Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Voltgloss]

Also, I would suggest that those others who have expressed an interest in voting Morgrim but have not yet done so (Robz, Insomniac) please wait and NOT drop the hammer until after Tables has had a chance to complete and provide his analysis this evening.  I am very interested to hear Tables' thoughts before we move to a final decision.

If a 4th vote for Morgrim comes in before Tables returns, I will likely unvote to prevent a premature hammer-dropping.  But if Tables' analysis does not convince me my suspicions of Morgrim are misplaced, I will be reinstating my vote.

Correction for typo:  What is the "something" you are trying to find out?

Who is likely to be killed now that I am dead?

Morgrim, why are you trying to find this out?  I can see at least two possible reasons, but I would like to know yours.

[Morgrim7]

Just curous to know. It could be you, it could be Tables (although I think he is mafia) it could be anyone. With this info. the power role could have a better target.

[Kuildeous]

Kuil, you keep chiming in to vote without doing analysis or explaining. There's no need for you to vote for anyone yet, a tie wouldn't be declared until everyone had voted and we're nowhere near that OR the deadline. Bandwagon voting like that doesn't really help the town and is slightly suspicious.

Of course it's suspicious. Everything is suspicious. Not voting is suspicious. Voting is suspicious. Being vocal is suspicious. Holding your tongue is suspicious. I suppose that's the nature of the game.

There is nothing to analyze. This game consists of Dominion players, who seem to be on the smarter side of things. So, everything I see typed up might be taken at face value, or they could be intentionally written so as to trick everyone else. Everything I typed is pretty much what I would have typed whether or not I was Mafia. I suspect the same is true for everyone else. Again, we don't have body language or impulsive claims. So, I fail to see what we can analyze in the first day, except that we know that two people in here are pretty good liars.

[bozzball]

Of course it's suspicious. Everything is suspicious. Not voting is suspicious. Voting is suspicious. Being vocal is suspicious. Holding your tongue is suspicious. I suppose that's the nature of the game.

There is nothing to analyze. This game consists of Dominion players, who seem to be on the smarter side of things. So, everything I see typed up might be taken at face value, or they could be intentionally written so as to trick everyone else. Everything I typed is pretty much what I would have typed whether or not I was Mafia. I suspect the same is true for everyone else. Again, we don't have body language or impulsive claims. So, I fail to see what we can analyze in the first day, except that we know that two people in here are pretty good liars.

This.

[Galzria]

Kuil, you keep chiming in to vote without doing analysis or explaining. There's no need for you to vote for anyone yet, a tie wouldn't be declared until everyone had voted and we're nowhere near that OR the deadline. Bandwagon voting like that doesn't really help the town and is slightly suspicious.

Of course it's suspicious. Everything is suspicious. Not voting is suspicious. Voting is suspicious. Being vocal is suspicious. Holding your tongue is suspicious. I suppose that's the nature of the game.

There is nothing to analyze. This game consists of Dominion players, who seem to be on the smarter side of things. So, everything I see typed up might be taken at face value, or they could be intentionally written so as to trick everyone else. Everything I typed is pretty much what I would have typed whether or not I was Mafia. I suspect the same is true for everyone else. Again, we don't have body language or impulsive claims. So, I fail to see what we can analyze in the first day, except that we know that two people in here are pretty good liars.

Here's the problem with that, and I refer back to Voltgloss's comment MUCH earlier:

Assuming you can gain no information first round, and you randomly lynch, 1 of 3 things happen:

1) You lynch town (66% of the time). Mafia kill at night. Day 2 starts. When do you get new information? You're back to square one.

2) You lynch Mafia (~22% the time). Mafia kill at night. Day 2 starts. You got lucky, but still have no new information, and 1/7 of randomly picking the last Mafia that day.
3) You lynch  Role (~11% the time). Mafia kill at night. Day 2 starts. You're down a major asset, and have no new information.

You HAVE to build a case. Random play lets the Mafia win. Yes, we're all Dominion players, and cunning, sly players. We're also human, and are prone to imperfect play. But a point-and-lynch system is doomed to fail. You will NEVER gain relevant information that way.

[Morgrim7]

I would like to point out that the msfia have probably  already voted for me. (assuming that I am not mafia myself)

[jotheonah]

I would like to point out that the msfia have probably  already voted for me. (assuming that I am not mafia myself)

It all depends on their play style. I can imagine a mafia choosing to sit back and enjoy the first round, especially if we all happened to stumble on a townie. I can also see a mafia rabble rousing.  You're right though - Looking back, if you turn out to be innocent, I think we'll have gained some very valuable information about the Mafia. But that info will be much more reliable if we kill you than if we don't.

I can't help but notice the predicted role claim has not materialized, despite the growing majority behind this lynching.

[jotheonah]

And I just post-count levelled. Not quite as unfortunate as Robz, but I have become a witch in the middle of a game that often degrades into a witch hunt.

[Galzria]

I would like to point out that the msfia have probably  already voted for me. (assuming that I am not mafia myself)

Certainly a possibility. Only 3 of us have cast votes, although 2 others have shown intent. I'm of two minds on this:

First, the Mafia may wish to move quickly, hoping to chain-react others into following. That's a plus for them. It also means they don't have to appear the hammer vote, which could be incriminating.
On the flip side, they would really be sticking their neck out early. And given the amount of suspicion that floats around to begin with, that seems unnecessary. Why risk themselves when waiting only benefits them?

On the other hand, and related to above, waiting for town to make the mistake of 3 or 4 voting someone could be HUGELY beneficial, if they can themselves appear to make a strong case to bandwagon. Giving them the chance to Hammer is generally not a good thing.
On the flip side, if the votes are being cast against a Mafia, that puts his partner in a VERY awkward situation. Vote and clear his own name, or don't vote and risk being in hot water?

I don't know. As I believe you to MOST LIKELY be Mafia, I'm inclined to think your partner has not yet voted. If you turn out not to be, then I probably agree that a member of the Mafia had voted for you already (or indicated vote).

[bozzball]

You HAVE to build a case. Random play lets the Mafia win. Yes, we're all Dominion players, and cunning, sly players. We're also human, and are prone to imperfect play. But a point-and-lynch system is doomed to fail. You will NEVER gain relevant information that way.

Not to harp on, but how are our discussions going to lead to anything that isn't random?

[jotheonah]

Of course it's suspicious. Everything is suspicious. Not voting is suspicious. Voting is suspicious. Being vocal is suspicious. Holding your tongue is suspicious. I suppose that's the nature of the game.

There is nothing to analyze. This game consists of Dominion players, who seem to be on the smarter side of things. So, everything I see typed up might be taken at face value, or they could be intentionally written so as to trick everyone else. Everything I typed is pretty much what I would have typed whether or not I was Mafia. I suspect the same is true for everyone else. Again, we don't have body language or impulsive claims. So, I fail to see what we can analyze in the first day, except that we know that two people in here are pretty good liars.

Voting too readily without much in the way of explanation is suspicious. Not voting is not suspicious at this stage. Voting for no lynch early on is, it turns out, suspicious.

This is the whole game. We talk and talk and overanalyze each other's words and try to spot a mole. That's really like all that happens. So if you really believe we have no more information than we did when we started, well, you're doing it wrong.

We're also all being evaluated on what we say and do and how helpful we are to the town. You and bozzball's bold assertion that we can't know or do anything at this time is certainly unhelpful to the town. It's bordering on willfully unhelpful.

If you want to be helpful, jump in. Say something controversial and calculated to produce a telling response. Reread the thread and post about things in it that seem suspicious or strange, or connections you see. X never talks to Y. Y was the first one to bring up X and brings X up again every time we stop talking about X. Stuff like that. We are swimming in information, we just have to analyze it. That's the game.

If you think the game is something else, like, say, waiting around for our sane cop, IF we have one, to identify the mafia for us and somehow convince us they are the mafia without becoming a target, please explain. Explain what magic fountain of new information is just beyond the riverbend. Or else buckle down and help us work with what we've got.

[jotheonah]

bozzball, re: random

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

[Voltgloss]

Not to harp on, but how are our discussions going to lead to anything that isn't random?

Through the process of voicing suspicion, defending, accusing, and explaining, we get information about each player from the player's own words and deeds.  Through analyzing those words and deeds, we can come to an educated conclusion as to who is more likely to be lying.  It's not going to be perfect - unless a Cop investigates a Mafia at night, you're never going to get 100% certainty - but it's still going to be better than pure randomness.

And even if the first day's lynch hits a Townie, reviewing the discussions/actions/positions taken during that first day - through the lens of knowing "person X was a Townie and person Y (killed by the Mafia at night) was also a Townie" provides much more information to be used during Day 2.  Each day's discussion becomes important information to be reviewed during each subsequent day, especially as more concrete info (the roles/alignments of those who die) cast those older discussions in new lights.

We can't just sit and wait and rely on a Cop we might not even have.  That is handing the Mafia the win.

I can't help but notice the predicted role claim has not materialized, despite the growing majority behind this lynching.

This is not lost on me either, jotheonah.  I am interested to hear how this fits into Tables' analysis.  I would also like to hear Robz's thoughts on the subject.  From where I sit, it's not enough by itself to shake my suspicions of Morgrim, but it's also part of why I don't want the hammer to fall early.

[Galzria]

You HAVE to build a case. Random play lets the Mafia win. Yes, we're all Dominion players, and cunning, sly players. We're also human, and are prone to imperfect play. But a point-and-lynch system is doomed to fail. You will NEVER gain relevant information that way.

Not to harp on, but how are our discussions going to lead to anything that isn't random?

While the end resulting vote is never likely to be 100% accurate (I would hazard a guess that in MOST games of Mafia, a Townie is hit first, if for no other reason than volume.), information mining, and reading into every reaction can be HUGELY beneficial.

My focus in Poli-Sci was Constitutional Law. I mention this because the Constitution is a written document hundreds of years old in which there are STILL many questions unanswered. And interpretations abound about every little detail. But are we more informed of the views of the Authors at the time for their having written it? Of course.

Try this: (Note: Don't try this) Walk up to a random person, and say quite loudly "You need to return the money to the bank that you stole". See what their reaction is. Sure, in person is different than in forum. But accuse someone in any medium, and they will have an unnatural urge to defend themselves. It's human nature. What can be gained from that reaction is ultimately up to you, and those around you.

Now, I advocated "playing nice", and I still feel that way. My first accusation was against Voltgloss, primarily since he came out of the gate playing the exact opposite. Since then, he's become more focused, and most of the time, I feel has presented valid points. My second real case was against Morgrim, although I withheld my vote until more responses from him and others came in. As they've arrived, I've felt more and more confident. Could I be wrong? Sure. I actually think I'll be wrong 33% of the time (See earlier posts). But being right 66% of the time seems pretty good right now. My third accusation came at you Bozzball, because of the issues discussed here. Your willingness and almost wanting of the vote to be random.

Now, the more you post, the more I get the feeling that your cover* of being a Mathematician may be truer than I gave credit for. You appear and act like one. For every value of X, there can be only 1 Y, else the equation is undefined. Is it raining, or has it cleared up? Yes. You take everything at face value, and rather literally. So you may not see value or reason in trying to extract information.

But as pointed out by Jotheonah, that's the game man. If you follow a mathematical formula here, you'll lose. Point-and-Lynch, or lynch in order of signups, or whatever, just won't work. It's find and use whatever info you can, or...

[jotheonah]

Try this: (Note: Don't try this)Try this: (Note: Don't try this)

LOL

[Robz888]

I can't help but notice the predicted role claim has not materialized, despite the growing majority behind this lynching.

This is not lost on me either, jotheonah.  I am interested to hear how this fits into Tables' analysis.  I would also like to hear Robz's thoughts on the subject.  From where I sit, it's not enough by itself to shake my suspicions of Morgrim, but it's also part of why I don't want the hammer to fall early.

Yes, this is interesting, because it seemed fairly clear to me that Morgrim was behaving like someone who had a special role, either for good or for evil. No role claim, in my eyes, is more evidence that he is mafia.

FYI, we may yet get a role claim out of him. I hesitate to say this because I don't want to give him ideas, but I assume it already occurred to him if he is mafia. A mafia member who is about be killed may decide he has nothing to lose and just say "I'm the jailkeeper" or whatever, in order to change our minds. Best case scenario with this is that we catch him in the lie--hopefully, the jailkeeper role is really in this game, and that person would probably have to announce themselves, and then we could know Morgrim is lying. The bad thing here is the real jailkeeper would have to out himself, score one for the mafia. But at least we would be able to kill Morgrim with certainty about him.

If he is just a townie, he should not lie about having a role claim just to save himself! Townies win, not by surviving, but by killing the mafia... and codifying false info to save yourself is terrible for the town.

I would vote for Morgrim at this point (having already indicated I would do that eons ago), but will wait for Tables as requested.

[jotheonah]

Can't resist. We'll table the vote until he returns.

[Kuildeous]

If he is just a townie, he should not lie about having a role claim just to save himself! Townies win, not by surviving, but by killing the mafia... and codifying false info to save yourself is terrible for the town.

Well, I see one reason for a townie to lie. If he reveals that he has a role, then this could divert the Mafia's resources. They may waste a kill on him or waste an investigation on him. I'd step forward and risk a bullet if it means saving the doctor or cop or whatever. I'm sure the Mafia knows this, so they actually have the same conundrum that we do. 

[Robz888]

If he is just a townie, he should not lie about having a role claim just to save himself! Townies win, not by surviving, but by killing the mafia... and codifying false info to save yourself is terrible for the town.

Well, I see one reason for a townie to lie. If he reveals that he has a role, then this could divert the Mafia's resources. They may waste a kill on him or waste an investigation on him. I'd step forward and risk a bullet if it means saving the doctor or cop or whatever. I'm sure the Mafia knows this, so they actually have the same conundrum that we do.

I suppose that could happen, but it's probably impossible to pull off in this format. If you are a townie and you lie about your role to protect someone else, like the doctor... how would the doctor know that's what you're doing? Wouldn't the doctor just incredulously shout, "I'm the doctor, you liar!" The real doctor would have to have some way of knowing that the pretender was an innocent just trying to act as human shield.

[Kuildeous]

I suppose that could happen, but it's probably impossible to pull off in this format. If you are a townie and you lie about your role to protect someone else, like the doctor... how would the doctor know that's what you're doing? Wouldn't the doctor just incredulously shout, "I'm the doctor, you liar!" The real doctor would have to have some way of knowing that the pretender was an innocent just trying to act as human shield.

That's a valid point. That would also make the self-professed martyr into a lynching target. Of course, anyone who says, "I'm the doctor," could be lying, right? So, speaking out when someone else makes that claim puts the real Doctor into the spotlight. In fact, the real Doctor could be branded a liar and hung. These fake claims are hard. 

I guess we'll cross that bridge when it happens.

[Voltgloss]

I suppose that could happen, but it's probably impossible to pull off in this format. If you are a townie and you lie about your role to protect someone else, like the doctor... how would the doctor know that's what you're doing? Wouldn't the doctor just incredulously shout, "I'm the doctor, you liar!" The real doctor would have to have some way of knowing that the pretender was an innocent just trying to act as human shield.

That's a valid point. That would also make the self-professed martyr into a lynching target. Of course, anyone who says, "I'm the doctor," could be lying, right? So, speaking out when someone else makes that claim puts the real Doctor into the spotlight. In fact, the real Doctor could be branded a liar and hung. These fake claims are hard. 

I guess we'll cross that bridge when it happens.

Complicated by the fact that - if my maths are right - there is a 50-50 chance that if someone falseclaims a role, there is NO ONE else in the game who actually has that role, and so no one to call them out as a liar. 

In the end, I'm inclined to think that a Townie falseclaiming is ultimately a negative for the Town because only the Mafia can actually confirm someone's role (without killing them).  The only way the Town can confirm or refute a falseclaim is by lynching the claimant.  The Mafia can just quietly have their Rolecop investigate during the night and then take appropriate strategic steps during the day/next night.  So it seems to me a Townie falseclaiming is more confusing to the Town than to the Mafia, and therefore hurts us more than it helps us.

[Axxle]

I did actually vote for Insomniac, but it didn't take. I suspect because I omitted the colon, and I’m sure the moderator is searching for that (we do provide a lot of text to sift through).

Probably right, which leads me to suggest to the town at large:  If you're serious about voting, make sure to use the "vote: name" syntax.  I see at least one recent post that suggests it intends a vote (jotheonah's, about Morgrim) but it doesn't use the "vote: name" syntax, which renders it unclear.  Apparently (and quite rightly) Axxle is only counting votes that use the "vote: name" syntax.

Yeah, I've been doing a Ctrl-F for "Vote:" and "Unvote" in order to tally the votes.  If you can use the bold "Vote: name" syntax that would be great, but I'll start actually going through the thread and reading all the bold text just to be sure I'm not missing anything directed at me. In my next count of the votes I'll be sure to include your vote of Insomniac (unless you changed your vote since then)

I would like to ask for a clarification. I know the Doctor and Jailkeeper can prevent a death. Does that include death from lynching?

My understanding is "no" - they can only prevent a death during the nighttime.

Correct.

[Morgrim7]

If I make a role claim,two things can happen.
1) I claim mafia, and everybody wonders if I am bluffing, or double bluffing.
2) I claim villager, and everyone assumes I am mafia.

Now that I have said this, if I claimto be a villager, everybody will be back to the drawing board.

That said, I claim to be a villager.

[Robz888]

That said, I claim to be a villager.

Surely you can muster a better defense than "I claim to be a villager." You meant to say, "I am a villager."

[Morgrim7]

Ok. I am a villager. Agree? Disagree?