never once said I want a pass from suspicion. Again, don't put words in my mouth.

How about you don't tell me I'm putting words in your mouth when I'm not. How about you wait until I say 'silverwolf said xyz' to tell me I'm putting words in your mouth. Me saying something does not = me saying you said it.

@ika - once again, if silverwolf is getting 'ticked off' by taking suspicion, she needs to take that to dom. Whether or not she gets 'ticked off', is not something I can control. She doesn't get a pass from suspicion from me because it might 'tick her off'.

@marco - sw figured ika out in turf wars. If she is town, I think she'll figure ika out.

#311

Golden wrote:Silverwolf, you said you found MP cautious about avoiding a hammer vote. Yes, you did. One post about MP before your vote post.

Here is the sum total (snips) of what you said about MP in your vote post.

Silverwolf wrote:MP needs to post more content and not keep making excuses for not doing so.

MOVING PICTURES

You need to post more.
You did not call back to the post you made ages ago about his hammer vote being suspicious. You made it very clear your vote was because you felt he 'needed to post more content' and was 'making excuses for not doing so'.

Do you really think it is unreasonable for me to believe your vote is for the latter reason, not the former? How is it fair to say I'm misrepresenting your vote when you, yourself, represented it entirely as being about him 'making excuses' for not posting content.

Here is MP's last post:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Just a heads up regarding my schedule, for those that care: I'll be around in about 5.5 hours from now to post Smashfest matches, but I may or may not be sufficiently finished with work by then to call it a night; if I am, I'll check in here, and no earlier. If I am not, I'll be back sometime later this evening. See you all sometime.
This does not read like an 'excuse' to me. It reads like a stated fact about when he will be back to the thread. I do not like that you represent it as an 'excuse'.

Ika says you care about and understand rl things. It does not seem like you do in respect of MP? Do you have any reason to believe he is not telling the truth about his schedule?

Why are you defending MP so much and interfering in my ability to get a read on him? That's what pings me about you. It looks like you are whiteknighting MP. You also have been misrepping me and the way you are going after me looks scummy.

Like I said, MP started off with a weird post and looked like he had a very cautious entrance. Me calling him out on this and voting him was to get him to react to it when he came back.

I do not appreciate it one bit when you tell me I don't respect his RL issues. It's another misrep.

I'm keeping my vote right where it is.

#312

Golden wrote:
Silverwolf wrote: I'm trying to get him to post.
Votes do not get people to post who don't have rl time to post.

Silverwolf wrote:I never once said I want a pass from suspicion. Again, don't put words in my mouth.
How about you don't tell me I'm putting words in your mouth when I'm not. How about you wait until I say 'silverwolf said xyz' to tell me I'm putting words in your mouth. Me saying something does not = me saying you said it.

@ika - once again, if silverwolf is getting 'ticked off' by taking suspicion, she needs to take that to dom. Whether or not she gets 'ticked off', is not something I can control. She doesn't get a pass from suspicion from me because it might 'tick her off'.

@marco - sw figured ika out in turf wars. If she is town, I think she'll figure ika out.

NO, I'VE SEEN SCUM USE EXCUSES TO AVOID THREADS MANY TIME. I DON'T LIKE HIS POSTS. I TOLD YOU THIS THREE TIMES NOW. I'M TRYING TO GET HIM TO REACT TO MY VOTE WHEN HE COMES IN HERE WHICH YOU HAVE EFFECTIVELY RUINED.

GOT IT NOW?

#313

Why shouldn't I defend MP? I think your vote for him looks bad.

Whiteknighting? OK, fair enough. I'll whiteknight people, if thats what you call it. I whiteknighted you in turf wars, which you didn't like any more. What affiliation was I then?

I defend people from accusations that I think are off. I already pointed out once in this game, that I once got lynched day 2 for defending sloonei hard day 1 when he was bad. It happens.

You called MP's rl issues 'constant excuses'. I did not put those words in your mouth. They stuck out to me, and they don't seem like the words of someone who believes MP's rl reasons. Do you believe them?

#314

Also, Golden I gave you my zexy read and told you I'd ISO and flesh it out more for you tomorrow. So stop saying I haven't answered you cuz I have.

#315

When did I last say you didn't answer me? Maybe it was asking you about zexy after you said you'd do a zexy iso, but that was a multi-post that I began long before. I'm comfortable that you'll do zexy tomorrow, no problems. You have been answering my questions (you didn't in your first reaction, but you have been since). I'm not sure where you're getting the idea from that I keep saying that you aren't.

I think you'd be much less angry with me if you just carefully read what I say instead of reading in things that aren't there.

#316

Anyway, you've earned bed. Don't let me keep you up.

And remember. I have huge respect for your skills. I saw them in Turf Wars. You're a massive asset as town and I have every reason to expect you'd be a good scum as well. I like you a lot - there is nothing personal about this.

But it doesn't change the fact that when I find something really pingy - I'm going to chase down exactly what was going through their mind, and hard. Today, that's you.

#317

Golden she's town.

Stop trying to lynch her and tunneling her

#318

ika wrote:Golden she's town.

Stop trying to lynch her and tunneling her

I'm certainly not tunnelling her. I have no problem keeping perspective.

Whether I am trying to lynch her or whether she is town both remain to be seen. Neither are known to me yet.

#319

Inawordyes wrote:Is "sig" the "sjg" on MU?

No someone stole my name!

I'm Sigurd over on MU. I do believe we've played in the same game before? Your profile picture seems familiar.

Just so everyone knows I probably won't be on at all until tomorrow evening.

#320

I've skimmed the thread so if I missed anything directed at me, I'll answer it tomorrow night when I read everything over, unless you'll be willing to ask me again.

This Silver/Golden thing seems like town vs town.

I think someone asked me why I was town reading Zexy. It is in part because of her (If you're a he sorry about this) defense of me, a gut/tone read based around their posts, and the level of activity/game solving they seem to be doing.

#321

sig wrote:Also

Vote Unvote

I mislike Wilgy's vote, but can't tell if this is his normal lovable town shenanigans or mafia pretending to be lovable town while avoiding any vote.

Sig this would imply that I'm only loveable based on alignment :P

#322

I'm fucking exhausted. I'm going to try catching up now though, despite the fact that I'll have to be awake in 5 hours and have another couple of long days ahead of me.

#323

JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I've added two options to the poll. You may place your vote in "Unvote" if you desire to have your vote on nobody. You may place your vote in "No Lynch" if you desire to lynch nobody.

Which apparently cleared the poll.

Please place your poll votes again to accompany your in-thread votes.

Ah, my vote is gone!

VOTE A2THEZEBRA

#324

Who all is around for active conversation?

#325

sig wrote:There isn't much to go on yet but, inaword had a towny entrance to the thread.

He is doing some RVS, but that is common on MU. I usually dislike doing this however, it isn't an alignment indicator.

These two statements read incompatible to me. Please explain.

#326

Well, it seems I'm all alone. That sucks.

I suppose I'll catch up in giant MP post fashion rather than individual posts, otherwise I'll be posting way too many consecutive posts.

#327

Golden wrote:
Zexy wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What I didn't like about your posts is that they seemed like an easy opportunistic set of early observations when there wasn't a whole lot of content to analyze. It's a good and easy way to establish yourself early on as a town leader.
I don't think you are the kind of person who would base a read only on that anyway when so much more is going to happen.
I'd like to believe same goes for sig.
Sometimes very early reads are the most accurate. Frequently people make their biggest mistakes before they find their footing in the game. If sloonei really believed in his read, why would it be expected for him to 'not only rely on that'?

Nah, i'm reading sig as town. That whole thing with him was just poo-flinging. He responded to well to me.

#328

Froggy, on the other hand... It started out as more poo-flinging at an easy target (and I mean that as a compliment. Good or bad, I like Frog's playstyle) but I do not think he has responded as well. I've yet to read everything that happened while I was at work, and probably won't get through it all tonight, but a lot of the things he has said are not sitting right with me. I got a hunch I caught a baddie.

#329

Ugh, I'm too tired to continue. Made it through page 3. I'll continue first thing in the morning until I'm caught up, I promise. For now, I at least have the following questions and remarks.

Regarding the claim discussion, I generally am excited to experiment with "new" gameplay, particularly claiming techniques, but I agree that it doesn't seem particularly productive here if we all aren't on the same page. My fake claim of cop in Arrested Development worked, but it's a wonder that any of us fake claimers even made it as far as we did, because only a few of us civilians did, including the cop, so it could have gone awry if the mafia had more familiarity with the setup. All of this to say: It taught me that not having the majority or all of the players on the same page with regards to these plans can be risky. So I'm leaning against any hypoclaiming.

Several players have requested meta on the combination of players including Long Con, Metalmarsh89, and Sloonei. I don't consider myself skilled at conveying meta, and I think over-reliance on meta can be dangerous. Nonetheless, I feel inclined to oblige, since it can assist in avoiding mislynches that are driven based on individual and cultural differences that are non alignment indicative.

Meta on Long Con: Veteran player of more than 7 years (I believe, he can provide this). Nonetheless, throughout nearly that entire time he has historically played and hosted complicated, open-setup role madness games, like many others here on The Syndicate. Consequently, his comments regarding role claiming are not alignment indicative or at all surprising to me. He can be an incredibly persuasive member of the mafia, and I would say, at least from my perspective, that he's actually more believable as mafia masquerading as town than he is as town, and I tend to suspect him incorrectly more often than not. Early in games, he has been known to utilize role-based analysis and gambits. Overall I'd say tends to be a mix of gut/tone and analysis-based with regards to accusations.

Meta on Metalmarsh89: Tends to feel more comfortable as the game continues (wacky early game player), regardless of alignment, in that he jokes around and gravitates towards RVS in early phases but he can and usually will switch on "analysis mode" at any time after a few cycles have transpired. The timing of his analysis switch depends on how invested he is in the game, as early as a couple of cycles and as late as... well, his death or never, occasionally. He tends to utilize vote analysis and ISOs, but it doesn't mean he's only evidence-driven in hunting methods by any means. Likes to self vote. He has been mislynched often early in games for his early "bizarre" behavior. Overall I'd say he tends to be more gut/tone-based early in games but definitely more analysis-based after a few cycles with regards to accusations.

Meta on Sloonei: Has randed town a ridiculous amount of times more than mafia. In my experience of seeing him mafia (only a couple of times when I was a fellow player, then add another time as a spectator), he just couldn't quite capture the same magnitude of that "town spark" he exudes in sheer effort and inquisitiveness when town, and as a result he was lynched as mafia very early every time I witnessed (d1, d1, and d...2? can't remember that last one). My initial impression of his meta was that he is very much a level-headed, systematic question asker who gradually chips away at every other player in the game, but nonetheless never expressing too much certainty with regards to reads. More recently, I've seen him adapt more confidence in his reads, particularly early in games, and become more aggressive with accusations. Before I would have said that his lack of tunneling was a slight town Sloonei indicator, but lately I'm less sure and am inclined to say it's switched to a slight mafia Sloonei indcator, and that he was lynched as mafia because he didn't seem sure enough of his convictions. Overall I'd say he tends to be a mix of gut/tone and analysis-based with regards to accusations, but that underlying all of his accusations is a very meticulous post analysis regardless of whether it's tone or vote behavior that pings him.

Spoiler: show

sig, sorry to say that I have an unreal amount of work to accomplish over the next two weeks, so this isn't a false warning. I will be less active than normal. It just is what it is.

Spoiler: show

sig, what does this (underlined) mean? What exactly don't you like about my post discussing the hammer function?

Spoiler: show

sig, this is incorrect. I did vote for zebra, but it was eaten by the poll reset when JJJ added the unvote and no lynch options.

Spoiler: show

Hello, Long Con. Not setting myself up for an under-the-radar game, merely being realistic with my current workload and being transparent in communicating this to you all. If you examine the sign-up thread, you'll see that I said a very similar sentiment, before I received my role card, multiple times. Hence this is not alignment indicative, and I'd like to hear why you think it is.

Spoiler: show

Zexy, hey there. How heavily would you say that you rate meta in your assessment of other players in games?

Spoiler: show

Zexy, why do you view increased defensiveness as a mafia-leaning trait?

Spoiler: show

Zexy, if you "mostly" wanted a reaction, what else did you want?

I find your train of thought regarding this matter difficult to understand.

Good night, game. See you in a few hours.

Linkitis w/ Sloonei: Hello, Sloonei! Goodbye, Sloonei!

#330

Also, UNVOTE, until the morning and I've properly caught up, at least. Can't justify a RVS vote at this stage.

UNVOTE

#331

Sloonei wrote:
Golden wrote:
Zexy wrote:
Sloonei wrote:What I didn't like about your posts is that they seemed like an easy opportunistic set of early observations when there wasn't a whole lot of content to analyze. It's a good and easy way to establish yourself early on as a town leader.
I don't think you are the kind of person who would base a read only on that anyway when so much more is going to happen.
I'd like to believe same goes for sig.
Sometimes very early reads are the most accurate. Frequently people make their biggest mistakes before they find their footing in the game. If sloonei really believed in his read, why would it be expected for him to 'not only rely on that'?
Nah, i'm reading sig as town. That whole thing with him was just poo-flinging. He responded to well to me.

I'm actually reading sig as town as well, and both my gut on sig, and zexy's responses to me, made me feel better about zexy.

#332

a2thezebra wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
a2thezebra wrote:What's good? I ate some brownies last night that still haven't completely worn off.
My phone died ;__;

You have any leftovers? I could use some.
Nope, there were fourteen to start with and between four people sharing them I ate five. None remain.

#333

Dyslexicon wrote:Let's make a wagon on Sloonei!

VOTE SLOONEI

I look too town to you?

#334

Dyslexicon wrote:
Dyslexicon wrote:
Marco wrote:I only know Soneji as we both come from the same board and have played dozens of games together. I think we both read each other pretty well, as we've also been on the same scum team 4-5 times (won each game too), but we're not infallible.

I don't consider the exact setup standard (semi-open nature with 1 out of possible 12 setups), but I've played some of the possible setups and am more than familiar with each role.
Thanks. Did you already state your read of Soneji (if you have one)? I don't recall.
Oooops, I thought Sloonei and Soneji was the same player, just different versions of the username. I see now that they are two seperate people. I did not mean to make them conjioned twins.

This is a problem that I have had myself with Soneji. I need to remind myself that he's not me.

#335

Frog wrote:For now

Vote: Metalmarshmellow89

This vote is weak.

#336

Dyslexicon wrote:I don't have an overview over who knows who, who's from here and how familiar this type of setup is to people, and I'd really like to have that.

So I'll just state that:
- I've played a couple of games with PSI.
- I'm not from here (but I really like the site *buddies everyone)
- I consider this setup pretty standard.

And if other would like to share that would be appreciated.

I like this.

- I'm a fairly regular member of the Syndicate community and have played with most of the players in this game, but this is not my "home" site.
- Players I've not played with before are: Dyslexicon, Frog, Inawordyes, Marco, Psittacitform, Zexy.
- Played exactly 1 game with each of Ika, Soneji, Silverwolf
- I've never played a semi-open setup before, and I've not heavily played in games with role claiming in years, and even when I did I was never big on doing it.
- I'll be playing in the Champs tournament next month, can't wait to see you other dudes there, whoever you are.

#337

Frog wrote:
Silverwolf wrote:
Sloonei wrote:And to add on to that, I definitely think you're reading too far into the relationship you perceive between myself and Marco. I assure you it does not exist. He may well be scum who was trying to buddy me and/or throw some shade on sig, but that's not how I'm reading that one post of his, and beyond that I don't even know if there's anything else to your case.

I trust that you'll start looking in other directions once more people start posting things and I appreicate your output so far, but on this one issue you are not on the right track.

All of this is still @Frog

I am going to work now so this is the last you'll hear from me tonight.
I think preflip associatives like Frog is doing are pointless before a scum flip.

Almost caught up.
Lol. I had 1 pre-flip association that I described more as a head scratching relationship. They both claim to not town read each other which is also buzzard considering their convenient congruencies and answer questions for each other.

You're debasing my logic without actually looking into it. This is fallicious logic SW.

However- going to have to agree with you. Ore flip associations are usually lol. But let the ENTP in me lay out all of the tinfoils anyway!!!

I just don't understand the way you've misconstrued everything about myself and Marco. You paired the two of us together and then proceeded to drag us, together, through the mud, often asking the two of us the same questions, and then when each of us would respond to you, you'd just tighten your grip on the "HA, SEE, THESE GUYS ARE ACTING TOGETHER!" stance. I've never met Marco in my life and I'm hardly even conscious of him in this game yet. I don't have a read on him and I'm frankly not sure why you think I do or should have one at this point. I'm pretty sure he would say the same thing because we are in the same boat right, because you put us there together. Either you're a townie who is way off base and/or poo-flinging, or you're a baddie whose attempts to frame a couple of players as bad have gone a bit off the handle.

Hi Marco, are you town?

#338

and that's as far as i'm going to get tonight. I have to be up in 6 hours to head back to work, so I won't be back until mid-afternoon tomorrow. Sorry folks.

#339

Sloonei wrote:
Frog wrote:For now

Vote: Metalmarshmellow89
This vote is weak.

Why is it weak? What vote is strong in your opinion and why?

I would think any non voter is weak IMO. Where there exists no pressure on slankers, we're screwing up.

I believe you to be villager (either derp or lynch baiting me, w/e)

USERNAME POSTS
Golden 53
Marco 43
Sloonei 41
Frog 34
Dyslexicon 27
Silverwolf 25
sig 20
Zexy 20
JaggedJimmyJay 14
MovingPictures07 13
ika 11
Long Con 11
Inawordyes 10
DrWilgy 4
Metalmarsh89 4
a2thezebra 3
Psittaciform 2

Straight up, this is how I see today.

I'm pretty much only going to be voting for Dr Wigly, Metalmarsh, a2thezebra, or Psittaciform

[I was trying to lynch bait Zexy earlier, pretty sure Zexy randed Town, just wanted to see who would hop on that opening.]

My vote on Metalmarsh has to do with a complete non-game solvey style.

In case you actually need references to his quotes, tell me how right I am and then vote with me.
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/search ... 8&sr=posts

#340

Sloonei wrote:and that's as far as i'm going to get tonight. I have to be up in 6 hours to head back to work, so I won't be back until mid-afternoon tomorrow. Sorry folks.

night dudesickle

#341

Frog wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Frog wrote:For now

Vote: Metalmarshmellow89
This vote is weak.
Why is it weak? What vote is strong in your opinion and why?

I would think any non voter is weak IMO. Where there exists no pressure on slankers, we're screwing up.

I believe you to be villager (either derp or lynch baiting me, w/e)

USERNAME POSTS
Golden 53
Marco 43
Sloonei 41
Frog 34
Dyslexicon 27
Silverwolf 25
sig 20
Zexy 20
JaggedJimmyJay 14
MovingPictures07 13
ika 11
Long Con 11
Inawordyes 10
DrWilgy 4
Metalmarsh89 4
a2thezebra 3
Psittaciform 2

Straight up, this is how I see today.

I'm pretty much only going to be voting for Dr Wigly, Metalmarsh, a2thezebra, or Psittaciform

[I was trying to lynch bait Zexy earlier, pretty sure Zexy randed Town, just wanted to see who would hop on that opening.]

My vote on Metalmarsh has to do with a complete non-game solvey style.

In case you actually need references to his quotes, tell me how right I am and then vote with me.
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/search ... 8&sr=posts

Lol, I saw a "dom" on the who posted list and removed it, assuming it was a mod. Just realied JJJ is the host for the game and is outposting half of the players. Shameful.

#342

wish i could redit that into one post...

I'm assuming Soneji is getting replaced sooner than hopefully so it'd be kind of wasteful to blind lynch an empty slot. The other slankers at least had the opportunity to show up, but haven't done anything.

Again - Town has incentive to solve the game, Mafia does not. Unfortunately, wolves tend to slank and play the lurk to win card WAY too often, as lame as it is.

#343

Quick Plan:

These players

Spoiler: show

Will Split up into groups of 2 and vote these players, putting each of them at 2 votes:

Spoiler: show

These guys will have to make a cases for each of the slankers, and finish up the votes:

Spoiler: show

If this splits evenly, all 4 slankers should be put at 3 votes each.

For reference, with a hammer, the vote required to hammer is currently 9 votes.
Since there are 4 wolves, it would require 5 town to pile onto the incorrect pick, and all 4 wolves to snipe the incorrect pick, thereby explicitly revealing their team. What I'm saying is, if we choose these 4 players as wagons now, we are certainly safe within the realms of variation putting each of the 4 lurkers to 3+/- 2 votes (1-5 votes on each).

I think this is an optimal strategy since, as I've pointed, I believe wolves are least likely to be engaged in the game because it is not in their wincon, and wolves are lazy AF in games unfortunately. I believe at least one wolf must exist in that group of 4, although I believe more exist in that group of 4 personally. If we force wolves to vote amongst wolves and nonwolves, we put them in a situation that makes them mechanically vulnerable! This is optimal IMO.

I hope you all join me in my plan to make wagons on these 4 players and collect everyone's reads on these 4 players.

#344

Sloonei wrote:
Dyslexicon wrote:I don't have an overview over who knows who, who's from here and how familiar this type of setup is to people, and I'd really like to have that.

So I'll just state that:
- I've played a couple of games with PSI.
- I'm not from here (but I really like the site *buddies everyone)
- I consider this setup pretty standard.

And if other would like to share that would be appreciated.
I like this.

- I'm a fairly regular member of the Syndicate community and have played with most of the players in this game, but this is not my "home" site.
- Players I've not played with before are: Dyslexicon, Frog, Inawordyes, Marco, Psittacitform, Zexy.
- Played exactly 1 game with each of Ika, Soneji, Silverwolf
- I've never played a semi-open setup before, and I've not heavily played in games with role claiming in years, and even when I did I was never big on doing it.
- I'll be playing in the Champs tournament next month, can't wait to see you other dudes there, whoever you are.

Ditto, except this is my home site.

#345

Interesting frog. Your style is definitely foreign at the Syndicate. This kind of policy lynch isn't likely to get going, from my experience. But - I'm intrigued by it, and I'd be in if everyone was.

For reference, Wilgy, marmot and zebra (the three of those who are syndicate regulars) are not people I would call low posters as a rule.

#346

I think you misunderstand me.

This isn't so much a policy lynch, as an estimated guess based on NotTown! type actions (essentially no actions).

The process of elimination by limiting it to the 4 players who satisfy the POE requirements for today ensure via probability at MINIMUM (rationality gives it a bump), that at least 1 wolf will exist between those four.

The top 8 posters are all lean V's for me, the subsequent 4 top posters need to step up their game but they've shown up to the table, the bottom 4 posters MUST be pressured into the center of the conversation, and this is our opportunity to honestly our duty as town to not allow slanking wolves to do this.

So again, this is not a standard 'policy lynch'. I would suspect wolves would hate my ideo because of the high probability of a wolf kill, and a mechanical deduction of who wolves are by the end of today by following this plan.

#347

I don't misunderstand you. The concept is that if wolves can slack off in posting, they will. I agree.

The thing I think Syndicate regulars will struggle with is the idea of voting someone they don't necessarily suspect individually in favour of a concept. It's just not normal here. Partly because high posting is not a big part of our culture, and there are plenty of people who tend to be low posters regardless of affiliation and lots who will always be high regardless of affiliation.

I'm in favour, though.

Although I think the odds are better catching a wolf in low posters than high, I'm not sure I follow this bit 'a mechanical deduction of who wolves are by the end of today by following this plan' - how do you expect it to allow us to deduce who other wolves are?

#348

#349

#350