[Mafia 17] Resident Evil Mafia - Game Over - Town Win - Can you survive the horror?

[ThunderHog]

http://www.magicdeckvortex.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10691&postcount=1

I noticed that there were a couple newbies to the game playing here. For those newbies, please click that link and do some quick reading before you continue onto further posts.

One quick note I would like to add. I'm going to be VERY strict on the 'quoting mod PM' rule. One slip-up of this rule and the penalties will vary depending on the player. For a newbie, it's a slap in the face and nasty warning. For an experienced player or a newbie who's already gotten the first warning and it's an instant-death.

Other than that, all normal rules apply! Have fun!!!

[ThunderHog]

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d71/ThunderHog/Avvy%20and%20Sig/ResidentEvilMafiiaBanner.png

“Go! Go!” A voice cries out from behind you that’s barely heard over the resounding sound of gunfire. “I’ll hold them off here.”
“You’ll never make it back!” You respond while running through the tall grass.
“I’ll be fine.” The voice is even fainter now as the distance between it and yourself grows. A couple more gunshots are heard before a blood-curdling scream and the tearing of flesh replaces it.
“Barry!” You shout out. “No!”
You try to run back after him, but someone in sunglasses grabs your arm and stops you.
“No. It’s suicide.” Says the man holding your arm.
“You’re right...” You respond, fighting to hold back tears.
As you approach your destination, you notice two large doors. A tall man slowly opens one of the doors and everyone points their guns inside ready to blast away anything that moves. Nothing did. You all quickly enter the large building and shut the door behind you. Using bookcases and other random pieces of furniture, the small group creates a makeshift barricade against the door.
“Hopefully nothing will get through that.” Says a man in a red vest.
“It looks pretty sturdy to me.” A petit woman in a white vest says optimistically. “I think it’ll hold.”
“It’s not safe here.” A man in a lab coat chimes in.
“Better than out there!” You shout. “Look what happened to Barry!”
“She’s right.” Says the man with the sunglasses. “This mansion is huge. We should split up and look for supplies and possibly an exit. Be alert though. It’s impossible to tell what’s in here.”

***A few minutes later, everyone has split up***

You find yourself exploring a dimly lit bathroom. There’s water all over the floor and a cold draft coming somewhere from the other end of the room. You slowly creep in, gun drawn, again looking for any signs of movement. As you get closer to the spot where the draft seems to be coming in, the sudden feeling that you’re being watched quickly overwhelms you. You close the window that’s letting the draft in and turn around - it was then you found out that you actually were being watched. You didn’t even have the chance to scream or fire at the beast before you head was crushed like a grape...

Barry Burton, R.P.D. S.T.A.R.S. Team Member, is dead.
Jill Valentine, R.P.D. S.T.A.R.S. Team Member, is dead.

It is now Day 1. The players may begin.


You win when only you and your team-mates are the last non-zombies alive.

You win when only you and your team-mates are the last non-zombies alive.
(they're the same, I know)

***Players***
1. Mad Mat
2. Streetz
3. Sensei Kakashi
4. devious little fox
5. AlasterEisaroh
6. Tekkactus
7. 3nd3r
8. Friend Mairsil
9. Kal-El
10. hamsandwich
11. FrycHiKn
12. Grumpherys
13. Haggis
14. Cashew

Note: Banner by CK. I provided all of the images for the banner which means that CK knows NOTHING about the game set-up, so don't even bother asking him. :D

[Friend Mairsil]

MFOS : SK

you should have seen this coming.

wOOt first post :D

[Mad Mat]

Vote FM

Vengeance! :mad:

Also, mod, a player list in post 1 would be great.

[Streetz]

To continue the trend:

Vote:Mad Mat

That and because I should have been #1. :P

[Devious little fox]

woo hoo Vote Streetz why ruin a good thing.

also the guy in the story with glasses is probably wesker and there are two dead (green) stars agents so maybe a team of filler characters and a team of star(not S.T.A.R.S) characters and maybe a team of zombies. First thought.

[Cashew]

I'm going to be VERY strict on the 'quoting mod PM' rule.

How strict like can I even reveal my role / name?


Last edited by ThunderHog; Today at 06:58 PM.

Attention Newbies: Don't be like ThunderHog. Do not edit your posts ever. Even if you misspelled something. It may result in death.

Now for a random vote:

Vote: Sensei K

Oh that was random at all. Oops.

[Cashew]

EBWOP (Edit by Way of Post):
Prime example of how to correct a mistake. I meant to say my vote wasn't random at all. Oops! [I so did that on purpose - totally planned]

[FrycHiKn]

This may got a twist. Because TH wrote that town or mafia win by the last non-zombies alive. This may mean that there are zombies that can kill anyone, right?

[Tekkactus]

It might be a Cult game.

Vote: SK

I can unvote now. ;)

[Cashew]

Yeap. I imagine someone is Nemesis and can infect with the T-Virus.

[ThunderHog]

Official Vote Count
1x Friend Mairsil (Mad Mat)
1x Mad Mat (Streetz)
1x Streetz (DLF)
2x Sensei kakashi (Cashew, Tekkactus)

9x Not Voting (Sensei kakashi, AlasterEisaroh, 3nd3r, Friend Mairsil, Kal-El, hamsandwich, FrycHiKn, Grumpherys, Haggis)

Mod's Notes
- Thanks Mad Mat.
- Shoulda been quicker Streetz.
- The only reason I can edit my posts here is because I'm a mod, the newbies CAN'T edit their posts. Normally, I wouldn't, but I'm not gonna make a brand new post just to fix a single small edit cuz I've made quite a many of them this game. When I play in one though, I will. :D
- Yes, you can reveal your name / role. I'm referring more along the lines of asking question about details in the role PM such as "How many 'E's are in the second line of the third paragraph in the 8th word?" type deals.

[Cashew]

- The only reason I can edit my posts here is because I'm a mod, the newbies CAN'T edit their posts. Normally, I wouldn't, but I'm not gonna make a brand new post just to fix a single small edit cuz I've made quite a many of them this game. When I play in one though, I will.

You're out of the game. I was merely using that as a point to illustrate to the newbies to not edit at all. And this is just reinforcing that. Don't edit posts. Invariably any game with new people down the line someone that is brand new edits a post for a dumb reason like correcting spelling because they don't know any better.

[Tekkactus]

Yeap. I imagine someone is Nemesis and can infect with the T-Virus.

Wouldn't be much of an RE mafia without Nemesis, would it?

[Devious little fox]

if there was a "nemisis" do you think he would be a "godfather" & how would we go about finding him (or a godfather in general)?

[AlasterEisaroh]

/me slaps DLF.

Also Vote:John Streetz

Not so random votes FTW.

[AlasterEisaroh]

So how many Votes to a Lynch? I guessing 8.

[Streetz]

Forgive me if I sound stupid at the moment, but what are STARS members? I've seen Resident Evil #1 & #2 but not #3 and its been awhile since I saw the first two. :(

BTW:

Unvote

And

Vote: Cashew

...for posting incorrectly and then supposedly planning it to make an example out of himself.

Note to self: Don't edit my own posts even though people can't see my edit marks. :E

[Kal-El]

The Special Tactics And Rescue Service (S.T.A.R.S.) is a law-enforcing task force belonging to the Raccoon Police Department. They serve as the central characters of the original Resident Evil (Video Game).

[FrycHiKn]

Wikipedia is your friend Mr. Streetz. This is a video game RE not a movie, I think :P


But acording to the pic and the story it seems that we are in a Resident evil 0, code veronica and Nemesis?

[ThunderHog]

So how many Votes to a Lynch? I guessing 8.
Prime example of one of the many mistakes I've made this game... And, yes AE, you're correct. It takes 8 to lynch.

[3nd3r]

My guess is a small town with a smaller mafia with a large 3rd party due to flavor. and hah flavor does play a role in this one folks. Nemesis will be in to zombify people and the 3rd party will probably be the zombies looking for total control. Mafia will probably be whoever made the virus in the first place and the town will be the characters of the game. I only ever played the first one and it's been nearly 10 years so my story line is pretty choppy. This is my wild shot in the dark.

oh and

Vote: FM

just for being first.

[Cashew]

Resident Evil Primer (for flavor)

Quick and simple:

Resident Evil primarily takes place in and around Raccoon City. The Umbrella Corporation is a mega-bioengineering company providing the world with numerous goods and services such as medicines, cosmetics, bio-weapons, defense, and computers. The Umbrella Corporation secretly developed an uber-virus called the T-Virus that would infect populations and turn them into controllable super-soldiers.

The T-Virus (and several other variants) have been released at numerous times turning those infected into ravaging zombies. Some slow, some fast, some with unique capabilities. The most powerful creations are called Tyrants and are hulking brutes able to take massive damage and inflict even more. There have been several varieties, but the most notable is Nemesis. A massive Tyrant that is armed with a rocket launcher. Nemesis and other Tyrants are being used as the ultimate test subjects by Umbrella.

Of course testing their combat abilities requires something to test it against. Umbrella uses STARS Team of Raccoon City (think of them as an even more awesome version of SWAT) as their test subjects. Several times STARS members and others unfortunate enough to be in Raccoon City have been tested by Umbrella when they released the virus.

I'm going to ignore most of 4 and 5 due to them being obviously different from our setting and with different villain set (Los Illuminados).

Flavor-Theorize Time (my favorite thing about Day One)

Two possible set-up's occur:
4 Mafia
10 Town and Neutral

3 Mafia
1 Cult
10 Town and Neutral.


Cult/Killer Possibility:
T-Virus - Tyrant / Nemesis
Tasked with killing all the STARS member. They are creations of Umbrella, but that doesn't mean they are friendly with them.


Mafia Possibility:
Umbrella Corporation
Albert Wesker
A leader of Umbrella and also a leader of the STARS Team. He betrays them in order to test the T-Virus against worthy prey. Good Godfather candidate.

Ozwell E. Spencer
Owner and founder of Umbrella. Enigmatic and secretive, not much is known about him. Good Godfather candidate. Notable he is taken down by Wesker.

James Marcus
Founder of Umbrella. Primary developer of the T-Virus. He becomes infected and a Virus carrier.

Edward Ashford.
Founder of Umbrella. I don't know much about him.

William Birkin
Creator of the G-Virus. He infects himself and causes yet another outbreak in Raccoon City before being killed.

Either Way Roles:
Carlos Oliveira
Member of the Umbrella Biohazard Countermeasure Service. He could go either pro-town or pro-mafia. He's probably a good guy role, and I'd be miffed if he didn't have some power.

HUNK
Member of Umbrella Special Forces Unit. Generally as bad ass as the STARS Team if not more.

Ada Wong
A spy for Albert Wesker. Operates in the gray, often being played as a protagonist and helping survivors in order to accomplish her mission. Good candidate for an investigator role.

Billy Coen
Escaped killer turned survivor. Good candidate for a killer role.

Town Roles:
Chris Redfield - RE1 Protagonist. STARS member brother to Claire - good mason candidate.
Leon Scott Kennedy - RE2 Protagonist. Decent candidate for a cop role.
Claire Redfield - RE2 Protagonist. Sister to Chris - good mason candidate.
Rebecca Chambers - RE0 Protagonist

Vanilla Town Roles:
Joseph Forest - STARS Member (Vehicle expert - deceased fast)
Brad Vickers - STARS Member (Pilot. Redeemed coward. Dies to Nemesis)
Richard Aiken - STARS member (Communications - dies to snakes or sharks)
Enrico Marini - STARS member (Leader - dies)
Edward Dewey - STARS member (Pilot)
Forrest Speyer - STARS member (Marksman - dies to crows)
Kenneth J. Sullivan - STARS member (Field Biologist - dies to zombie)

I wouldn't know any of those w/o Wikipedia. Very minor characters from RE1.

[Sensei kakashi]

So if I get the win conditions right we are fighting both the Mafia AND zombies. So that means either a couple third party/killers or a second scum group. And the cult idea is a possibility so we'll see how that goes.

As far as random votes goes... It's a toss up between two... let's see... heads...

Vote: FM

Sorry buddy looks like we're getting it on early... ;P

[Grumpherys]

I'd like to start by saying this. I'm not the usual player that you all know and are annoyed by. My name is Lind L. Tailor. I am Not Grumpherys. I am simply using his interface as a means to communicate with all of you.

Greetings.
I hope to make sense of all the points I have to make. Firstly, the two deaths are likely a huge hint. Second, I believe that Cashew may Have more knowledge than an average vanilla player. It is for that very reason I have grown suspicious of him. I have noticed that both the Town and Mafia have the same win condition. This leaves us closer to just one choice in reality. This is something that I'm sure Cashew already knows. That choice is likely that there are three teams all pushing to win. The only people with that sort of Knowledge would be some one with more information. The post he made in post number 23 seems to be more distracting than telling. It tells us little, makes him look more valuable, and throws us off. He may be right, but I am wary. I leave you with that.

[Streetz]

Thank you for the information, Cashew. I will take a closer look at it while on vacation.

Speaking of which, I will be gone all next week. I WILL have access to internet so I will do my best to visit this thread and post in it.

Grumph - Its too early to start growing a suspicious of Cashew. It is not too early to start growing suspicious of people that...

Nevermind. I don't want to reveal this yet. I'll wait a day or two if I survive. :)

...Now I'm off to work.

[AlasterEisaroh]

Grumph - Its too early to start growing a suspicious of Cashew. It is not too early to start growing suspicious of people that...

Sorry John, but I disagree, it's never to early to be suspicious of Cashew :P

[Mad Mat]

Grumph...

I'm not sure what amazes me the most. The (overall) lack of atrocious grammar or the lack of good arguments in that post.


Also, notice to all new players: if someone claims cop and you're a town roleblocker, don't roleblock him.

[Tekkactus]

The vig will just kill you, anyway.

As far as I can tell, we're all agreed that we have STARS Town, Umbrella Mafia, and zombies as factions, right? If you disagree with this model, speak up, because otherwise I think it's a good avenue to pursue.

[Sensei kakashi]

Sounds like a good assumption for right now.

@ Grump: How are the two deaths a "huge hint"? All I gather from them are that the town are likely STARS and blue and that those two roles are not in this game. Unless of course they are the zombies, but if that is the case who killed them? But most of that is semi-meaningless atm so... moving on..

I don't see what makes you think Cashew has any more info then the rest of us, vanilla or not. And as this is a themed game his post 23 is a good thing. Town can often crack a game open near the end game based solely on theme and flavor, and even in the events we can't crack it open theme and flavor could at least point us in the right directions at times. I think him listing out possible town roles was stupid on his part, and knowing names of possible mafia isn't all that helpful unless it's the right circumstances. But still, as a person not too familiar with RE I can appreciate the effort.


That choice is likely that there are three teams all pushing to win. The only people with that sort of Knowledge would be some one with more information.

No, anyone who read page 1 could think this.


If you disagree with this model, speak up, because otherwise I think it's a good avenue to pursue.

How exactly do you plan on "pursuing" it on day 1? Do we ask everyone to raise their hands if they are STARS and lynch anyone who doesn't? I agree the model looks likely based on WCs but I don't see how it helps us right now.

[Tekkactus]

Maybe "pursuing" was too strong of a word for what I was trying to convey. What I mean is, we should take into account that there are at least 3 factions when making decisions.

[Haggis]

Vote: Kal-El

Because that what big brothers do

[Kal-El]

Lind L. Tailor just sounds to much like a mafia name to me and trying to throw suspicion towards Cashew just makes you look suspicious. I mean anybody that's played the games already knew everything he had to say.

Vote:Grumpherys

[AlasterEisaroh]

Lind L. Tailor just sounds to much like a mafia name to me and trying to throw suspicion towards Cashew just makes you look suspicious. I mean anybody that's played the games already knew everything he had to say.

Vote:Grumpherys

Lind L. Tailor is a name from Death Note, Grump is just trying to funny, and failing at it.

[Devious little fox]

lmao @ ^ post, seriously rotf. Anyway Unvote

[Friend Mairsil]

UNVOTE

from what i gathered from wiki and the win contidions we have a cultist. i can almost garentee it. also we should already have a few zombie out in the field, at least imo. the reason being that the zombies gotta outnumber everyone else so a few to start off with would make sense.

@grump - thats what im talking about ;)

@SK, MM, and 3nd3r - you all suck :p oh and SK yes we shall have a fun game :D

@AE - idk i think grump did pretty well with it ;)

oh and since i need to get my OMGUS vote out of the way
VOTE : 3nd3r

[Cashew]

I always flavor theorize on day one, if there is flavor to theorize on. It helps by limiting the bushes people can hide under, gives greater understanding of the game to all players, and sometimes causes a little information to leak about players. I laugh at the appear more valuable to town, you do know who you're talking to right? I'll probably have convinced everyone I'm mafia before the end of day two and end up hammering myself because I don't play right.

Any who, I forgot to mention what can you tell from the dead people at the start:

Jill Valentine:
RE1 and RE3 protagonist. I find it surprising she is dead as she is one of the major characters of the series. RE5 she is presumed dead and since the game was just released I'll put this in spoiler to not ruin it for anyone that just bought it:

She is alive and well under the control of Albert Wesker. However, ThunderHog had his set-up in well before this was common knowledge. Timeline: RE5 released this week on Tuesday.


Barry Burton:
Supporting character from RE1. He's pretty much vanilla town as they come. I'm surprised another vanilla STARS isn't dead.

From the way they are listed, it is pretty obvious town will probably be all RPD STARS Members. I'm an fairly certain Umbrella will be mafia. The cult issue is rough because the problem with a cult is it is very difficult to gain headway against as long as the head is alive. If there is a cult in this game, it is actually more imperative to hunt it than scum. And before someone puts words in my mouth, I'm not saying don't scum hunt. I'm saying cults are like amoebas constantly growing. You can find the mafia snakes hiding without worry about their numbers increasing. Just a matter of checking enough bushes.

I'm a little disconcerted that Sensei K actually kinda defended me instead of going straight into hardball. Guess you aren't playing rabid pit bull this game, or maybe I haven't poked you yet.

I'm also interested in Grump actually trying this game to make sense, even if he is doing it through role play. Seems like he may have a role he deems worth playing his hardest to keep in the game.

[AlasterEisaroh]

Jill Valentine:
RE1 and RE3 protagonist. I find it surprising she is dead as she is one of the major characters of the series.

Maybe TH just wanted a Jill Sandwich :paranoid:

[3nd3r]

I have but one question I'd like to ask concerning flavor: When do the humans ever out number the zombies in the game??? Just curious because I can never remember a time like that except maybe at the end of the game.

Unvote: FM

ok so now we have the random voting out of the way.

Now, I'd like to ask for all third party peoples and mafia to please stand up... :p :D

[Tekkactus]

Cult usually don't win when they have the majority, they win when they're the ONLY faction.

Unvote

[ThunderHog]

Official Vote Count
2x Friend Mairsil (Mad Mat, Sensei Kakashi)
1x Sensei Kakashi (Cashew)
1x Streetz (AlasterEisaroh)
1x Cashew (Streetz)
1x Kal-El (Haggis)
1x Grumpherys (Kal-El)
1x 3nd3r (Friend Mairsil)

5x Not Voting (devious little fox, 3nd3r, hamsandwich, FrycHiKn, Grumpherys)

With 14 alive, it takes 8 votes to lynch.

[FrycHiKn]

I have to agree partialy of what the guys said.

Yes indeed there are 3 groups but there isn't 1 zombie. I think there are the nemesis guy and 2 zombies (Barry and Jill).

[3nd3r]

you make a good point there my chicken. why else would TH tell us something like that???

[hamsandwich]

...Now I'm off to work.


vote: streetz this is clearly an atttempt to look pro town. we all know you don't have a job. :P

[AlasterEisaroh]

vote: streetz this is clearly an atttempt to look pro town. we all know you don't have a job. :P

That's why my vote stands :P

...Unvote

[Sensei kakashi]

I'm a little disconcerted that Sensei K actually kinda defended me instead of going straight into hardball. Guess you aren't playing rabid pit bull this game, or maybe I haven't poked you yet.

You expect me to "go into hardball"? Unlike you I play to win, not to fulfill some goal that you will never do. There will be plenty of time to bring up your faults and scummy activities, hell half my job would be done for me by you if I wanted you lynched the way you play... As far as defending you goes, I haven't done that. All I did was shoot down Grump's POC attacks.


I have but one question I'd like to ask concerning flavor: When do the humans ever out number the zombies in the game??? Just curious because I can never remember a time like that except maybe at the end of the game.

This is an example of one of the "flavoristic" things that cannot cross between a game and a mafia. In the game there are always more zombies because if there wern't there would be no point of the game. But in a game of mafia there is always (unless the mod is dumb, no offense TH) more town then anything. If the zombies are a cult type there should only be one or two alive right now, and those would be the "recruiters."

[Grumpherys]

It's really quite simple. I had nothing to really work with from the start. In any case I was simply trying to go with some steady disagreement. I am always wary of anything cashew does, but in truth my original unedited post agreed with Cashew. In reality I would say that Streetz attempt to seem pro town strikes me most, but as he is not here to defend himself I have nothing to say, as of yet.

Cashew in a way you are correct I really am making an effort to make sense of what I say. I am in fact a valuable role, all players are as long as they voice opinion. That is why I am trying to be clear and precise. I also would like to note that I have no prior knowledge to the game of RE at all. In any case I believe that the players that died earlier are in fact now the zombie populace. Which leads me to its importance, There are likely only 2 zombies. Who, we have yet to find out. Regardless, that should give us a little insight as to how many mafia there could be.

Of the 14 players two are probably the zombies.
This means for a vote of 8, 9 are probably town, 2 mafia, 2 zombie and 1 neutral, or 9 town, 3 mafia, and 2 zombie.
What are the thoughts on this? Also another question, what would the zombies have as a power if there are only 2?

I have a sneaky suspicion that this infecting person is a SK/cultist and rather than killing players turns them into zombies. What is the thoughts on this?

As for my Grammar, I hope it is helping.

[Devious little fox]

the grammar is definitely helping, but as far as trying to figure numbers i am leaning more towards two even "tactical" teams maybe 5 red and 5 blue maybe with divided power roles, then maybe a few nutral roles the a couple cult zombies.

[Cashew]

Ah there is the Sensei K I know and hate. Not sure how I feel about new Grump, feels like cold and distant.

Anywho, I think overthinking the cult scenario won't accomplish much. No matter the numbers, if there is a cult head, it has to die to stand a chance that simple. If the head lives the cult is too powerful to defeat even with town and mafia working together. It is also questionable how the flavor of the zombies will be used. There is one chance that we could be infected and turned, there is also an equal chance we could be hunted by an uber-neutral killer by the name of Nemesis. We do know the flavor has a powerful role in the game as TH was very adamant on fourteen players - no more no less.

Of the Resident Evil Good Guy Roles there are:
11 RPD Star Members (2 are dead already) - 9 Stars Members left
2 Non-Affiliated Characters
2 Umbrella Affilated Characters
1 RPD Non-Star Member

Of the Resident Evil Bad Guy Roles there are:
4 Umbrella Heads
1 Umbrella Spy
1 Named Tyrant
Tons of Zombies.

My speculation is that we have:
3 Umbrella (Mafia)
1 Umbrella Spy (Traitor Role)
1 Named Tyrant (Neutral Killer/Cult)
9 RPD Stars + others.

Regardless, day one is pure speculation, so I guess more speculation on it won't hurt. Just remember most of what is said today means a grain of salt and often is disproven in a single night.

[Sensei kakashi]

I do find it interesting the win cons say "last non-zombies" which implies it is not either side's goal to kill the zombies but only to kill the opposing faction. That is not usually something you see when dealing with a cult. In order to win, cult is usually considered a "threat" and so it is usually required for town to eliminate them and scum to outnumber them to win.

It's possible maybe the zombies are not a cult but simply lynch or kill immune or some other type of power role deal and are considered "neutral" factions in this set-up.

[Grumpherys]

Not sure how I feel about new Grump, feels like cold and distant.


My speculation is that we have:
3 Umbrella (Mafia)
1 Umbrella Spy (Traitor Role)
1 Named Tyrant (Neutral Killer/Cult)
9 RPD Stars + others.



I have a feeling that either we are at this point the closest to agreement ever, or for once we both may be right, and in agreement. 9 town.
Regardless in your speculation where do the zombies fit in? As we know they are not mafia being a win condition of non-zombies. Also I feel this head we must kill could very well be the tyrant you speak of. Perhaps this is the important role that Streetz mentioned... I would assume it would not be something he would hint at.

As far as how you should feel, perhaps opted to listen for a change.

[hamsandwich]

How exactly do you plan on "pursuing" it on day 1? Do we ask everyone to raise their hands if they are STARS and lynch anyone who doesn't? I agree the model looks likely based on WCs but I don't see how it helps us right now.
__________________


It helps by limiting the bushes people can hide under, gives greater understanding of the game to all players, and sometimes causes a little information to leak about players.

Mass claim?




from what i gathered from wiki and the win contidions we have a cultist. i can almost garentee it.

Seems very sure of himself. How can you “almost” guarantee anything but your own role at this point.


If there is a cult in this game, it is actually more imperative to hunt it than scum. And before someone puts words in my mouth, I'm not saying don't scum hunt. I'm saying cults are like amoebas constantly growing. You can find the mafia snakes hiding without worry about their numbers increasing. Just a matter of checking enough bushes.

QFT ^^. However, slight and unbolded FoS on the second mention of the “snake in bush” theory.


Cult usually don't win when they have the majority, they win when they're the ONLY faction.

Can anyone confirm this? ^^


Yes indeed there are 3 groups but there isn't 1 zombie. I think there are the nemesis guy and 2 zombies (Barry and Jill).


. More “certainty” it seems.


Not sure too much “flavor” speculation is needed on day 1. The whole vacation thing still sounds fishy to me.

Seriously, if we want to flavor speculate then lets mass claim. If not, we need to find a different subject.

[Devious little fox]

sk just changed my way of thinking about this games set-up. i think:

i think red team has to eliminate blue team (vise versa, versa vice) before the zombies "control" us all. So that means i think the two dead people are in this game and they have 1 head. So at this point i think we have 3 zombies and two even "tacticle" teams. Question is how fast do the zombies spread? is their just the head that "recruits"? do all the zombies get a chance to "recruit" and theirs alot of blockers? what do you guy think about this?

[3nd3r]

DLF that's my basic take on the set up as well. the win con for the zombies is probably to just have a majority or to survive.

@Ham: we're talking about flavor at the moment because not much else can be discussed at the moment. We haven't had time to exactly make any scummy moves or town like moves so flavor is our one point of talking as I see it.

[Mad Mat]

What about this for win cons:

Scum wins: all town is dead or zombified and there are still scum left.
Town wins: all scum are dead or zombified and there are still townies left.
Zombies win: everyone is a zombie or dead.

This may or may not be what DLF said, as I'm not really sure what he's exactly saying.

The way zombies are made is hard to guess at. It could be that it grows exponentially, with each zombie being capable of making another. This would be an easy win con without some special roles barring their progress. Maybe there's a doc curing zombies, or all zombies die/become non-zombie if their original head dies. Or some players could have immunity to being zombified (once).
It could also be that only the head can zombify, but that does not seem very flavorfull.

[Grumpherys]

Essentially we have hit a road block and will continue to run this circle of anticipation until some one dies. I hate to admit it normally but, I've found it best to just let it out there to mull over. We won't go anywhere till some one dies. I'd like to remind you that the game is very hard pressing when your stuck with a vanilla role and have no hints. That said any one that has a power role will be expected to remain silent as far as your role goes. Also on a side note I will say nothing about mine unless the situation occurs.

I'd like to request from the players a general note on how long we should draw out with the first day, as it is often hard to tell what the roles are like for the vanilla players. while the chances are on average from my experiences, 3-9 town have power roles, 6 of us are running blind. As the fact of secrecy with power roles will need to remain secret, the only hint to the 6 vanilla will be the death of a player, or the lack there of. After this is shown the winning condition for the zombies team should be a little more clear. Likely more confusing, but regardless opinions and role claims tend to make or break it. I have found that early role claims break the game for the town more often than not.

By the way the earlier above sentences do not claim my role but are stating an over all sympathy from past dealings for the vanilla players.

So as of yet my suspicions are not clear, I'd like to hear more from the rest of you first.

[Cashew]

I see where you're trying to make sense Grump, but I don't see where you are. You seem to indicate that we shouldn't roleclaim, but roleclaiming early helps the town. I'm a little conflicted about your message. Many hate the mass roleclaim or the early roleclaim, I think anyone who played the last game knows I'm not one of those.

However, it caused too much chaos when I splonked out my role last game to do it again :)

[Grumpherys]

"As the fact of secrecy with power roles will need to remain secret"
I am anti role claiming unless a cry from a majority of players demands a claim. In which case the player is likely going to die any way.

[Cashew]

I have found that early role claims break the game for the town more often than not.

Yet you seem to indicate that early role claiming actually helps the town. So visa vie are you indicating that you don't want to skew the game towards town? How does that benefit town.

[Sensei kakashi]

Mass claim?


on day 1? no.


Can anyone confirm this? ^^

It's true. It's because cults can often times have a majority and still end up losing. But the mod could in fact make it whatever he wants I suppose.


Not sure too much “flavor” speculation is needed on day 1. The whole vacation thing still sounds fishy to me.

Seriously, if we want to flavor speculate then lets mass claim. If not, we need to find a different subject.

Why? Flavor speculation is a key element in theme games. It won't harm or help us until later sure, but the sooner we get it out the better I suppose. And why are you pushing a mass claim on page 4?


i think red team has to eliminate blue team (vise versa, versa vice) before the zombies "control" us all. So that means i think the two dead people are in this game and they have 1 head. So at this point i think we have 3 zombies and two even "tacticle" teams. Question is how fast do the zombies spread? is their just the head that "recruits"? do all the zombies get a chance to "recruit" and theirs alot of blockers? what do you guy think about this?

Balance wise there is no way a cult can exist in a game like this with more then 2 people to start it off. Even 2 is pushing it. And because the two "teams" are called "town" and "mafia" they are almost certainly not "equal." Town likely has 2 times as many members.

Besides if we were two teams we would all know our partners and thusly know who "isn't" our partners and thusly the game wouldn't be a game at all.


It could also be that only the head can zombify, but that does not seem very flavorfull.

True but it is a flavor sacrifice needed to twist the theme into a game of mafia. If the mod wanted zombies as a cult he would need to make one or two "leaders/recruiters" and make all other zombies plain old "recruits." And having each new zombie being able to make a new recruit just wouldn't make any sense. For one it's a hell of a lot more complicated, and for two if the recruit targets a mafia or recruit immune player (possible power role) the recruitment would stop forever. Because of this I have to conclude if the zombies are a cult then the only threat is the leader(s) when you think about it.


I'd like to request from the players a general note on how long we should draw out with the first day, as it is often hard to tell what the roles are like for the vanilla players. while the chances are on average from my experiences, 3-9 town have power roles, 6 of us are running blind. As the fact of secrecy with power roles will need to remain secret, the only hint to the 6 vanilla will be the death of a player, or the lack there of. After this is shown the winning condition for the zombies team should be a little more clear. Likely more confusing, but regardless opinions and role claims tend to make or break it. I have found that early role claims break the game for the town more often than not.

Why do vanilla's need to know what the power roles are? If any vanilla figures out a town power role so do the mafia. It's better to have 6 town running blind then 4 mafia killing a power role a night.

Also early role claims for no reason have tended to lose town the game.

Is anyone else pegging Grump for likely scum? The way he is playing, his admittance to having a "good role" (notice he was a power role in FD... not the same vibe) and now some pre-emptive role fishing... I got my eye on you Grump...


I am anti role claiming unless a cry from a majority of players demands a claim. In which case the player is likely going to die any way.

Really? In your last post you seemed to be painting role claiming in a very "pro-town" sounding light. Alright, we'll see.

[hamsandwich]

unvote i don't think the "fake vacation" case is going anywhere.

yes, i think grumps is likely scum. vote: grumphreys

let it be noted that after i mildly suggested a mass claim and only in the context of a response to other players thoughts, sensei kakashi has labeled me as "pushing" a mass claim.

[Friend Mairsil]

god i love day one. o being able to read 4 pages of crap is so worth it :p

@Ham - how can i be sure? really? have you read the win conditions? *shakes head* also you cant say SK is saying anything about you pushing mass claim when you actually say it ;) (yes mass claiming is bad)

from what ive gathered from all of your spectulations and my personal opinion we have these as our numbers
Town : 8 (with power roles obviously)
Mafia : 3 (i do not think we have a GF, but this is more a guess than anything)
3rd party: 3 (one as a cult leader, and the others as either some random zombies or a SK. not really sure yet. i need night one before i can guess at anything further.)

Unvote

i wish i could be more help but its been a dogs age since i played RE and really i have nothing to go on. so for now i guess ill just sit back until something catches my eye.

[Cashew]

let it be noted that after i mildly suggested a mass claim and only in the context of a response to other players thoughts, sensei kakashi has labeled me as "pushing" a mass claim.

I noticed that as well. I think you more than mildly suggested it though. Sensei K also had a tendency last game to throw the rolefisher and massclaimer titles at me - and what was he Mafia. So hmm, yeah, maybe there is a correspondence there.

@SK: You mafia again and playing your same tricks?

FOS: Sensei K.

[Mad Mat]

True but it is a flavor sacrifice needed to twist the theme into a game of mafia. If the mod wanted zombies as a cult he would need to make one or two "leaders/recruiters" and make all other zombies plain old "recruits." And having each new zombie being able to make a new recruit just wouldn't make any sense. For one it's a hell of a lot more complicated, and for two if the recruit targets a mafia or recruit immune player (possible power role) the recruitment would stop forever. Because of this I have to conclude if the zombies are a cult then the only threat is the leader(s) when you think about it.
Huh? I proposed that every zombie could attack someone at night and turn him into a zombie, starting out with the cult leader. It's a broken game mechanic on its own, but not with the necessary balancing mechanisms. For example: recruited zombies could possibly fail in their attack. Some people are immune. Etc.

I am against a day 1 mass claim. Good mafia games have numerous requirements, but one is that a day 1 mass claim should be detrimental to town. A mod could ignore this under the assumption that town is not going to do it out of fear for screwing itself, but this'll just bring us into an endless cycle of wifom.

There are various ways by which this could be done. Under the umbrella=scum hypothesis, they could have captured some of the "good" characters in the franchise without the knowledge of the others and now be able to use them as a safe claim. I've seen similar set-ups in other games. Or TH could have thrown the whole world around and made some umbrella guys town. A mass claim includes a large risk of a town screw-over.

unvote; vote ham

Give substance when you not-random vote.


@SK: You mafia again and playing your same tricks
I'd let this one slip for now (considering it IS SK who just happens to have a large size of mouth), but it certainly warrants keeping an eye on him.

@grumph: Keep up that grammar!

[Cashew]

unvote

I'm pretty sure Sensei K can defend himself, I'm very curious why you are. You also seem to speak with a little more authority on the zombies than others, like you know something, perhaps are one. I'm not reading you as town a this point, but not certain you are mafia either. Regardless.

Vote: Mad Mat

[3nd3r]

Vote: Ham

Jumping on someone without a second thought just because someone says "does anyone else think he's scum." also for pushing for a mass claim day one and bashing the talking of flavor. I thought you'd played over on mafiascum or whatever the website is.

on a side note the grammar is nice but they're sentences without much substance.

[ThunderHog]

Official Vote Count
1x Sensei kakashi (Tekkactus)
1x Cashew (Streetz)
1x Friend Mairsil (Sensei kakashi)
1x Kal-El (Haggis)
2x Grumpherys (Kal-El, hamsandwich)
3x hamsandwich (Mad Mat, Cashew, 3nd3r)

5x Not Voting (devious little fox, AlasterEisaroh, FrycHiKn, Grumpherys, Friend Mairsil)

With 14 alive, it takes 8 votes to lynch.

[Tekkactus]

Uh, TH, you're pretty bad at vote counts. I unvoted SK 2 pages ago, and Cashew unvoted Ham 2 posts ago. C'mon, man.

[hamsandwich]

Give substance when you not-random vote.


yeah. so this is a legitimate statement. however, when you add a vote to it, it becomes hypocrisy to the nth degree.

[hamsandwich]

3ndr, please show an example of my "pushing". i wrote the words "mass claim" twice. once as a question and a second time as a suggestion to get to the bottom of this so called "flavor talk".

also, i have been playing on mafiascum and if you read up on mafia strategy you would know that mass claiming is and was actually used as a "game breaking" strategy in theme games. talking about a mass claim is not "pushing", anymore than your choice of what to discuss is you "pushing" flavor talk.

[Sensei kakashi]

let it be noted that after i mildly suggested a mass claim and only in the context of a response to other players thoughts, sensei kakashi has labeled me as "pushing" a mass claim.

You suggested it twice... That is not mildly suggesting it. And if we want to argue the term "suggesting" and "pushing" can mean the same thing. Although, yes, pushing does have a stronger tone to it, it's still roughly the same word.


I noticed that as well. I think you more than mildly suggested it though. Sensei K also had a tendency last game to throw the rolefisher and massclaimer titles at me - and what was he Mafia. So hmm, yeah, maybe there is a correspondence there.

That's because last game you were rolefishing and this game Ham was pushing a massclaim on page 4. And uh, you were being anti-town as the cop last game, so this time your postings of flavor is sorta... pro-town right? That makes you scum this game right? Didn't think so.


Huh? I proposed that every zombie could attack someone at night and turn him into a zombie, starting out with the cult leader. It's a broken game mechanic on its own, but not with the necessary balancing mechanisms. For example: recruited zombies could possibly fail in their attack. Some people are immune. Etc.

Any cult that can recruit multiple times in one night is broken regardless of other factors.


Re: [Mafia 17] Resident Evil Mafia - Can you survive the horror?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensei kakashi View Post
True but it is a flavor sacrifice needed to twist the theme into a game of mafia. If the mod wanted zombies as a cult he would need to make one or two "leaders/recruiters" and make all other zombies plain old "recruits." And having each new zombie being able to make a new recruit just wouldn't make any sense. For one it's a hell of a lot more complicated, and for two if the recruit targets a mafia or recruit immune player (possible power role) the recruitment would stop forever. Because of this I have to conclude if the zombies are a cult then the only threat is the leader(s) when you think about it.
Huh? I proposed that every zombie could attack someone at night and turn him into a zombie, starting out with the cult leader. It's a broken game mechanic on its own, but not with the necessary balancing mechanisms. For example: recruited zombies could possibly fail in their attack. Some people are immune. Etc.

I am against a day 1 mass claim. Good mafia games have numerous requirements, but one is that a day 1 mass claim should be detrimental to town. A mod could ignore this under the assumption that town is not going to do it out of fear for screwing itself, but this'll just bring us into an endless cycle of wifom.

There are various ways by which this could be done. Under the umbrella=scum hypothesis, they could have captured some of the "good" characters in the franchise without the knowledge of the others and now be able to use them as a safe claim. I've seen similar set-ups in other games. Or TH could have thrown the whole world around and made some umbrella guys town. A mass claim includes a large risk of a town screw-over.

unvote; vote ham

Give substance when you not-random vote.



I'd let this one slip for now (considering it IS SK who just happens to have a large size of mouth), but it certainly warrants keeping an eye on him.

Ha ha ha ha... That's fine. i need eyes on me to keep me in line anyways.


3ndr, please show an example of my "pushing". i wrote the words "mass claim" twice. once as a question and a second time as a suggestion to get to the bottom of this so called "flavor talk".

you suggested it, that is pushing. you weren't pushing all out sure, even I'll back you up on that. But to say "...then lets mass claim." like you did that is a push.


also, i have been playing on mafiascum and if you read up on mafia strategy you would know that mass claiming is and was actually used as a "game breaking" strategy in theme games. talking about a mass claim is not "pushing", anymore than your choice of what to discuss is you "pushing" flavor talk.

Sort, but one does not normally "push flavor talk" they usually just talk. And you did not "talk" about a mass claim, you actually suggested we do it. Thus, push. And this new "massclaims have been used as a game breaking strategy" could also be considered pushing a massclaim as you are painting it in a way that makes it look like a good idea to the town.

And massclaims are gamebreaking in some games, however not in all games. So an early massclaim risks outing all power roles for nothing while if we wait to massclaim until later we not only risk less, but our chances of breaking the game go up dramtically.

[Sensei kakashi]

>.> Holy crap... Uh... ignore that bit in the middle, bad copy/paste job...

[Grumpherys]

Bold words are new.

I'd like to request from the players a general note on how long we should draw out with the first day (Note this is the only thing I asked for from everyone) , as it is often hard to tell what the roles are like for the vanilla players. while the chances are on average from my experiences, 3-9 town have power roles (I mean to say that out of 9, 3 have power roles), 6 of us are running blind. As the fact of secrecy with power roles will need to remain secret (But don't tell us your roles), the only hint to the 6 vanilla will be the death of a player(Every game I played as a vanilla the only thing I could use as solid information was a death), or the lack there of (High chance of a doctor role and no SK). After this is shown the winning condition for the zombies team should be a little more clear (We'd know if they kill or not). Likely more confusing(Because the cult thing is still a possibility), but regardless opinions (Make) and role claims (Break) tend to make or break it. I have found that early role claims breaks (Meaning it ruins the towns chance to win) the game for the town more often than not.
----------

By the way the earlier above sentences do not claim my role but are stating an over all sympathy from past dealings for the vanilla players.
This means I'm not telling what my role is in the post.
----------

unless a cry from a majority of players demands a claim
This means if some one is at L-1 and is highly suspicious the role claim will be important.
----------
So now that I've gone and shown you the meaning in my sentences, I'd like you to note that this is with out any information outside what you all know. In other words the lack of importance is due to the fact that I am running blind.

Now that I've seen some jumpy votes moving around I'm thinking that Ham is going along a similar path to his past game Where he attacked me. I will not vote, out of shear wariness. Wary because I cannot go by past behaviors alone however; I am watching Ham closely now. Any suggestion/push for mass claim is bad and then to go against it as soon as its mass denied, claiming I did it was a bad move. I clearly never did.

[Streetz]

Note I am on vacation right now posting from my laptop. I cannot gaurantee I will be on every day to check this thread, but I will try. I just spent the last 20 minutes reading and skimming posts and I will do my best to address some things. First up:


The vig will just kill you, anyway.

As far as I can tell, we're all agreed that we have STARS Town, Umbrella Mafia, and zombies as factions, right? If you disagree with this model, speak up, because otherwise I think it's a good avenue to pursue.

I would agree on the three different factions and will confirm I am in one of the three. :) But that is all I will elaborate on at this time. Especially on day one!


unvote i don't think the "fake vacation" case is going anywhere.

yes, i think grumps is likely scum. vote: grumphreys

let it be noted that after i mildly suggested a mass claim and only in the context of a response to other players thoughts, sensei kakashi has labeled me as "pushing" a mass claim.

MFOS: Ham

The fact that you were pushing to throw suspicion my way over a vacation (which I really am on right now) is very, very suspicious. In combination with your recommending a role claim so early, I am leaning to vote against you. However, I'm not going to jump on that (currently a bandwagon) vote just yet. And I know I certainly can't be the last one to vote on it...

Someone mentioned I was trying to be Pro:Town from an earlier post. Please elaborate on that. There are a number of people all making the illusion to be pro town including in my opinion, Cashew, Grumph, SK and Mad Mat. I need to re-review everyone's posts before I make a hard vote.

Unvote

In the meantime, I need to figure out why my laptop isn't connecting to MDV"s ftp to upload an update on the main site.

Suggestions to all: Make sure to watch for a few things including who isn't posting very much without reason. Who is trying real hard to win over our trust (like Cashew and the others I mentioned, myself included). One of the tactics I've used in previous games, when I was mafia, was winning over the hearts of the town with 'flavor factoids' and supposed 'research'. Lastly, Watch for people that are voting for each other (often distractions from mafia in day one).

That's all from me this late evening/early morning.

[Sensei kakashi]

Someone mentioned I was trying to be Pro:Town from an earlier post. Please elaborate on that. There are a number of people all making the illusion to be pro town including in my opinion, Cashew, Grumph, SK and Mad Mat. I need to re-review everyone's posts before I make a hard vote.

Illusion? That's a pretty hard statement to back up. how can you be sure we are making an "illusion?" How do you diferentiate times when one is not "trying" to be pro-town but simply doing what they think is right and the times when one is making an "illusion" to be pro-town?


Suggestions to all: Make sure to watch for a few things including who isn't posting very much without reason. Who is trying real hard to win over our trust (like Cashew and the others I mentioned, myself included). One of the tactics I've used in previous games, when I was mafia, was winning over the hearts of the town with 'flavor factoids' and supposed 'research'. Lastly, Watch for people that are voting for each other (often distractions from mafia in day one).

Last game I was mafia and I wasn't exactly "winning over the hearts of people" so that doesn't apply to everyone. And of course good mafia strategy for town AND scum is to get people to like and trust you so in reality that little piece of advice is a crap shoot. The people voting for each other is another bad piece of advice when you think about it because of "random stage." There is bound to be a lot of random revotes and back and forths just for the hell of it. I would say looking for it in the near future might work but now that we have talked about it...

[Mad Mat]

unvote

I'm pretty sure Sensei K can defend himself, I'm very curious why you are. You also seem to speak with a little more authority on the zombies than others, like you know something, perhaps are one. I'm not reading you as town a this point, but not certain you are mafia either. Regardless.

Vote: Mad Mat
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot I shouldn't comment when you two guys want to have a verbal fight.

Also, major hypocrisy coming from the guy who started all this flavor discussion.


yeah. so this is a legitimate statement. however, when you add a vote to it, it becomes hypocrisy to the nth degree.
No, it isn't. You voted for no reason, I voted with a reason (i.e. you voting for no reason).

[Cashew]

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot I shouldn't comment when you two guys want to have a verbal fight.

Also, major hypocrisy coming from the guy who started all this flavor discussion.

If you step into something, expect to get yourself dirty. You can't answer for Sensei K unless you are in cahoots with him. You can speculate on or for him, but hey it's still speculation. I find it odd that you're throwing your chips in with him knowing nothing. Unless of course you do know something about him. Love the seething tone.

Second, I stated the actual flavor of RE. I stated the three alliances that could exist. I did not try to nail down how they actually work and various inctricacies of them. When I speculate I make it clear that is what I'm doing. Again you seemed to let on you knew something in your speculation. Which makes me relaly suspicious of me.

By the way I like the dodge refute. Reminds me of how I was playing last game. I learned first hand it doesn't work at all.

[Mad Mat]

If you step into something, expect to get yourself dirty. You can't answer for Sensei K unless you are in cahoots with him.
And I disagree with that. I can answer for anyone regardless of affiliation.


Second, I stated the actual flavor of RE. I stated the three alliances that could exist. I did not try to nail down how they actually work and various inctricacies of them. When I speculate I make it clear that is what I'm doing.
And why is it good to do one and not the other?

Or hell: why is it bad to discuss how the cult would work?


Again you seemed to let on you knew something in your speculation. Which makes me relaly suspicious of me.
You're going to have to quote for that, as I don't see where.


By the way I like the dodge refute. Reminds me of how I was playing last game. I learned first hand it doesn't work at all.
You're dodging here yourself by not saying what I am dodging.

[hamsandwich]

No, it isn't. You voted for no reason, I voted with a reason (i.e. you voting for no reason).

because i think someone scummy is plenty of reason for a vote. besides, your original accusation was not the lack of reason, but the lack of substance, of which your vote contained just as little an amount.

unvote, vote: mad mat

for implying that thinking someone scummy is not a good enough reason to vote for them.

streetz: MFoS right backatcha for thinking that my first post and vote contained anything more than a joke.

[Friend Mairsil]

Suggestions to all: Make sure to watch for a few things including who isn't posting very much without reason. Who is trying real hard to win over our trust (like Cashew and the others I mentioned, myself included). One of the tactics I've used in previous games, when I was mafia, was winning over the hearts of the town with 'flavor factoids' and supposed 'research'. Lastly, Watch for people that are voting for each other (often distractions from mafia in day one).

so when doing this we should include you, correct? if so, then right now by posting this you have already tried to win over our hearts by giving us useful tips on how to play. really to tell the truth i dont have a clue where to look so im just grasping as straws. though the point made stands.

as for everything else going on let me see if i have this strait.
Cashew started the flavor talk. (ok this is a good thing as any conversation is good conversation.)
SK has done nothing note worthy but is now labeled as trying to win over town. (i dont think so for a second. i mean he knows better cuz they would turn on him in a second. past experience talking)
MM is defending or anwsering for SK (according to cashew. either way i really dont care as it is day one.)
Ham suggested a mass claim, then everyone was like "no", then he goes and says he didnt say that, and attacks grump. (most deserving of my vote, but ill give it a day before i decide anything)
Grump is playing a much better game than he usually does. which some can misconstrue as trying to win over town, but i think it is him not wanting to die for another stupid reason like his pervious play style.

everyone else, well there not really talking so i cant really pull anything from that, so ill just vote for one of the unspoken and hope that they come in to say something.

VOTE : Kal-el

this is for....yeah just drop in and say hello buddy ;)

[ThunderHog]

@ Tekk: Lemme try this one again... XD

Official Vote Count
1x Friend Mairsil (Sensei kakashi)
2x Kal-El (Haggis, Friend Mairsil)
1x Grumpherys (Kal-El))
2x hamsandwich (Mad Mat, 3nd3r)
2x Mad Mat (Cashew, hamsandwich)

6x Not Voting (devious little fox, FrycHiKn, Streetz, Grumpherys, AlasterEisaroh, Tekkactus)

Mod Note: Prods available by request. Please bold your prod requests.

[hamsandwich]

Ham suggested a mass claim, then everyone was like "no", then he goes and says he didnt say that, and attacks grump. (most deserving of my vote, but ill give it a day before i decide anything)

never denied "suggesting" it. denied "pushing" it. not everyone was like "no". many people did not respond. my suggestion was not out of the blue. it was in response to the flavor talk. i am puzzled as to why suggesting something is so suspicious to everyone. also, i am puzzled as to why madmat thinks that general scumminess is not an adequate reason to vote for someone on day 1.

[Haggis]

I don't even know what a mass claim is, what is it and i'll give my :twocents: after words

[hamsandwich]

I don't even know what a mass claim is, what is it and i'll give my :twocents: after words


its a giant role claim. in theme games it can be used as a preemptive strike against mafia. it works better in an open role setup(where mod actuallys lists all the roles), but in a theme game it forces scums hand to fake claim early. it can be effective. i don't think its is necessary for this game, but with all the speculation i was reading on the flavor, it seemed like that was where the conversation was headed.

the first time i posted it was a question, the second was a suggestion. i.e. if we are going to pick apart the flavor and base our decisions on it, then a massclaim might not be a bad idea. if, however, we are going to move on and actually play this as a game of "mafia", then it is best to hold off.

it seems to me that some players here have a better grasp on the zombie side of things as cashew pointed out, and so that might not be a bad place to start looking. for players to be against a massclaim is one thing, but to immediately try and eliminate the person who suggests it seems suspicious to me. i.e. what have they got to hide? i can't force a mass claim, but to be railroaded for suggesting it in a setup like this where it might actually be helpful just doesn't make sense.

[Mad Mat]

because i think someone scummy is plenty of reason for a vote. besides, your original accusation was not the lack of reason, but the lack of substance, of which your vote contained just as little an amount.
Lack of substance = lack of reason.


unvote, vote: mad mat

for implying that thinking someone scummy is not a good enough reason to vote for them.
And that's a scumtell? Damn right it isn't a good enough reason to vote for them. Thinking someone is scummy AND providing reasons, now that's a good vote. In that view, mine wasn't really good either, but I wanted to make the point that people shouldn't vote without providing a reason.

Seriously, what does a post like this add to a discussion: "vote grumph, I think he's scum"?

[Haggis]

its a giant role claim. in theme games it can be used as a preemptive strike against mafia. it works better in an open role setup(where mod actuallys lists all the roles), but in a theme game it forces scums hand to fake claim early. it can be effective. i don't think its is necessary for this game, but with all the speculation i was reading on the flavor, it seemed like that was where the conversation was headed.

So everyone tells the world there role?

I dunno that sounds liek it kills half teh fun of the game.

[hamsandwich]

In that view, mine wasn't really good either, but I wanted to make the point that people shouldn't vote without providing a reason.

^^ exactly my point. thank you.


Seriously, what does a post like this add to a discussion: "vote grumph, I think he's scum"?

for one, it lets others know where the voter stands. two, it serves to pressure the votee. three, it draws other players with bad logic out of the woodwork(like you). instead of voting me for my "lack of reason", you could have just asked me to elaborate.

[hamsandwich]

So everyone tells the world there role?

I dunno that sounds liek it kills half teh fun of the game.

it can. it can also make it more interesting. depends on what everyone claims. there's no rule in mafia that says you have to tell the truth. ;)

[Mad Mat]

^^ exactly my point. thank you.
Huh? No, it wasn't.

All you're doing is OMGUS voting now, not answering to what I pointed out. That's also why my vote is staying there for now.


for one, it lets others know where the voter stands.
And this is important why? There is only one possible reply to such type of posts: "why?". That's why they're dumb to make.


two, it serves to pressure the votee.
Pressure without a reason is pointless and, frankly, scummy.


three, it draws other players with bad logic out of the woodwork(like you). instead of voting me for my "lack of reason", you could have just asked me to elaborate.
And you're still attacking me and not my point... Yup, vote stays.

[Haggis]

it can. it can also make it more interesting. depends on what everyone claims. there's no rule in mafia that says you have to tell the truth. ;)

OoOoO, sneaky

[hamsandwich]

mad mat's post is extremely scummy.

i am not voting you for voting me. so my vote is not omgus.

my point was made, you are avoiding the issue. you hypocritically voted me with little substance attached and your reasoning was for the lack of substance involved when i originally voted grump.


pressure is never pointless. the reason was that i found him scummy. it is a valid reason.

AGAIN: why did you vote me instead of simply asking me for an explanation?


i am attacking you because you are scummy. you did not make a point. the only point you successfully proved was my point about your hypocrisy.

[Sensei kakashi]

Pressure itself is never pointless but some actions intended to put pressure on someone are. Like votes without actualy presuring reasons. A vote made becuase you "feel someone is scummy" places no pressure because the votee feels no real attack and has nothing to defend against. that's not to say something can't come from votes like that, but it's not something I usually count on.

Also, if you feel Mat's post was scummy you need to say how and what specifically. saying "That post was scummy" is worthless as it gives the rest of us no insight as to the what and why.

[hamsandwich]

sorry, but calling a vote omgus when it is clearly not is scummy. admitting that he voted me for "lack of substance" while himself providing no substance and then saying i didn't make my point is scummy. by saying "it's scummy" i mean you should read it. i am surprised that noone is paying attention to the giant hypocrisy he is displaying at this time.

also, a vote causes pressure regardless of reasons given. votes carry an inherent ability to lynch. when we vote someone we get reactions which we can then guage and analyze. was my vote on grump justified? only time will tell, but do i deserve to be voted for voting him? no. would anyone like further explanation as to why i feel grump "scummy"? i would hope so, but interestingly enough noone has asked.

[Mad Mat]

I'm not even going to bother replying to you as I'll just repeat myself.

So what do the other players think?

[Sensei kakashi]

Well theres a bit of hypocrisy going on in your camp as well. saying that only time will tell if yoru vote on grump was "justified" then saying you don't "deserve" to be voted in return. what makes Grump more "deserving"? How long are you giving the votes on you to see if they are or are not "justified"?

A single vote does carry the threat of lynch, but no lynch is likely without reason. A vote with no attack and no basis behind it will not lead to a lynch and thus no real pressure comes from it.

[Sensei kakashi]

So what do the other players think?

I'd like to know why you think his vote is OMGUS.

[Grumpherys]

Three things, Ham:
1. I didn't feel pressure, I have no reason to.
2. I'd like to know why in your mind I appeared scummy, as the reasons you gave I proved to be your own fault, I never suggested a mass claim.
3. When 3nd3r and Mad Mat gave their reasons for voting you, you responded with a vote at Mad Mat. Why, it would appear because he pointed out you being the person that suggested the mass claim.

I would think that you would have no reason to not explain why this is not Omgus, out side of you not stating that your voting him because he voted you.

I'd like to include the fact that while I'm not voting you the pressure I'm applying has no vote behind it yet. I will vote on you if you carry on ignoring my post earlier and not stating things more clearly. I'm not voting yet because I like to ask questions and then shoot rather than shooting and asking questions after the player is dead. It allows me to not worry about a premature lynch. That said you would be wise to take me seriously. I still have a vote to use, and I will when I deem it necessary.

Ham you are in my sights, please make yourself clear and expose your logic.

Mad Mat your choice of words, and activity tell me a lot about your game play this time around. You are taking a very serious effort into the game; I'd like to know why the sudden push to make Ham explain himself. I was the one he was voting for I am curious that you would even consider his efforts to be a threat to me, rather than the inconvenience he really is.

Also Ham why is it you take offence from Mad Mat and not 3nd3r, as he has the same amount of pressure added to his side as Mad Mat?

What is Mad Mats involvement in the arguement of Cashew and SK?

I'd like to hear more from Haggis, as he has a tendancy to be transparent and active to make the status of active lurking in my eyes. Haggis please add something to the conversations at hand rather than saying things like, "OoOoOo sneaky".

[Grumpherys]

EBWOP: It would appear that 3nd3r also pointed out that Ham suggested a Mass claim. While I see how Ham's logic would make sense in a different set up this one doesn't qualify. I still can't see why Ham voted Mad Mat over 3nd3r but regardless I can't see why he voted at all out side of hypocrisy and Mad Mats own vote on ham.

[Mad Mat]

I'd like to know why you think his vote is OMGUS.
Because I think


for implying that thinking someone scummy is not a good enough reason to vote for them.

is in no way a good reason to vote someone and consider him scummy after he's questioned and voted you. It's more of a general mafia tactics debate than a scum tell and is avoiding the question of why he voted grumph in the first place. Afterwards, he posts reasons why he thinks voting without a reason is warranted (still not warranting his own vote for me), which I all refute, and he replies with attacks on me once again. His answers to my refutations break down to "no you're wrong". Additionally, he just keeps repeating things I have already answered, like:


you hypocritically voted me with little substance attached and your reasoning was for the lack of substance involved when i originally voted grump.
To which my answer was that I voted to make a point. On top of that, it's not even hypocrisy as the reason for my vote was clear: ham did not provide a reason for his vote. Essentially:

Ham votes grumph. Reason: ???
MM votes ham. Reason: Ham voted grumph without a reason.

I think it was simply a (rotten and decomposed) stick he tried to find to hit me with, not an incriminating stick he found by accident.


Mad Mat your choice of words, and activity tell me a lot about your game play this time around. You are taking a very serious effort into the game; I'd like to know why the sudden push to make Ham explain himself. I was the one he was voting for I am curious that you would even consider his efforts to be a threat to me, rather than the inconvenience he really is.
It's not about you. I question things that look suspicious or anti-town and see what comes out. If I'm lucky, I hit a sneaky scumboy or make sure the anti-town behavior (voting without a reason in this case) is not repeated. And I'm starting to think I have, the former.

[Kal-El]

@FM I was just wondering if you noticed that you are among the people that aren't saying much. In fact when you voted me you only had 1 more post then myself, I would also like to note that I will usually not be around on Sunday's because I'm usually not around a computer.

I have also not said much because nobody has convinced me that somebody else deserves my vote more than Grump does, and I think he is sitting on a very important role.

I was wondering was a prod was, from what I understand it would be a direct question to TH, is this correct?

[hamsandwich]

mat: i gave a reason for voting grump. if it was not sufficient then you should have asked for clarification. by posting this:


Ham votes grumph. Reason: ???
MM votes ham. Reason: Ham voted grumph without a reason.

you are lieing. my reason was stated at the time of the vote. if you wanted clarification as to my vote on grumps you should have asked for it. now you have accused me of avoiding the question. what question is that mat? you have not asked me a question. the reason for your vote was about as clear to me as the reason for my vote was clear to you. you said it is not okay to vote without substance. then you voted me with only that. now, you are retroactively changing the word "substance" to the word 'reason" so that it fits your argument.

FOR THE THIRD TIME: WHY DID YOU VOTE ME INSTEAD OF ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION?


if you have any questions please list them out so i may answer them. thank you.

[hamsandwich]

SK: i will answer your questions soon. there were a couple things that stood out to me in grumps posting and i will be happy to post them up when i get the chance. right now, my time seems to be occupied with tweedle dee and tweedle dumber.


Also Ham why is it you take offence from Mad Mat and not 3nd3r, as he has the same amount of pressure added to his side as Mad Mat?

unclear on what you mean by 'pressure" here. mad mat is badgering me. i believe i responded to 3nd3r already. if 3nd3r has a follow up i am all ears.



I still can't see why Ham voted Mad Mat over 3nd3r but regardless I can't see why he voted at all out side of hypocrisy and Mad Mats own vote on ham.

get your story straight. mad mat said "players shouldn't vote without substance, vote: ham." if you take out the vote, then it is a legitimate statement. the vote is complete hypocrisy. i think mat is being oppurtunistic and trying to build a case out of my vote on you. notice he has accused me of "avoiding" something but has yet to ask me any significant questions.

[hamsandwich]

Well theres a bit of hypocrisy going on in your camp as well. saying that only time will tell if yoru vote on grump was "justified" then saying you don't "deserve" to be voted in return. what makes Grump more "deserving"?

as i said. if someone wanted to know more about my vote on grumps all they have to do is ask. noone has(except you). i will post my thoughts on grump soon, this game is moving faster than i thought it would.

[Tekkactus]

I was wondering was a prod was, from what I understand it would be a direct question to TH, is this correct?

A prod is a PM to an inactive player to tell them to start posting.

[Cashew]

What is Mad Mats involvement in the arguement of Cashew and SK?
There really wasn't an argument, just normal Sensei K Cashew bickering. I was setting up an easy logical feint on SK insinuating he was mafia, because he was making the same argument this game that he made last. Half an effort to paint him as a possible scum to weaker players, and half an effort to get SK riled up. Mad Mat felt it necessary to put words in SK's mouth before he had a chance to speak and easily dismiss the obviously weak poke. Which makes me wonder why MM is defending SK, when he's being so offensive towards other players?

He's playing much the way I played last game being confrontational and at the same time avoiding issues. Again, word to the wise, it doesn't work that well unless your the cop and aren't getting role blocked.

Regardless, I think ham is right on this, Mad Mat is preying opportunistically and I personally think he seems to have a little knowledge of the zombie affiliation. I'm more and more convinced that he is neither town or mafia, but that third affiliation.

I'd vote for him again if I could.

[Sensei kakashi]

Rereading the Ham/Mat debacle I think both are right and both are wrong at the same time.

In Mat's case, yes voting a person becuase he failed to give reasons on hiw own vote is acceptable. It helps to weed out those unknown reasons while stopping potential votes and lynches to be placed and allowed to sit under no reasons. However, you did not use the word "reasons" you said "substance" and this is a big deal here. "reasons" could be anything from 5 words to 20 sentences long. however anything under a paraghraph should be considered "no substance." So by using the word "substance" you effectivly did make yourself a hypocrit via your 1 sentence long reason.

so Ham is right on that point, but wrong in a lot of others. For starters his vote on you was made under bad reasons. If he had delved a little deeper into the "hipocracy" thing there and then I think it would have justified his vote, but he barely said anything on it at all. But his vote isn't an OMGUS, it's just a vote made for a bad reason. More recently Ham is in the worse. His last post at Mat in particular. he strawmans in on Mat voting him instead of asking him a question and still refuses to actually answer the question. He says he had a reason and he calls Mat a liar yet I see no explanation of his vote on Grump in that whole post.


as i said. if someone wanted to know more about my vote on grumps all they have to do is ask. noone has(except you). i will post my thoughts on grump soon, this game is moving faster than i thought it would.

Focusing on the fact you were never "specifically" asked won't change anything. Mat voted you for your reasons on Grump or lack there of, so that should have been a clue you had some explaining to do. This is mafia, people will not hold your hand every time. In fact when people attack you they will often times make it as difficult as possible for you to respond/defend yourself so as to make their attacks seem stronger. You are going to need to learn how to handle yourself in these situations as best you can. Constantly calling your attacker out for not asking a specific question while also avoiding answering that same question is not a good way to have handled the situation.

[Sensei kakashi]

I was setting up an easy logical feint on SK insinuating he was mafia, because he was making the same argument this game that he made last. Half an effort to paint him as a possible scum to weaker players, and half an effort to get SK riled up. Mad Mat felt it necessary to put words in SK's mouth before he had a chance to speak and easily dismiss the obviously weak poke. Which makes me wonder why MM is defending SK, when he's being so offensive towards other players?

Haven't you learned not to poke the snake pit yet? I mean eventually I would think even you would get tired of seeing yourself hang after messing with me.

But that aside, how did Mat put words in my mouth? Also when i first read what he said I felt he was agreeing with you and letting what you said I did slip while saying it is reason to watch me. So I don't feel he defended me at all, I feel he sided with you. Mat should clear this up.


Regardless, I think ham is right on this, Mad Mat is preying opportunistically and I personally think he seems to have a little knowledge of the zombie affiliation. I'm more and more convinced that he is neither town or mafia, but that third affiliation.

Wow... Ok seeing as how I just went over some of whats been going on... where do you see Mat preying opportunistically? And what makes you think he has a little knowlege of the zombies? His theories? What, town can't speculate now?

[Friend Mairsil]

@FM I was just wondering if you noticed that you are among the people that aren't saying much. In fact when you voted me you only had 1 more post then myself, I would also like to note that I will usually not be around on Sunday's because I'm usually not around a computer.

I have also not said much because nobody has convinced me that somebody else deserves my vote more than Grump does, and I think he is sitting on a very important role.
i dont usually say much in the first day until i find something worth jumping on. though i do let my presence be known by coming in a giving my thoughts on a few subjects. you however havent said anything really beside voting grump. while on the subject of grump let me ask you a question. well its more of a clarification than anything. anywho, so, your voting grump because you think he is sitting on a power role, right?


I remember someone asked what was other opinions of the MM/Ham debate. well mine is both are running in circles and this arguement is pointless as it will not lead to mafia through accepted means.

[hamsandwich]

SK: mad mat has not asked me any questions. i have asked him a very specific question three times which he has not answered.

grumphreys mainly pinged scum for me when he started rambling about how early claims were good for town but would not support them. i don't recall exactly how he worded it, but it seemed like he was trying to play both sides of the issue. also, when describing his ideas of the "set up" he arbitrarily placed a "neutral" role into the mix. i found that interesting. he also seemed to talk about the set up with a degree of certainty. others have as well, but not to such a degree(at that time).

at this point i have no interest in moving my vote back. though he seems like a worthy lynch possibility, i would need more to condemn him. as for mad mat. he needs to answer my question and ask something of his own before accusing me of "avoiding". the only reason i focus on the fact that he never asked a question is because of the fact that he is accusing me of this. that's two counts of hypocrisy on his part.

[Sensei kakashi]

his vote on you was based on your vote on Grump. Regardless of asking you a question or not you still should have imediately explained your vote on him enough to somewhat satisfy whatever his vote was based on. Added on to that the question you have asked him "three times" was why he voted you and not simply asked you a question which is a dumb question to ask once, so I can't even calculate what it means when asked three times. There are 14 players in this game, it stands to reason there will be times people will vote someone at times when it seems they could have done something different. Why? There's a number of reasons. As far as which one is Mat's you would have to ask him.

[hamsandwich]

his vote on you was based on your vote on Grump. Regardless of asking you a question or not you still should have imediately explained your vote on him enough to somewhat satisfy whatever his vote was based on.

agreed, and i understand that. however, my point is that mad mat did the exact same thing. he is basing his defense and current accusations on the equation
lack of substance=lack of reason as you have pointed out, that is not necessarily true, not to mention that it was constructed after the vote had been placed. hence, mat put himself in the same position as i had: trying to explain a vote retroactively. i understand the suspicion of my vote on grump, but i find the oppurtunistic, and growing wagon resulting from this "crap logic" to be more suspect.


Added on to that the question you have asked him "three times" was why he voted you and not simply asked you a question which is a dumb question to ask once, so I can't even calculate what it means when asked three times. There are 14 players in this game, it stands to reason there will be times people will vote someone at times when it seems they could have done something different. Why? There's a number of reasons. As far as which one is Mat's you would have to ask him.

i am asking mat for his reasons. i have asked him three times.

however, now i am confused. what are you getting at with the bolded statement above?

[Sensei kakashi]

as you have pointed out, that is not necessarily true, not to mention that it was constructed after the vote had been placed. hence, mat put himself in the same position as i had: trying to explain a vote retroactively. i understand the suspicion of my vote on grump, but i find the oppurtunistic, and growing wagon resulting from this "crap logic" to be more suspect.

What is the point of defending oneself if not to correct mistakes? Have you asked him if he meant "reasons" when he said "Substance"? Also define "opprotunistic" in a way that doesn't apply to most if not all votes made by town and scum alike. "Opprotunistic" is a bonefied crap shoot attack used only by the most desperate of people. It is difficult to prove, even more so to distinguish, and in no way applies to one's alignment.


however, now i am confused. what are you getting at with the bolded statement above?

You were saying something earlier about why he voted you and not simply asked you a question. The bolded statement goes to illistrate why one might vote someone in positions where it may seem a little rash to vote. I'm not going too much into it as you seem to want Mat's opinion on it and I don't want to give him an out.

[Mad Mat]

I have already answered your question more than once:


To which my answer was that I voted to make a point.
In which the point was that people should not vote without providing a reason. And before you call hypocrisy again, it's not: I had a reason. You can argue about the substance/reason thingy. Substance is just a more vague way of saying it - it doesn't even refer strictly to words in a post - but I think it should have been pretty clear from my post what I meant with it.

And the question you still haven't answered and the one I have been asking is: why did you vote grumph? And if your only answer is "I found him suspicious", then I will consider your action a suspicious one.
It baffles me right now that you didn't know this as:

is avoiding the question of why he voted grumph in the first place.
I mean, it's phrased out there quite clearly, no? Right in the same sentence where I accuse you of avoiding. And still you post later with "nobody but SK has asked me to give my reason for my grumph vote" and "what's your question mad mat?".


Which makes me wonder why MM is defending SK, when he's being so offensive towards other players?
I'm not defending SK. As I have already said, I comment on what I find interesting.

And where am I putting words in his mouth? I just said that his action was sort of suspicious, but not worth pushing for. It's acknowledging an observation and commenting on it.


He's playing much the way I played last game being confrontational and at the same time avoiding issues.
Avoiding what?


Regardless, I think ham is right on this, Mad Mat is preying opportunistically and I personally think he seems to have a little knowledge of the zombie affiliation.
See, now that's avoiding. I already asked you to state where I showed this info of zombie affiliation. I speculated, yes, but that's far from showing info about zombie affiliation. You start speculating, others join you, and then you fault them for speculating on the things you did not touch. Amazing scum tell or what? I wasn't even the only one speculating on zombies, making the quotes I have demanded even more important.

Or, hell, just read post 78 and respond to it. You're repeating arguments I have already adressed and then accusing me of avoiding stuff.

[Cashew]

Wow, way to convince me further and further Mad Mat. Other people speculated, when you did it you had an aura of authority. Your speculation seemed like it was more an admission of inside knowledge and less like speculation.

Again, I find you highly confrontational, and you seem to be vastly overreacting. My guess is I'm either spot on or you're headed down the tracks to getting yourself lynched. Being it day one, I'm of course looking at other people, but you are first and foremost on my radar.

[Grumpherys]

In my opinion Cashew is the far most opportunistic player here, that doesn't mean anything other than he looks to take advantage of any situation, I think he is simply pressuring MM.

Ham how ever never made a reason out side I think he’s scum, Kal-el made more reasoning in his post to vote me... out side of taking advantage of a role playing name... he stated I was trying to throw suspicion toward cashew. Yes, they are bad reasons but better than any reason you could claim to have had in your vote against me Ham. Regardless the newest argument on votes of "you said this and its hypocrisy" is also fairly pointless. Lets not throw mud.

Regarding how the,
speculation seemed like it was more an admission of inside knowledge and less like speculation.

This tells us nothing as it in itself is speculation, able to be explored, but highly irrational. I doubt that any neutral roles would even know who else is neutral, assuming the zombies are neutral that is.

I can only speculate one thing with a high degree of certainty, There are or will be zombie roles. Why? It is RE people be realistic please.

Ham the only thing I said remotely close to claims being positive was that vanilla have nothing to work off until there is a death. At which point they will learn the role. Out side of that look all you want, I never said that claiming was good, forced out of people yes, but not good.

[hamsandwich]

I can only speculate one thing with a high degree of certainty, There are or will be zombie roles. Why? It is RE people be realistic please.





I also would like to note that I have no prior knowledge to the game of RE at all.

these quotes strike me as odd. if you have no prior knowledge of RE then how are you so sure of "zombie" roles?

i am pretty much over my argument with madmat/grump/sk. we don't agree on things. "substance" and "scummy" are both vague terms. i am not trying to justify my vote on grumps. i voted him because of his posting which i have explained in a previuous post. it wasn't a huge case. however, please note the two quotes above. they don't seem to be vague at all.



What is the point of defending oneself if not to correct mistakes?

que? it is also appropriate to defend oneself against "crap" logic.


Have you asked him if he meant "reasons" when he said "Substance"?

he volunteered that information. after the fact he changed the definition of "substance" to equal that of "reasons". he has admitted that "substance" was a vague term.


Also define "opprotunistic" in a way that doesn't apply to most if not all votes made by town and scum alike.

jumping on a wagon is often oppurtunistic. moreso with bad reasons or parroted cases. you are correct, many votes are oppurtunistic, but one has to wonder when several players jump a wagon based on a hypocritical and poorly constructed argument.

please read grump's quotes above and tell me what you think.

[Devious little fox]

i haven't been posting much because quit frankly i don't like day 1 and never really no what to press, but your last quote on grumps is ridiculous enough for you to earn my vote. If you need me to elaborate...I WONT.

vote ham

[hamsandwich]

i haven't been posting much because quit frankly i don't like day 1 and never really no what to press, but your last quote on grumps is ridiculous enough for you to earn my vote.


you mean the one where i have pointed out a blatant contradiction?

you have already said you won't elaborate, but i must ask that you do.

[Devious little fox]

i can't even begin to think you are serious but just incase...you take something grump said 50 pages ago when the game started and try to pair it with something that he just said after everyone has elaborated on the topic and try to pass it off as viable.

[Cashew]

In my opinion Cashew is the far most opportunistic player here, that doesn't mean anything other than he looks to take advantage of any situation, I think he is simply pressuring MM.

Well you do know me, however you misidentified me as opportunistic. If I was going to be opportunistic, I would have voted for hamsandwich ensuring that he had the most votes of anyone. Instead I voted for someone that had no votes on them. That is far from opportunistic. An opportunist waits for easy situations to capitalize, letting others do their work. I don't see any elements of opportunity in me attacking Mad Mat. In fact, there some to be more supporting him meaning I'm fighting an uphill battle. Definitely a far cry from opportunistic.

Gonna have to call a major BS on that one Grump, such bs in fact, that now I'm going to spend a little bit figuring out if you're deluded or scummy.

Unvote
Vote: Grump

I appreciate you trying to make yourself sound clear this game. It is just a shame you're making yourself clearly sound like an idiot.

[Mad Mat]

Wow, way to convince me further and further Mad Mat. Other people speculated, when you did it you had an aura of authority. Your speculation seemed like it was more an admission of inside knowledge and less like speculation.

Again, I find you highly confrontational, and you seem to be vastly overreacting. My guess is I'm either spot on or you're headed down the tracks to getting yourself lynched. Being it day one, I'm of course looking at other people, but you are first and foremost on my radar.
Still avoiding.

That's all I'm going to say to you until you adress it, I can tell you now.

To other players: note how Cashew is accusing me of things without backing them up. This makes me unable to defend myself, as I have no clue what the **** he is actually talking about.


he volunteered that information. after the fact he changed the definition of "substance" to equal that of "reasons". he has admitted that "substance" was a vague term.
I said more than just that. Don't quote me out of context.

And finally:

Other people, CONTRIBUTE!

[Grumpherys]

Well you do know me, however you misidentified me as opportunistic. If I was going to be opportunistic, I would have voted for hamsandwich ensuring that he had the most votes of anyone. Instead I voted for someone that had no votes on them. That is far from opportunistic. An opportunist waits for easy situations to capitalize, letting others do their work. I don't see any elements of opportunity in me attacking Mad Mat. In fact, there some to be more supporting him meaning I'm fighting an uphill battle. Definitely a far cry from opportunistic.

Forgive me for having a different view on the matter Cashew but you often set up scenarios for you to vote some one. I mean it not as an insult but as an understanding of your play style, perhaps I have it wrong. I just see that you take a case and make it fit your perspective, rather than taking every thing into account on a continues basis.
For instance: You bother Sk all the time and make your self to be a self glorified "jerk" in an effort to pull some one into frustration and then slip up, thous making them out to be mafia. Regardless of affiliation any player could make a mistake. In this most recent case you voted me to attempt bothering me. I'm assuming this because this is how I see your play style working. You may honestly believe me to be mafia but I doubt your vote even has any regard to my affiliation.

Ham you are right the two quotes do counter each other, but you are also greatly incorrect in assuming an earlier statement that has no knowledge of a game behind it means I've never heard of it or glimpsed it. I didn't know the flavor at all, but assumed it had to do something with zombies, as that was the first thing that became evident. I now am aware that zombies exist in RE. This means that your argument is null. I'm beginning to wonder why you continue to badger me about trivial things. Is it because I appear to be on top of an important role? If this is the case it would be best you set your priorities strait before you end up night killed again. I say this because to me it appears the same efforts you made last game when you thought I was on a role made you act in the same manner. Again, I am not claiming, but suggesting that in the case a Vig. exists in this set up you might end up their target if you continue this pattern.

Enough about me. I would like to hear Kal-el make his statement about why I appear the scummiest. Also Tekk never replied back to my question of "where is he?".

[Grumpherys]

Streetz
AlasterEisaroh
Tekkactus
3nd3r
Friend Mairsil
Kal-El
FrycHiKn
Haggis

Streetz is more lax as he has a semi good excuse and FM is here and there but I'd like more from him, however the rest on the list should get into it more and start to post more often.

[Sensei kakashi]

jumping on a wagon is often oppurtunistic. moreso with bad reasons or parroted cases. you are correct, many votes are oppurtunistic, but one has to wonder when several players jump a wagon based on a hypocritical and poorly constructed argument.

Jumping on a wagon is opprotunistic? if that is the case every town is opprotunistic at some point in a game. No one can be lynched unless people jump on wagons. Bad reasons are... well bad sure. But in a game of mafia everyone will have a bad reason at some point. The key is to out them quick and find out if it was just bad reasoning on their part or if it seemed like some clever and not so well thought out ploy to place a vote. parroted cases is not an issue that can be discussed without citing a specific event.

And yes, almost every vote in a game can be defined as "opprotunistic" in some way or another which is why the attack "you or your vote seems opprotunistic!" is so stupid. And exactly who has jumped on your wagon based entirely off of Mat's "hypocritical and poorly constructed argument"?


please read grump's quotes above and tell me what you think.

Well he used the "opprotunistic" attack in the first sentence so I think it's stupid. But I'll refrain from slinging mud. His points on you do seem a little biased but I think they do have slight truth to them. You spent a lot of time avoiding commenting on your reasonings behind your grump vote, even so much that you seemed to have been hiding behind the "hes a hypocrit" attack as a defense.


Out side of that look all you want, I never said that claiming was good, forced out of people yes, but not good.

... I'm almost positive you did say that...


Likely more confusing, but regardless opinions and role claims tend to make or break it. I have found that early role claims break the game for the town more often than not.

Ok you didn't use the exact word "good" but this above quote is definitly you making role claims "seem" good.


i haven't been posting much because quit frankly i don't like day 1 and never really no what to press, but your last quote on grumps is ridiculous enough for you to earn my vote. If you need me to elaborate...I WONT.

... Have you been reading the thread?

Unvote:, Vote: DLF

You elaberate now. And either start liking day one or we can happily put you out of your misery if you prefere. We don't need a lead weight dragging around us all day.


i can't even begin to think you are serious but just incase...you take something grump said 50 pages ago when the game started and try to pair it with something that he just said after everyone has elaborated on the topic and try to pass it off as viable.

I'm trying to find this contradiction he speaks of... Let's see what i can weed out...


these quotes strike me as odd. if you have no prior knowledge of RE then how are you so sure of "zombie" roles?{/quote]

Anyone who doesn't know zombies exist in RE needs to leave this game. If this is your "blantant contradiction" then you fail. If this is not the contradiction I would like someone to point me to it.

[quote="Mat"]To other players: note how Cashew is accusing me of things without backing them up. This makes me unable to defend myself, as I have no clue what the **** he is actually talking about.

i know how you feel. take solace in the fact no one ever listens to him anyway.

[Sensei kakashi]

Oh right. Unvote: placed that one before reading his next post. still, saying crap like "I won't elaberate" is dumb. Never do it again.

[hamsandwich]

grumps contradiction is in the wording of his statements. the wording of those statements seem off. it seems to me that the first statement about having no knowledge of the game is contrived. its just a feeling which is why i posted it and asked for others opinions.

mad mat. you and i will have to agree to disagree. you called me out on my ****ty vote with a ****ty vote of your own. that's how i see it. otherwise i am not reading scum from you so i

unvote

there are many players not posting right now and i don't think it prudent for us to be ignoring them.

also, did anyone notice that grumps implied that i was pushing him because i thought he had some sort of power role, and then proceeded to threaten me with a "nightkill"?

OOC: grumps, is english a second language for you?

[Cashew]

also, did anyone notice that grumps implied that i was pushing him because i thought he had some sort of power role, and then proceeded to threaten me with a "nightkill"?


More or less yes, it seemed threatening. Whether or not he has the power to back up the threat is only his guess.

Request prod on people who haven't posted in 5 days or more:
Frychikn and AlasterEiaroh.

Would anyone entertain perhaps just lynching a lurker/frequent inactive for Day 1? If they aren't going to participate they would make excellent fodder for day one. Or maybe the serial killer/vig/mafia will at least be kind enough to kill the more inactive people tonight at least.

[hamsandwich]

a day 1 lurker lynch is something i can get behind as long as the target is an "active" lurker. i would rather not lynch someone dealing with rl issues.

also, cashew, were you ever planning on responding to mad mat's request? i hadn't noticed his connection to the zombie roles. if there were particular posts you found questionable, please let me(us) know where they are.

sk: noone in particular, but i did notice 3nd3r and DLF coming after me for pretty poor reasons(moreso DLF). i.e. DLF voted me because i pulled two quotes that suggest grumps may have not been entirely truthful as to his knowledge of this game. same question for DLF that i had for mat: why vote when he had the oppurtunity to discuss the situation with me?

the only real case against me is my poor explanation in regards to my vote on grumps(which i have explained), but the only vote against me that seems to be halfway decently explained is 3nd3r's.

also, i disagree with you on how to define "oppurtunistic". whether a vote is "oppurtunistic" or not is a personal opinion. please don't voice your opinion as though it is fact as that seems to be what your entire dislike of the "oppurtunistic" argument is.


"Opprotunistic" is a bonefied crap shoot attack used only by the most desperate of people.

^^^^^^ this is your opinion yet you present it as fact, simultaneously painting me as "desperate" because i used this argument. i can see scum using such persona tarnishing tactics. i agree that simply saying someone is "oppurtunistic" is not a good case, but the above statement is in no way absolutely true. please be aware of this tendency when posting, as sentences like this can only lead me to believe that you are scum.

[Devious little fox]

@ Ham, i didn't vote you for trying to pull up two contradictory statements. I voted you because i can't believe you seriously find it contradictory that grumps learn about zombies after 5 pages of everyone saying RE is all about zombies and using it as an "argument".

[Sensei kakashi]

^^^^^^ this is your opinion yet you present it as fact, simultaneously painting me as "desperate" because i used this argument. i can see scum using such persona tarnishing tactics. i agree that simply saying someone is "oppurtunistic" is not a good case, but the above statement is in no way absolutely true. please be aware of this tendency when posting, as sentences like this can only lead me to believe that you are scum

Believe what you want Ham but calling Mat Opprotunistic was a desperation act by you. You used this attack and the hypocrocy one to hide behind and avoid giving reasons for your Grump vote. 9 out of 10 times anyone using the attack "Opportunistic" has no case and is desperately trying to make one up.

[ThunderHog]

Official Vote Count
3x hamsandwich (Mad Mat, 3nd3r, devious little fox)
2x Kal-El (Haggis, Friend Mairsil)
2x Grumpherys (Kal-El, Cashew)

7x Not Voting (Streetz, Tekkactus, Sensei kakashi, FrycHiKn, Grumpherys, hamsandwich, AlasterEisaroh)

[Friend Mairsil]

for you grump ill try and post a little more. ;) though i make no promises as i have to use a friends computer to post, and im running out of beer that ive ben using to bribe him. go go barter system >.>

ok first and foremost i dont have a clue as to what to do. i dont have very much information, and the arguements that are going on right now to me are pointless and futile. right now im sort of agreeing with cashew on a first day lurker lynch. But when i think about it more i seems like it would be a waste of a lynch. being that if they never contributed to the game what knowledge would come from there death besides there role. nothing thats what. i know this may sound a little F-ed up, but id rather see a talker get lynched, as i would be able to start connecting people to motives and reasons.

lets see you probly also want to know who i think mafia might be. well sorry to disappoint, but i dont have anyone that really stands out right now. though i do have my usual suspects which are:
SK
Cashew
Tekk
you might be asking why them, and the only response i got for that is; they amuse me and they are the ones i really want to argue with, because they usually know what they are doing. also they love to breadcrumb, no seriously like alot. so im just waiting for one of the to slip before i make a move. cause you know you cant go after them with a weak arguement :D

as for everyone else the only person thats gotten my attention is Grump, but its more for good reasons than anything else. DLF is coming out swinging which , well, suits him. 3nd3r is missing along with Fry and AE. really i wont have anything until someone slips or until tomorrow. either way once i really start playing you'll know by the amount of questions ill be flinging.

so if there is anything anyone wants to ask please feel free.

UNVOTE

[Mad Mat]

This'll be a short one:

Cashew, respond.
TH, prod the lurkers.

[Grumpherys]

Your doing it wrong cashew.
Request prod on people who haven't posted in 5 days or more:
Frychikn and AlasterEiaroh.

Remember you must yell at TH to get his attention.

Ham, English is in fact my first language, however I speak 2 others German, and Japanese (neither fluently) and tend to cross them over on occasion. Why would this be of importance to you?

As far as the threat I was getting rather annoyed by Hams arguments. I can't see any of them being useful or even realistic. The fact is he got to close to the sun his arguments were his feathers, and being poorly built they melted off.

By the way when I hear about a game I should visit and it has a new release, I need to know about it. I looked into it because I major in Game Design in college at the Art Institute. So now I know more.

SK I think you are correct in his statement being desperate. I'm not sure what to make of any of this yet, but I see things are shaping up more now. Players are starting to get a feel for each other now. This game has the potential to be a lot of fun this time around.

What do I have to say that is contribution toward the game right now... I'm really not sure, I believe Kal-el is avoiding me. I can't say its a scum, tell but he personally appears to be scum. Not vote worthy though.

[Kal-El]

I would like to start with saying I had meant to make a post yesterday but as it was my better half's birthday I didn't really have time.


i dont usually say much in the first day until i find something worth jumping on. though i do let my presence be known by coming in a giving my thoughts on a few subjects. you however havent said anything really beside voting grump. while on the subject of grump let me ask you a question. well its more of a clarification than anything. anywho, so, your voting grump because you think he is sitting on a power role, right?

Besides voting Grump, way back, about page 2, I think post #17, I actually added the very first bit of flavor with detailing what S.T.A.R.S. are as Streetz didn't know. I have played every single RE game ever made, and at midnight last Thursday even went out an bought an X-box 360 just so I could play 5. (Just so nobody makes the mistake that I know to much about any aspect of this mafia game)

Also I didn't vote Grump because I think he's sitting on a power role, I actually voted him during the random vote stage, with a semi not so random vote, playing on his role name, which is a known criminal from Death Note, and the fact that so early in the game he was trying to pass off Cashew as suspisious. I did however say that I haven't changed my vote because since voting him nobody has convinced me of a more deserving vote, and that he appears to be sitting on a power role. More about this thinking after the following quote.



Grump

I would like to hear Kal-el make his statement about why I appear the scummiest

I didn't say scummiest, although in my vote I did say your name sounded mafia to me, mainly because of the previously stated criminal link to your name. I actually believe that we can all agree that there are 3 groups in this game, I also believe that all three groups have their own power roles, so I have no idea what side your on, and a more recent mention to the vig role makes me think you know more than most of us.

[Cashew]

Mad Mat, I don't know where i haven't been perfectly clear to you. Please, let me know what your question is since you're like a special kid with a red button at this point. It's cool that you want to keep pressing it over and over for the same unknown reason, but I'm starting to get scared you'll put it in your mouth soon and die or get slobber all over me.

If it's about your speculation, I'll hold your hand back to your speculation post (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=284243&postcount=55) and merely point out again that all I said about it was that you spoke with an air of authority rather than a point of conjecture. Again, my gut feeling is that you let loose something only you know about the flavor because you have that role. Again, I have a distinct feeling you are not town. Again, I have a distinct feeling you are not mafia. Again, I have a distinct feeling you possibly breadcrumbed your zombie role in that statement. Again, I think you are an idiot.

[hamsandwich]

sk and grumps: whatever. your opinions are not facts. you are entitled to them.

DLF: the wording of those statements struck me as odd. my issue with you is that you voted me without discussing the quotes. i find that behavior to be, get ready SK, "oppurtunistic". i.e. you could have discussed the issue with me, but instead you choose to lob a vote onto a wagon. i don't feel i have done anything particularly scummy this game. my vote on grumps was poorly explained, but i also listed a number of reasons which noone responded to.

grumps: why are you so obsessed with power roles? i cannot tell if you are engaging in some delicate rolefishing or claiming a power role.

cashew: i am starting to wonder about some of your flavor speculation. i will be rereading and most likely have a question or two.

[3nd3r]

ok I've been a little busy and I apologize for that but hey what can we do? Ham retains my vote now for his BS argument with MM over hypocrisy. When I read it I wanted to pull up the definition of every word used just to show that it was stupid and fruitless making Ham's vote on MM look like OMGUS.

@ Cashew: how do you explain posts 114 and 136??? just curious since you're an experienced player. Using words like aura and gut feeling just doesn't cut it in mafia as you and SK told everyone last game. If I wasn't voting Ham for good reasons I'd vote you right now.

[hamsandwich]

ok I've been a little busy and I apologize for that but hey what can we do? Ham retains my vote now for his BS argument with MM over hypocrisy. When I read it I wanted to pull up the definition of every word used just to show that it was stupid and fruitless making Ham's vote on MM look like OMGUS.



sorry, but my vote was far from omgus, though i really hate to retread the discussion i'll put it bluntly: mad mat's reason for his vote on me was that i provided little substance with my vote. according to the definition of substance

substance: that of which a thing consists; physical matter or material

mad mats vote on me contained just as little. the argument was not BS in the slightest.

in any case, omgus votes are just as likely to be placed by frustrated townies aa they are by scum, so if you're only reason for voting me is because you think my vote on mat looked like omgus then you, too, are voting with little substance. but whatever.

[FrycHiKn]

Ok... I dunno intend to jump on the grumpwagon but I need to ask something...

Are you trying to confuse us?

Because you said this:

By the way when I hear about a game I should visit and it has a new release, I need to know about it. I looked into it because I major in Game Design in college at the Art Institute. So now I know more.


Is that really relevant? And If you are major in Game design, how come you didn't saw the town/mafia win condition? It was on the first page and the PM that we got and those clearly states that there are zombies...


I didn't know the flavor at all, but assumed it had to do something with zombies, as that was the first thing that became evident. I now am aware that zombies exist in RE.

It is weird that you made a some arguments related to that...

----

Offtopic: English is my second language so... Sorry for that.

[ThunderHog]

Fry has posted pre-prod, so I don't find it necessary to prod him - however, I am prodding AE now.

[3nd3r]

Ok going by your(Ham's) definition of substance, your vote had NO substance. True??? and don't give me oh it's for reactions purposes, that didn't work last game it isn't working this game. Now, going by the same definition for substance, MM's vote, which he placed because your(Ham's) vote, had substance. True it may have been little substance, but last time I checked any is a lot more than none. Plus at the time of your(Ham's) vote you stated no reason. Then, you attack MM and I for just not asking why you placed your vote as you did. Last I checked faulty reasoning is a scum tell, well you didn't have faulty reasoning, you had no reasoning. I believe that no reasoning is infinitely worse than faulty reasoning. Given that this game is one where we must determine scum from town by almost 100% talking, I think we, we being MM and myself, were well within our rights to attack you and continue to do so.


As for the OMGUS, I merely said it could be viewed that way, so either A. you lack the ability to comprehend or B. you wish to misconstrue what I said. Either way you still maintain my vote.

[Cashew]

@ Cashew: how do you explain posts 114 and 136??? just curious since you're an experienced player. Using words like aura and gut feeling just doesn't cut it in mafia as you and SK told everyone last game. If I wasn't voting Ham for good reasons I'd vote you right now

Lol. So what are you voting off of on Day One? Logic and Reason? Day One is nothing but gut feelings based on how people act and react. It is also about sniffing out bread crumbs, and I smell Wonder Bread.

Thank you 3nd3r for getting on radar as well.

Day one often ends in a dumb town getting lynched. I have a feeling today may be hamsandwich.

[hamsandwich]

Ok going by your(Ham's) definition of substance, your vote had NO substance. True???

false. i clearly stated it was because i felt grump to be scummy.


and don't give me oh it's for reactions purposes, that didn't work last game it isn't working this game. Now, going by the same definition for substance, MM's vote, which he placed because your(Ham's) vote, had substance.

no. if voting for someone by saying you think they are scummy is considered to be no substance, then how can voting someone for "voting with no substance" considered any better?


True it may have been little substance, but last time I checked any is a lot more than none.

true. any is more than none.


Plus at the time of your(Ham's) vote you stated no reason.

false, reason was stated. i thought grumps scummy.


Then, you attack MM and I for just not asking why you placed your vote as you did.

false, who attacked you? also, i attacked mad mat for hypocrisy. the fact that he didn't ask for clarification and instead threw a completely hypocritical vote onto me is called: hypocrisy.


Last I checked faulty reasoning is a scum tell, well you didn't have faulty reasoning, you had no reasoning.

true, faulty reasoning can be a scum tell. hypocrisy = faulty reasoning, no? also, see above, i had reasoning.


I believe that no reasoning is infinitely worse than faulty reasoning.

debatable. infinite is a large number. a townie hammering scum with no reasoning is better than scum hammering town with faulty reasoning.


Given that this game is one where we must determine scum from town by almost 100% talking, I think we, we being MM and myself, were well within our rights to attack you and continue to do so.

yes, you are within your rights. do i not have the right to defend myself?



As for the OMGUS, I merely said it could be viewed that way, so either A. you lack the ability to comprehend or B. you wish to misconstrue what I said. Either way you still maintain my vote.

well, it is your vote.


Day one often ends in a dumb town getting lynched. I have a feeling today may be hamsandwich.

happy to be of service. ;)

[hamsandwich]

ebwop:


As for the OMGUS, I merely said it could be viewed that way, so either A. you lack the ability to comprehend or B. you wish to misconstrue what I said.

you conveniently leave out the distinct possibility that you are not so good at the whole communicating thing or that maybe i just am misunderstanding you. the above statement may fall under the category of either/or fallacy. just sayin'.

[hamsandwich]

eebwop: strike "or that maybe i just am misunderstanding you." you did cover that part.

[Haggis]

I think AE is the "Mafia boss" trying to stay under the radar!

[Haggis]

I think AE is the "Mafia boss" trying to stay under the radar!

UNvote

Vote AE

[Haggis]

EDIt wrong button

[Streetz]

If it's about your speculation, I'll hold your hand back to your speculation post (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=284243&postcount=55) and merely point out again that all I said about it was that you spoke with an air of authority rather than a point of conjecture. Again, my gut feeling is that you let loose something only you know about the flavor because you have that role. Again, I have a distinct feeling you are not town. Again, I have a distinct feeling you are not mafia. Again, I have a distinct feeling you possibly breadcrumbed your zombie role in that statement. Again, I think you are an idiot.

Cashew - Is it really necessary to call someone an idiot? Whether or not they are an idiot, it isn't nice.

MFOS: Cashew mainly for being so attacking and so vulgar thus far in this game.


ok I've been a little busy and I apologize for that but hey what can we do? Ham retains my vote now for his BS argument with MM over hypocrisy. When I read it I wanted to pull up the definition of every word used just to show that it was stupid and fruitless making Ham's vote on MM look like OMGUS.

@ Cashew: how do you explain posts 114 and 136??? just curious since you're an experienced player. Using words like aura and gut feeling just doesn't cut it in mafia as you and SK told everyone last game. If I wasn't voting Ham for good reasons I'd vote you right now.

Hmm. Post noted. Please in the future quote the posts you are referring to. It helps us really understand what you're talking about.


Day one often ends in a dumb town getting lynched. I have a feeling today may be hamsandwich.

Cashew - because you are one of the most vocal members of the group, please enlighten us on who you currently think are the most scummy players and/or the most suspicious characters. Besides Ham, of course. Please and thank you.


I think AE is the "Mafia boss" trying to stay under the radar!

I find my own judgments are in limbo at the moment thanks to all of the arguing back and forth of members of our group. I find it safest to vote for lurkers as AE has not been distant from the forums and yet hasn't posted in this thread for a while. That to me is a strong scum tell. And thus:

vote: AE

Before I say more I would like to backtrack and re-read all of the posts since my previous one so I can make some stronger arguments against those I find suspicious. I would encourage everyone else to do the same. Especially those that haven't posted much recently such as myself.

I am still on vacation through the end of this week so I cannot gaurantee I will be posting again until next Monday.

[Grumpherys]

Firstly I'm confused by Haggis. There is really no way of providing evidence out side the fact AE is lurking. Regardless it's your vote I just hope you can provide more reasoning to your vote, other than lurking.

Ham. Ham. Ham. "YOUR SCUMMY, VOTE!" not a reason. A gut feeling as Cashew would say claiming there can only be gut feelings on the first day, but not a reason. Your whole argument is now that your reason was I seemed scummy. It's the same as claiming a thrown dart on a board of names is a reason. You have nothing to back it up, and you have no way of taking it back. The best response long ago should have been, "I thought post--- looked curious, when he said--- it appeared very ---" which I admit you attempted, claiming I had prior knowledge to the game that I lied about. Well I didn't at first have any knowledge, which is why (@Fry) I mentioned my major in college, it is my job to know. That is why I looked it up. Now I know.

So Ham, let it be. Apologize for your continued aggravations. Explain your vote on MM a little more clearly for reasons that are not about the substance issue. Your vote on MM is due to his being towny, not scummy. Claim all you want that it was opportunistic, regardless to most others I'm sure it looked more preventive than opportunistic. Now your giving scum reasons to pull you under. You can give the scum a weapon against you by continuing the charade about substance. It's annoying, not scum hunting, and worse yet nit picky. Really now, Substance vs reason. A word slip that in his eyes means close to the same thing. Grow up, this isn't he said she said (close, yes but please stay with me here) This is catching people in lies, forcing the hand of a player to pin them down with logic.

I'm done ranting now. And please don't start coming at me with this substance vs reason bull, I'm close to voting you for foolishness as is. (Yes, my reason is all over the last few pages. Your being a fool)

now, I see streetz is on I hope he posts.

[Haggis]

Firstly I'm confused by Haggis. There is really no way of providing evidence out side the fact AE is lurking. Regardless it's your vote I just hope you can provide more reasoning to your vote, other than lurking..

If i was a supreme crime boss, would i go drawing attention to my self? Hecks no.

I'd stay quite, just like AE is doing, trying to slip under the radar.

[Sensei kakashi]

I'd stay quite, just like AE is doing, trying to slip under the radar.

Uh... AE has "stayed quiet" in the last three games. And last game FM was the GF(crime boss) and he was one of the most active people and did get a lot of suspicion drawn to him.


sk and grumps: whatever. your opinions are not facts. you are entitled to them.

Actually on the whole "Opprotunistic = desperation" i wouldn't argue a fact but it is factesq. Not all may come from Desperation, but they are all equally baseless, equally worthless, and equaly proof the attacker can't find a good case to use.


DLF: the wording of those statements struck me as odd. my issue with you is that you voted me without discussing the quotes. i find that behavior to be, get ready SK, "oppurtunistic". i.e. you could have discussed the issue with me, but instead you choose to lob a vote onto a wagon. i don't feel i have done anything particularly scummy this game. my vote on grumps was poorly explained, but i also listed a number of reasons which noone responded to.

So your big thing this game is going to be being voted instead of being talked to? What DLF did is not "opprotunistic" it is placeing a vote on someone without stating why and even going so far as to say he won't state why. You have a good attack with this one, don't even bother trying to call it opprotunistic and risk destroying some of it.


Lol. So what are you voting off of on Day One? Logic and Reason? Day One is nothing but gut feelings based on how people act and react. It is also about sniffing out bread crumbs, and I smell Wonder Bread.

ha ha ha... ahhh... That's funny... I'm sorry to suggest day one is about sniffing out bread crumbs is funny enough but to actually think someone would bread crumb a scum role is beyond hysterical. You're always good for a laugh Cash... Then after that a hanging!

[Mad Mat]

Mad Mat, I don't know where i haven't been perfectly clear to you. Please, let me know what your question is since you're like a special kid with a red button at this point. It's cool that you want to keep pressing it over and over for the same unknown reason, but I'm starting to get scared you'll put it in your mouth soon and die or get slobber all over me.
Post 78, as I've said before. The questions are there, very clear.

I'm not even going to comment on your typical insults. If you're town, look where that behavior got you last game.


If it's about your speculation, I'll hold your hand back to your speculation post (http://magicdeckvortex.com/vbforums/showpost.php?p=284243&postcount=55) and merely point out again that all I said about it was that you spoke with an air of authority rather than a point of conjecture.
And all I asked was: point out where. I don't see any strange aura of authority there. None at all. You're in fact the only one who mentioned it. So explain, or it's a null argument, as an argument is meaningless if nobody understands what you're on about.

Plus, you being the player with the largest ego on this forum save perhaps SK, well, you know, pot kettle?

Seriously:


What about this for win cons:
Suggestion.


Scum wins: all town is dead or zombified and there are still scum left.
Town wins: all scum are dead or zombified and there are still townies left.
Zombies win: everyone is a zombie or dead.
Description of what I suggest.


This may or may not be what DLF said, as I'm not really sure what he's exactly saying.
I sort of saw what I was putting forward into DLF's post, but I wasn't sure we were saying the exact things.


The way zombies are made is hard to guess at. It could be that it grows exponentially, with each zombie being capable of making another. This would be an easy win con without some special roles barring their progress. Maybe there's a doc curing zombies, or all zombies die/become non-zombie if their original head dies. Or some players could have immunity to being zombified (once).
It could also be that only the head can zombify, but that does not seem very flavorfull.
Behold the authority of every sentence conditionals?


Again, my gut feeling is that you let loose something only you know about the flavor because you have that role.
And what do we say about gut feelings? They're meaningless. Nobody cares what your nutrient absorption organ feels. They're basically excuses to vote someone without a real reason, as there is no possible way one can discuss a gut feeling.


Again, I have a distinct feeling you are not town. Again, I have a distinct feeling you are not mafia. Again, I have a distinct feeling you possibly breadcrumbed your zombie role in that statement. Again, I think you are an idiot.
Wow, what awesome arguments you got? Start to consider me scum/zombie because your ****ing colon tells you so? I prefer thinking with my brain, thanks.


Lol. So what are you voting off of on Day One? Logic and Reason? Day One is nothing but gut feelings based on how people act and react. It is also about sniffing out bread crumbs, and I smell Wonder Bread.
No, it isn't. The scum tells are often ambigious, but they're scum tells.

And even if it were in some games, it isn't here. Your behavior allows for rational scumminess discussion, for example. I suggest everyone reread Cashew's posts and notice how he avoids replying to points by insults and dodges.

The only problem is that he acted in the same anti-town style last game, where he was cop (and vanilla later). That doesn't make it any less anti-town, however.

Oh, yeah, I asked my appendix and he told me Haggis was scum. So unvote, vote haggis.

:rolleyes:

(If anyone accuses me of hypocrisy on this vote, I think I'll get an aneurysm.)

[Cashew]

Cashew - because you are one of the most vocal members of the group, please enlighten us on who you currently think are the most scummy players and/or the most suspicious characters.

- Grump is altering his game from his normal M.O. drastically. I'd wager he is a power role or mafia. As normally he is very uncompromising with his playstyle.

- hamsandwich seems to have ADD thus far, but proving rather ineffectual. I'm not certain its the scum-tell others read. In fact, I'm more inclined to put him as vanilla town.

- 3nd3r & Mad Mat are hyper aggressive which always gets on my radar because I want to know who is pushing the game and in what direction. I tend to ignore 3nd3r's instincts because they are bad so I wager whoever he is attacking is more likely to be town today than mafia. Does that make either of them scum? Not at this point, but they are worth watching.

- Sensei K is always on my list of people I find scummy. This game he's acting very coy, which does have my interest piqued. Like his slight about scum not bread crumbing when he bread crumbed his mafia role last game. Who knows on him, not to be trusted ever for sure though.

Those seeming to play their own game at this point. Not sure what they are doing.
Haggis, Frychikin, dlf, FM. Kal-el


I'm in favor of killing a lurker as Haggis suggested and seeing what happens overnight.

Unvote
Hit: AE

[Sensei kakashi]

- Sensei K is always on my list of people I find scummy. This game he's acting very coy, which does have my interest piqued. Like his slight about scum not bread crumbing when he bread crumbed his mafia role last game. Who knows on him, not to be trusted ever for sure though.

... I did? When was this>

[Cashew]

I certainly thought you did, made at least one coy nod to not being town, and definitely repeated several times to not trust you. Not outright breadcrumbs, but crumbsies enough. I'd go find them, but that's one massive thread with a lot of bad memories.

[Sensei kakashi]

Those aren't crumbs. Those aren't even close. Like i said, always good for a laugh.

[Streetz]

Seriously, where is the rest of our town and why hasn't AE posted.

MFOS: AE

I think as a town we have reached a point where we need to make a decision and move on in order to further speculate on the actions of the our members.

We should lynch the lurkers and go from there. I will MFOS anyone that doesn't post this weekend.

[hamsandwich]

grump: i'm sorry. i am a fool.

madmat: thank you for at least being consistent.

AE: post or replace.

cashew: i am medicating, should have it under control soon.

[Mad Mat]

Last game AE did the same as he did now and he was scum then. So, yes, either replacement or modkill or contribution now. We don't need no lurkers like that.

ham: what do you mean consistent?

cashew: vote, don't hit. And you're still avoiding.

Also:


grump: i'm sorry. i am a fool.
Epic. Grumph should sig that.

Unvote

[Cashew]

AE is fairly consistently a lurker. I'm in favor of removing him early from this game and seeing what happens overnight.

I don't even know what I'm avoiding at this point, so I guess I'll continue to avoid it. I answered your questions in 78 at least once if not two or three times now.

Thanks for the hit advise, I didn't even realize I did it.

Vote: AE

[Streetz]

ThunderHog - Can you please get a vote total? Thanks.

[hamsandwich]

ham: what do you mean consistent?

i felt your vote on haggis was consistent with your reasoning for your vote on me. i.e. haggis voted with little substance. i was going to be really annoyed if noone noticed that. if you are voting for some other reason then you should explain more.



]Epic. Grumph should sig that.

no. he should not. i do not appreciate the manner in which grump makes his point, but i do understand the basic jist of what he is saying. i need to play to my win condition and it is very easy to fall into the trap of thinking you are right when, in reality, your behavior is being percieved completely opposite of what you intend. i thought i had a good point, but i was obviously wrong. grump is also not entirely correct, i.e. he seems to dismiss portions of my argument which do hold water, however, i see little to gain in continuing an argument where noone seems to agree to my basic premise.

[ThunderHog]

Sure thing boss!

Official Vote Count
1x Grumpherys (Kal-El)
2x hamsandwich (devious little fox, 3nd3r)
3x AlasterEisaroh (Haggis, Streetz, Cashew)

8x Not Voting (Mad Mat, Sensei kakashi, AlasterEisaroh, Tekkactus, Freind Mairsil, hamsandwich, FrycHiKn, Grumpherys)

With 14 alive, it takes 8 votes to lynch!

[Devious little fox]

unvote

i am definitely in favor of taking ae out as it will take out problems down the road.

vote AE

[Friend Mairsil]

eh i dont feel like trying to get him to post. i swear its like every game he does this. now i know i said i didnt want to do this, but even ive seen him around and im barely on anymore. so that says tons to me.

VOTE : AE

[Grumpherys]

grump: i'm sorry. i am a fool.
I'm still skeptical but, at first glance this seems very sarcastic... I kind of stared at this comment for a moment in disbelief.

Ahem,
I'm sorry for coming across as rude there, Ham. I just saw earlier that your other points while valid didn't help so I Ignored them for a while. When I saw the argument go no where I just got fed up. I appreciate your leniency in my honest opinion that took guts to just drop it and admit defeat even if your opinion still holds.
Regardless I cannot allow myself to fall to a pity plea. I would suggest not doing it again (holding a fruitless argument). Other wise I would hope that MM would also take this moment to see his arguments greatest flaw. Pointlessness.

Now for my main concern. AE.
I must say, while there isn't a single word I could use to defend him with, I should suggest we wait to see if he has picked up his prod. Being on means nothing unless he remembers he's playing. Even if he only says one thing and then drops off again you could at lest get some info from it. As is however, I would refrain from lynching the non active lurker. Much rather an active lurker. Some one that comes on to say things but has no "substance" to the words spoken. My eyes personally go to Haggis.

On a side note, if a man in a kilt is a man and a half, would it then take 12 votes (8+1/2) to lynch Haggis if he is in a kilt?

More seriously though, active lurkers give far more information, than a non active one. Or is my opinion on this irrelevant and letting free kills to the mafia be good.

[AlasterEisaroh]

Why are all of you so concerned about me, not posting? You would think you'd get it through your skulls by now that I like to keep quite in these games. does it hurt anyone? does it help anyone? Maybe it does maybe it doesn't, but the fact remains that I'd rather watch then post if I have something to say I'll say it. I don't know why I have to say this each game. I mean you all (save for the new players) should know that I do this. This is how I play.

Lastly.

I'm Claire Redfield (I may have spelt that wrong, but you should know who I mean).

[FrycHiKn]

I won't vote for AE til he explain... And yes, I played like AE but I got heat easily, need to ask something... Is Lurker automatically means Mafia?


How did that worked before, eh?

[Mad Mat]

i felt your vote on haggis was consistent with your reasoning for your vote on me. i.e. haggis voted with little substance. i was going to be really annoyed if noone noticed that. if you are voting for some other reason then you should explain more.
The main reason I voted him was to show how ridiculous "gut feeling" votes are.

His vote actually had a reason (lurkervote), though I admit it was phrased in a very odd way.


Why are all of you so concerned about me, not posting?
Because that means you are not playing the game.


You would think you'd get it through your skulls by now that I like to keep quite in these games. does it hurt anyone?
Yes, town.


does it help anyone?
Yes, scum.

And why do you claim, with nobody asking for it and not really in danger of getting lynched (you're at -3)?

[AlasterEisaroh]

Because that means you are not playing the game.

I'm playing the the game my way, if you don't count it as playing the game, then too bad for you.


Yes, town.

Oh yes I'm hurting town SO MUCH by not posting, because none the idiotic thing that rest of you are doing aren't hurting town just as much.


Yes, scum.

Oh yes a Pro-town vote helps Scum.


And why do you claim, with nobody asking for it and not really in danger of getting lynched (you're at -3)?

So you will all leave me the heck alone.

I'm sick or all the crying about me not posting, it rather pathetic. I say go ahead, and vote me off, you'll only be helping Scum, and possibly Zombie win.

[Tekkactus]

Rereading nao

[Grumpherys]

Well that does it. Rather than helping by scum hunting AE thinks it best to play in a stare blankly out at space until I feel like posting manner, or at lest that's how it looks.

I'm doing this to show the rest of you (new players and other lurkers) I don't like this format of play because it helps scum in so many ways.

1. some one they have nothing to worry about.
2. it's a possible mafia hiding as a lurker.
3. Gives the town nothing as far as contribution.
4. sometimes gives the scum a free kill.

some other reasons to vote him.

1. You did the opposite of what we suggested. Not to claim. I actually said not to long ago to prevent AE and new players from doing it.
2. States that he will continue to lurk. (due to play style)
3. Claims that, voting him will only help mafia, we have no way of knowing the truth in this because hes lurking.
Now 4 is one I fear the most but his style leaves it open to guess work and nothing else. (Note: This vote is included with reason)
Vote: AE

I was hoping he'd have a reason other than his play style. Your play style, AE, means little to nothing to us. It leaves town out in the dark and with out a flash light.

So in other words, I'm not letting lurkers lurk. Contribute or die. IF you think you can get away with threatening to lurk by saying
go ahead, and vote me off, you'll only be helping Scum, and possibly Zombie win.
think again.

The passive aggressive from me is over for you AE, now kindly die.

[Grumpherys]

EBWOP: This goes to Tekk and Fry also. Don't lurk.

[AlasterEisaroh]

I think it's funny that Ryu can do that same damn thing as me in games, and you all leave him alone. Hypocrites much.

Unless I some how survive to Day 2, this will be my last post this game.

So when I come up Town I hope you all learn to let me do what I do in Mafia games.

[hamsandwich]

would you mind a full claim? i.e. are you vanilla town?

cashew's earlier alignment speculation places your character as a good mason candidate and also as town. do you mind expounding?

[FrycHiKn]

So AE... Are you going to kill yourself or going for a code of silence kinda stuff?

[Tekkactus]

I think it's funny that Ryu can do that same damn thing as me in games, and you all leave him alone. Hypocrites much.

Unless I some how survive to Day 2, this will be my last post this game.

So when I come up Town I hope you all learn to let me do what I do in Mafia games.

First off, Ryu contributes. Second, I don't think it's us who need to learn. Every game you lurk. Every game you piss us off. Every game you die. Who's the one who needs to make a change, exactly?

Anyway, after my reread I've come to the following conclusions:

SK and Cashew are typical SK and Cashew. I did notice some subtle changes in SK's behavior, though; he's being less confrontational than normal. Unfortunately, I've never noticed any sort of trend to his play so this basically means nothing to me right now.

Grump is difficult to read because he's not Grump.

DLF's brain is made of cotton swabs and silly putty.

Haggis and Kal-El need to contribute more.

3nd3r is being a lot more aggressive than I've seen in the past, which gives me some pause.

More to come, need to run off to a birthday dinner!

[Cashew]

Do I believe AE's claim about being Clare Redfield? Actually yes, that's a major role and easily counter-claimable.

Do I believe AE is town? If he's Clare Redfield, I certainly do.

Do I believe he should stay in the game already stating he'd never post again? No.

A lot of people put out the theory that this is a cult game. If it is, there is no better cult member target than a silent lurker town. Regardless, a non-participating town is well dead weight. He won't help town in votes, he won't help town by sharing anything about his results if he has a power. He just won't help. And no matter what he says, that does hurt.

I'm not sure why he chose to blow up and have the temper tantrum of the century over our usual complaint of his usual lurking. I'm not sure why he half-claimed. I'm not sure why he already went into "I will never post again mode." I'm not sure he'll actually never post again.

I am sure, I'd like to see him out of the game. It hurts to kill a town, but on day one it's an acceptable loss and in this case, I doubt we'll feel the hurt at all. I am sure the best way AE can help the town is if we use him as a sacrifice so we can get the vital information we need from Night One to make more logical conjectures on the game.

I would rather kill a scum, but I would rather kill a known AE town non-participator than even facing the slightest chance of killing a participating town member.

So I'm voting for AE today.

I am not changing my vote unless he starts posting or someone comes out and claims mafia. To me it's that simple.

[Devious little fox]

i think saying he is clair redfield is a major factor being overlooked. i would say it is almost certain that she is in this game plus she is a major character so she probly has a power role. this means that it is possible to know if he is lying. i think it is also a good fake claim because the real clair wouldn't claim this early ( i would hope not atleast if she is power). anyway i lost track of where i was going but he also said he wouldn't post so thats a gotta go no matter his role in my book.

[Devious little fox]

just for clarification cashews post was not there when i started writing (but we pretty much agree on the same things).

[Mad Mat]

Post that you'll contribute (and do so, by giving your thoughts on what is currently happening for example) within the next 24 hours or you have my vote, AE. There is no point leaving you alive if you refuse to play the game, which is based on posting, hence proudly lurking is not playing the game.

[hamsandwich]

so, just to clarify:

cashew: you want to lynch a player you believe to have a "major" and "easily counterclaimable", "town" role?


mad mat and DLF agree with this? i understand if you wouldn't want a counterclaim this early, but seriously, can't we pick another lurker?

FoS: Cashew for your blatant willingness to lynch a pro town power role, and for
this:

I'm not sure why he chose to blow up and have the temper tantrum of the century

^^ AE's reaction was hardly the "tantrum of the century" and i believe that magnifying a reaction in a negative manner is a scum tactic.

we have no proof of AE's alignment, but if his role is so easily confirmed as has been mentioned, perhaps we should try a bit harder on day 1.

[Mad Mat]

I don't want to lynch him per se. I want him to contribute to this game. To play it. Mafia does not consist of night actions only, in fact the most important and fun part is the day (well, unless you're scum and have really pleasant night discussions). Right now, he's lurking and proud of it. He's like the soccer kid who's on your team but just stands there in the middle and pretends the ball doesn't exist.

Of course, a better course of action would be if TH forced him to contributingly post at least once every two days. Or replace him with an actual player. Someone who says "deal with it *****es, I'm out for the day" does not deserve to be in this game.

[hamsandwich]

i understand, however, isn't a name claim a pretty significant contribution? i don't think tunneling on AE at this point is going to help. should he suck it up and post more? of course. should we believe his claim? probably not, but without a counterclaim it is a pretty significant piece of info. should we lynch him? not without a counterclaim. at this point i am more concerned with cashew. this latest attack seemed embellished.

[Cashew]

@hamsandwich:

Would you rather us lynch you? It's a high possibility today. I don't know what you are, and am saying that I would rather kill AE if he's going to behave that way than even fathom the chance of killing an actual contributing town. AE could be the holy pope almighty sent to save us us from the zombie Satan with the ability to shoot lightning bolts from his eyes and fireballs from his arse, but I doubt he's going to help us if he continues to behave the way he is.

So again, unless someone stands up and says "I'm mafia" or AE changes the way he plays (and doesn't just say he is going to change it). I'm voting to off him today, and not risking the chance of taking out a helpful town.

Maybe it is an over-reaction, because I'm over with him doing this every game.

[3nd3r]

I hate to be the ass who asks this but why do we keep letting him sign up for these games when we know he won't contribute or post more than once a week or two??? Every game I end up voting to kill him or replace him.

Unvote

Vote: AE

yours isn't a play style around here, it's the lack of one.

@Ham I'll be back to you once I get the useless person gone.

[Cashew]

FYI:
By my count:
7x AlasterEisaroh (Haggis, Streetz, Cashew, Devious Little Fox, Friend Marisil, Grumpherys, 3nd3r)

1 more vote on him is needed for a lynch.

Sometimes when we get to this range I find myself having second thoughts about my vote as their importance is high. Today, I have no second thoughts.

[Tekkactus]

If nothing else AE's sacrifice will provide us with some interesting data.

[Sensei kakashi]

SK and Cashew are typical SK and Cashew. I did notice some subtle changes in SK's behavior, though; he's being less confrontational than normal. Unfortunately, I've never noticed any sort of trend to his play so this basically means nothing to me right now.

Yeah I've lost my ability to post every 30 min. With my decrease in my ability to post as often I lose a lot of the time and posts I used to devote to cases and attacks in previous games. If I was still as active as I have been in the past I would be as "confrentational" as you seem to call it as ever.


Do I believe AE's claim about being Clare Redfield? Actually yes, that's a major role and easily counter-claimable.

The only question on his claim from me right now is why he felt he spelled the name wrong. I mean if it is his role shouldn't it be right there in the PM? kinda had to believe his claim if he feels he hasn't even spelled the name right. But of course if it is a fake claim the same applies. He shouldn't fakeclaim without the name right there as well so it's kinda a moot point the more I think about it.

And uh, I'm not really into lynching a claim we mostly all accept as a likely town role simply off a playstyle.

[Cashew]

Even though his play style hurts town? What if he was only voting for people he knew to be town or only voting for himself? At what point does the play style supersede anything the role offers?

The following is an exact illustration of how AE's style hurts town.
While he bolsters town's numbers, he also makes it harder to get a lynch. Think about it this way, mafia should want him in the game, the whole game. He is beneficial to them by providing a non-consequential buffer.

Let's fast forward to a very hypothetical situation that is used to illustrate his effect at it's most potent level. 3 mafia left 4 town left. One town is AE.

Because AE is not voting or even playing, the town can never get the 4th vote they need on a mafia member. All mafia has to do is wait for a single town player to vote for a townie then the mafia follow suit and the day is over.

Yes it's a far stretched scenario. However, I use it to simply indicate that his self-stated non-participation is a detriment to town, not mafia. Maybe you'd rather gamble on trying to find scum on day one, but I say cut our losses. Then again, maybe you want him in the game because you are experienced enough to know that lurkers are good cattle and worth keeping around.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe there are scenarios where cattle town are good for the town. I can't think of a single one though.

As far as I'm concerned, town has two things they can use to win. Their brain and their vote. If they aren't going to use both, mafia is going to win no matter what.

[Grumpherys]

Honestly when Cashew said he believes the claim due to the easily counter claimable part, I believe that AE isn't what he claims. Two reasons.
1. AE seems like the kind of player that relies on his claim as town to keep him alive to no limitation. Meaning a pro town character would almost certainly be a shield for him to hide behind. If it gets counter claimed then that's information for scum, which to him would be worth the loss in mafia numbers.
2. He seems desperate, and didn't know what kind of role would be in for that name claim. What has he got to lose? he's closer and closer to a lynch.

The only other thing that I'm curious about is Hams wanting a counter claim... if AE does turn out to be scum my suspicion finger goes back to Ham.

I'd like to bring up how Tekk adds something after I address him, and it even goes as far as to say an ironic mention about lurking.

[hamsandwich]

vote: cashew

what guarantee do we have that AE is going to continue this style of play past day 1?

grumps: yes, i must be scum for not wanting to lynch a what has been described as an uncounterclaimed, extremely likely town power role on day 1. [/sarcasm] i can think of a much better place for your suspicion finger...

listen to yourselves. since when is cashew so unimaginative and dumb that he can't foresee more than one scenario for AE's future in this game.

what about Kal-el, haggis, FM, and Streetz? what sets AE apart?



he's playing us.

[hamsandwich]

ebwop: "he's playing us" refers to cashew.

[Cashew]

LOL at the people trying to distance themselves from the lynch. Definitely going to be looking into Tekk, SK, and ham tomorrow.


what guarantee do we have that AE is going to continue this style of play past day 1?

Even more LOL at hamsandwich. He knows full well that AE will not change. Hell want proof, look at every single game he's been in. Then read this post from this game:


So when I come up Town I hope you all learn to let me do what I do in Mafia games.

Ham do you seriously think AE is ever going to contribute? He never does. Every game we get mad and almost vote him off several times. I'm not compromising this game, he's my vote until he changes his style or he or me is out of the game.


listen to yourselves. since when is cashew so unimaginative and dumb that he can't foresee more than one scenario for AE's future in this game.

I only forsee death for AE.

And that scenario wasn't just for AE, it was for any person who outright refuses to play as town. Lurking town doesn't help, it does hurt and I for one am dedicated to removing the cancer. If it means I have put myself in the spotlight for opportunist attacks, I sure will. You know I'm not one to back down.


Kal-el, haggis, FM, and Streetz?

They participate. Not as much as the people who troll, but they do actively try to participate. If you think by any means they are on the same level as AE you are sadly mistaken. Even DLF posting a random sentence of gibberish every other day contributes more to town and game than AE does.

I'm curious to see if AE will post again or if Mad Mat will keep his word and knock him out if no one unvotes.

[hamsandwich]

you forget that i have been in one game of mafia on this site prior to this one. i don't know AE's meta as the last game he was in he replaced out.


LOL at the people trying to distance themselves from the lynch. Definitely going to be looking into Tekk, SK, and ham tomorrow.

of course you are, because you know you will be here. you are mafia.

can we lynch him now?

[Cashew]

LOL. Was that supposed to be a compelling post or an actual argument? I've seen drunken frat boys with more verbal acuity than you've put forth in this game.

No wonder so many people have had issues with you in such a little time.

[Mad Mat]

I'm curious to see if AE will post again or if Mad Mat will keep his word and knock him out if no one unvotes.
I'm not sure if he has come online between that post and this one (the forum doesn't show last activity).

I actually really dislike wasting a lynch on him. It'd be much better if he was just replaced. If he is town, lynching him is a god-given move for scum day 1. They get a free townie lynch and can find an excuse in lurkerlynch. That is one of the major reasons lurkers are always anti-town players: if they're town, scum can easily argue voting them; if they're scum, it's hard to find out due to their lack of posts.

But if replacing isn't possible, better lynch him today than letting him screw the game up even more later.

I don't want to speedlynch this either. No need to rush it, in particular with all those low-contributers out there.

[Friend Mairsil]

hey hey hey i contribute plenty, and what was this about me being the same as AE in lurkiness? who said that *goes back and checks* oh look at that it was Ham. so let me get this strait you cant tell the difference between me and AE, or even streetz for that matter? ok, well, let me be of service and help you understand a wee bit.

AE = Strait up lurks/doesnt post unless he has something to say(which in my opinion makes him seem devoid of speech or thought by his lack of saying anything)/always goes into suicide mode(in two game has voted for himself because he refused to stop lurking).
All of this things make him a perfect asset for scum. in fact when i was scum i would normally push to keep him alive, or go with the flow and lynch him because no one would ever give it a second thought.

now things that differentiate me from AE
FM = Doesnt post much in day 1, but does post. (i already have about 10 posts today. which is far more than what AE has)/does troll when he has continuous access to to a computer(as shown in previous games)/will scum hunt and provide thoughts on any situation even if nothing strikes me as something worth saying(in one of my last posts i have shown that i do just this)/asks tons of questions.

all of this means that i contribute and participate. while AE by defintion doesnt. though whats really getting me is why your defending him so strongly. could it be that you don't want to see your scum buddy die, or could it be that you want to be able to say "I told you so", thus making yourself out to be a helpful townie when in fact your scum? though you'll probly say its because of the role name he threw out, but as history has taught us ; anyone who role claims day one is doomed to death by towns hand. i mean seriously, go look at all of the first days of past mafia games, and tell me who claimed day 1 and lived beyond the day with town backing him and not attacking him. go ahead ill wait. *pulls out a newspaper and starts to read the comics. giggles to self periodically* oh your back. so what did you find. oh really no one? now do you see my point. his claim means nothing, because it wasnt needed. just like cashew's claim last game. it wasnt needed and it will never be accepted unless verified by a confirmed town power role. sadly i dont see him living long enough for this to happen. so yeah...why are you defending him so strongly? Is there some information that you have that we dont?

[Tekkactus]

LOL at the people trying to distance themselves from the lynch. Definitely going to be looking into Tekk, SK, and ham tomorrow.

Feel free, pal.

[Cashew]

I'm not sure if he has come online between that post and this one (the forum doesn't show last activity).

I saw him online last night at least four times. I was checking fairly frequently as I sat here doing other stuff. Agree with you whole-heartedly on your read on lurkers. I just have sat here with him doing this every game to the point where I'm tired of it.

He will answer prods. He is an active lurker. Don't mistake him for a regular lurker. He reads the thread everyday. He just chooses to lurk despite everyone hating it.

I'd rather get it over with and see what happens overnight. Regardless of a the speed, I'm not changing my vote from AE unless I'm 100% positive it's going on to scum.

[hamsandwich]

FM: your posting has been entriely devoid of scumhunting. oh, wait, you attacked me for not wanting to lynch an uncounterlcaimed, possible town power role on day 1. your intuition is truly amazing.


AE is lurking. maybe he has his reasons. i don't think a meta lynch is the way to go. i think its poor form to lynch a lurker without even trying to find real scum. but hey, this is MDV, and poor form seems to be SOP.

vote: AE


let's just go ahead and see who's right, shall we?

[Devious little fox]

@mad mat: AE wont get replaced as he is technically not doing anything "wrong" so as far as that going down, it wont.

i can definitely see votes pilling up on ham tomorrow (from myself included) from the way he is connecting himself to AE (not in a good way) pretty much regardless of how AE turns up (i think). So just a heads up to stay away from rot.

[Tekkactus]

I'd like to bring up how Tekk adds something after I address him, and it even goes as far as to say an ironic mention about lurking.

Grump. Grump buddy, really? I fell behind in the game, so I had to do a reread. Your comments don't influence my actions. Ever.

[Tekkactus]

Annnnd there's the hammer.

[Devious little fox]

ang guess who it's from :) a desperation act to distance himself from his partner...we will see.

[hamsandwich]

i am quite curious. i really love all of the players who seem to be planning out there actions for day 2. a) we have no idea if AE was telling the truth. b) we have no idea how many nk's there will be c) we are entirely clueless on the zombie front. d) you people people have no idea who the f#$k i am.

[AlasterEisaroh]

Well I'm dead so here is a post before TH makes it official.

I'm Claire Redfield, Town, with a night action that lets me look for Chris Redfield if I find him something happens. I don't know what, as TH would have to tell me when I find him. I'm going to guess Claire, and Chris become Masons.

[hamsandwich]

ang guess who it's from :) a desperation act to distance himself from his partner...we will see.

despair: to lose, give up, or be without hope (often fol. by of): to despair of humanity.

i don't have a partner. i don't need one.

[hamsandwich]

wow, i was right.

[Tekkactus]

That's not the hammer. Ham never unvoted. Screw-up or epic bluff?

[Friend Mairsil]

FM: your posting has been entriely devoid of scumhunting. oh, wait, you attacked me for not wanting to lynch an uncounterlcaimed, possible town power role on day 1. your intuition is truly amazing.
your damn right it doesn't. i look for play patterns in day one, as well as motives and interactions, or lack there of. finding actual scum day one is not a priority when i play. its just not my style, and becase we already have enough people doing just that. oh and i didnt attack you per se, i mearly stated my thinking, and asked you a few simple questions. questions that you anwsered with a vote on AE. strange kinda. instead of telling me why your defending him you just throw him into the fire. best burn the evidence, huh?

now as for my intuition. ill just reply with "isnt it" :p

[hamsandwich]

he was town, how exactly did i "burn the evidence"?

so we have plenty of people scumhunting according to you, but instead of listening to them you decide to lynch AE based on what, meta and lurking? even though he claimed a town role that went unclaimed?

you're a genius.

tekk: a screw up, did i need to unvote? cause if not then we have a reprieve it seems...

[Devious little fox]

unvote i believe him now

vot ham

[Devious little fox]

edit due to me not wanting to get ninja'd by ham dropping the official hammer. now i just hope that he hasn't spilled is role in a manner that gets him killed ( i dont really know the lines of no return). anyway i think his role fits perfectly into the game and he already broke the he will not post again rule so the way i see it he is 99.9 percent town with a way to find other town later in the game if we need numbers.

[Friend Mairsil]

he was town, how exactly did i "burn the evidence"?

your the hammer on a person you were trying to defend. that to me that seems like burning :D


so we have plenty of people scumhunting according to you, but instead of listening to them you decide to lynch AE based on what, meta and lurking?
based on my own thoughts and opinions. oh and who should i listen to again, because i was fairly sure i was allowed to make my own decisions?


even though he claimed a town role that went unclaimed?
being uncountered never stopped me before. i need to be convinced of someones role before i accept it. just ask Cashew. though let me ask you a question: would mafia ever false claim?


you're a genius
you know it :D

[hamsandwich]

edit due to me not wanting to get ninja'd by ham dropping the official hammer. now i just hope that he hasn't spilled is role in a manner that gets him killed ( i dont really know the lines of no return). anyway i think his role fits perfectly into the game and he already broke the he will not post again rule so the way i see it he is 99.9 percent town with a way to find other town later in the game if we need numbers.


if ham wanted to drop the official hammer, don't you think he would have done so when tekk pointed it out?

care to explain why you think i am scum?

FM: if AE flipped scum then i would be "burning" the evidence, but with the situation as it is, do you think i was being sincere?

so i guess my vote is still on cashew and i see no reason to move it.

DLF: i am not the best lynch for day 1. you should be trying harder. read through past games. in my eight games of experience, though the hammer is suspicious, they are rarely scum on day 1.

[Sensei kakashi]

Even though his play style hurts town? What if he was only voting for people he knew to be town or only voting for himself? At what point does the play style supersede anything the role offers?

Cash, last I checked he wasn't only voting for people he knew to be town or only voting for himself. You are now actually justifying your vote on him with hypotheticals of things he isn't doing?

I don't actually care about his playstyle right this second. He claimed, his claim is almost universally accepted, that means his wagon should "decrease" regardless of any othr factor. instead it actually "increased." this abnormality seems odd to me.


Because AE is not voting or even playing, the town can never get the 4th vote they need on a mafia member. All mafia has to do is wait for a single town player to vote for a townie then the mafia follow suit and the day is over.

Now you're pulling facts out of your ass. Just becuase he is lurking doesn't mean he won't vote. So I think saying "town can never yada yada" is a misrepresentation. Go preach your snake oil somewhere else.


Yes it's a far stretched scenario. However, I use it to simply indicate that his self-stated non-participation is a detriment to town, not mafia. Maybe you'd rather gamble on trying to find scum on day one, but I say cut our losses. Then again, maybe you want him in the game because you are experienced enough to know that lurkers are good cattle and worth keeping around.

First off he is a detrement to the game, not the town. He should be replaced not lynched ESPECIALLY when every idiot from here to austia-freaking-kangaroo believes his claim.

Second off if you are actually so in need of justification of your vote you need to slander me in order to get it you and the rest of the town are in need of a big wake up call.


As far as I'm concerned, town has two things they can use to win. Their brain and their vote. If they aren't going to use both, mafia is going to win no matter what.

Says the pro-scum cop and the suicidal 999 puncher. Take your hypocritial BS to your nearest bridge please. And try not to hold up traffic. thanks!


what guarantee do we have that AE is going to continue this style of play past day 1?

Becuase he's AE. unless under constant pressure he will lurk forever. But I mean the same applies to Fry. His track record hasn't been all that great either. The point is he has claimed, people believe him, people have even called him town while voting him. He should not be lyched. His wagon is so obvious a scum run expedition it's not even close to not being funny. I'd give him 10 to 1 odds of being mafia and you'd have to pay me to place a bet on him being town. Granted I suppose being cultis still a possibility bu does anyone see any evidence of that at all? No?


listen to yourselves. since when is cashew so unimaginative and dumb that he can't foresee more than one scenario for AE's future in this game.

Listen to ourselves? What the hell does that mean? If I hold me to my ear can I hear the ocean? And Cashew is trying to justify voting AE in every possibel way he can becuase he knows voting him is BS after an acceptable claim, regardless of his lurking.


LOL at the people trying to distance themselves from the lynch. Definitely going to be looking into Tekk, SK, and ham tomorrow.

Trying to distance ourselves from the lynch of a more or less accepted town claim? hmmm... Yeah... Die scum die.

Unvote:, Vote: Cashew


LOL. Was that supposed to be a compelling post or an actual argument? I've seen drunken frat boys with more verbal acuity than you've put forth in this game.

No wonder so many people have had issues with you in such a little time.

Classic Cashew. When you are unable to rack up an actual argument you resort to the age old bullying tact. Well if you want a case here's where we can start. Um, pushing the lynch of someone you yourself are calling town. Trying to set up future lynches by, heres the kicker, casting suspicion on the people who DON'T want to lynch people they think are town. i think that's enough for now to justify my vote. So Chewie, I suppose it's that time again isn't it.


AE is lurking. maybe he has his reasons. i don't think a meta lynch is the way to go. i think its poor form to lynch a lurker without even trying to find real scum. but hey, this is MDV, and poor form seems to be SOP.

vote: AE


let's just go ahead and see who's right, shall we?

... Ham... I'm really starting to dislike you... :P


@mad mat: AE wont get replaced as he is technically not doing anything "wrong" so as far as that going down, it wont.

Uh no, if 13 players say "Mod replace AE" Th pretty much has to do it. Think about it, it's TH's job to keep this game going. Either he replaces 1 person, or he repalces 13. It's his call. Which do you think he'll choose?

[Sensei kakashi]

That's not the hammer. Ham never unvoted. Screw-up or epic bluff?

Yeah you find me where TH ever says he HAS to unvote and I'll continue with the day.


edit due to me not wanting to get ninja'd by ham dropping the official hammer. now i just hope that he hasn't spilled is role in a manner that gets him killed ( i dont really know the lines of no return). anyway i think his role fits perfectly into the game and he already broke the he will not post again rule so the way i see it he is 99.9 percent town with a way to find other town later in the game if we need numbers.

HA HA HA HA....
AE: I'm Clair!
DLF: BS vote: AE
AE: seriously I am
DLF: i believe him now! Unvote:

And you were ninja'd, without a hammer.


your the hammer on a person you were trying to defend. that to me that seems like burning

Burning?

If you mean bussing explain to me how it works? He defends him partner and hammers him and what, expects to get away with it? You and me were scum with Ham, did he seem like that type of moron to you?


being uncountered never stopped me before. i need to be convinced of someones role before i accept it. just ask Cashew. though let me ask you a question: would mafia ever false claim?

Right because that rhetorical question makes everything better! Look, the point isn't he claimed and went uncounterclaimed, the point is he claimed and the people pushing his lynch CALLED HIM TOWN. So regardless of whether you believe his claim or not why do you not find it odd others voting along side you believe his claim and call him town?

[Devious little fox]

sorry bout that got cut off mind post and had to leave for a second. anyway i dont think that ae is the best lynch as he is able to guarantee town later in the game (if you believe that chris is town) and he already broke his no post rule so i am sure he will do it again. i mean it is a game and he is playing it to win so like he said he would post if he had something to say which at this moment is good enough for me. now my vote moved back to ham because i have not been vibing right with him all day and now this drama with the hammer saying he didn't know to unvote but he wants me to looik at his last 8 games and he wanted to but not wanted to hammer and now his vote is back on cashew? I DONT LIKE IT. anyway i think we should reavaluate AE's benifit for staying here i mean he can even varify another power role in chris ifhe is forced to claim. plus if we make his role seem really good then maybe mafia will take him out for us :)

[Friend Mairsil]

FM: if AE flipped scum then i would be "burning" the evidence, but with the situation as it is, do you think i was being sincere?

his role hasnt been revealed, its been claimed. TH must say who he is before he can be considered a flipped town. also you have failed to anwser any of my questions. is there any reason for this?

[Sensei kakashi]

What is this no post rule and where can I find it's wiki page?

Secondly he hasn't changed his posting style at all and you go from wanting to lynch him for being al urker to suddenly thinking he is playing to win? Wow...

And you haven't been vibing right with Ham all day? What are you just incapable of finding good reasons to vote people or what?

[Cashew]

I'm curious if not unvoting will prevent the hammer from occuring. That's more of a formality, and not an epic-fail as Tekk put it.

Finally the SK I know and loathe has come to fruition and I can sleep at ease. Eager to see how much more fun is had while I slumber.

[Sensei kakashi]

his role hasnt been revealed, its been claimed. TH must say who he is before he can be considered a flipped town. also you have failed to anwser any of my questions. is there any reason for this?

Maybe because you didn't answer his? No I suppose he would need to see the future first...

[hamsandwich]

FM: sorry, hard to tell the difference between rhetorical and not. could you please restate the question you would like answered? preferably in a 1) 2) 3) type format.

[Sensei kakashi]

Finally the SK I know and loathe has come to fruition and I can sleep at ease. Eager to see how much more fun is had while I slumber.

sure you can, once I put you in the ground... again...

[Devious little fox]

ok extremly bad choice of words, i ment that he is playing the game so that i am sure he wants to win. as far as ham goes i dont like what he has been doing (good enough reason to have my vote at this time, absolutely). feelings run day 1 pretty much and my feelings told me AE was fake claiming power to be left alone then he gave detail (which could be fake) and they fit in so well with the flavor that it has convinced me otherwise, whats wrong with that?

[Friend Mairsil]

EBWOP:

If you mean bussing explain to me how it works? He defends him partner and hammers him and what, expects to get away with it? You and me were scum with Ham, did he seem like that type of moron to you?

no, i really dont think he's his partner. in fact im starting to think Ham is scum. the way i see it is like this:
Ham (scum) tries to defend a known townie. he does this to gain a little sway over the crowd. then as he see whats going down reverses what he was doing as the role name would suggest a power role. i never called him a moron, i think. though i do think he would do the exact same thin i would in his situation.


the point is he claimed and the people pushing his lynch CALLED HIM TOWN. So regardless of whether you believe his claim or not why do you not find it odd others voting along side you believe his claim and call him town?
i do find it odd, but cant do anything about it until i see N1 results. i would change my vote to ham or DLF, but...let me ask: did Ham drop the hammer or was that vote not valid.

[Devious little fox]

i for 1 vote that 1 must unvote before they change as it is the way i have always played and it adds to what can happen as we have just seen.

[hamsandwich]

FM: what "sway" was i gaining over the crowd? i've been getting torn up from all directions since my first vote.

[Friend Mairsil]

Maybe because you didn't answer his?
he never asked any ;)



FM: sorry, hard to tell the difference between rhetorical and not. could you please restate the question you would like answered? preferably in a 1) 2) 3) type format.

the only real question i want anwsered is why defend AE? it doesnt make sense in my eyes. i can see defending him to attack others, but it really doesnt seem to be the case here. no instead it seems like your just holding the shield for him, as opposed to blocking while holding a sword. if you get what i mean.

[Friend Mairsil]

EBWOP:


FM: what "sway" was i gaining over the crowd? i've been getting torn up from all directions since my first vote.
i never said it worked ;)

[hamsandwich]

he claimed a town role which, according to his main detractor, was a possible power role. noone counterclaimed. the logic for lynching him was and is faulty. why would i not defend him? especially when taking into consideration all of cashew's bs which i have previously pointed out.

[hamsandwich]

EBWOP:

i never said it worked ;)


yes but you are implying that i am not so smart. did it not seem to you that i was on my way to being lynched? why on earth would i further incriminate myself with a chainsaw defense. you are giving me little credit. last game i went all of day1 without giving any links to scum partners. my killer admitted later that he thought i was town. i see your point, but it is too contrived. i am not as poor a player as some are trying to make me out to be.

[Friend Mairsil]

ok, thats all i wanted. well almost. did the hammer drop? if not, then id like to change my vote to DLF. i wanna save cashew for day 2

[Mad Mat]

So, TH, is he dead or not?

I'm puzzled about one thing: why are people attacking others because they're against voting AE? AE is a highly irritating mafia sign-upper (he doesn't really play), but his claim certainly warrants more than a speedlynch.

I have no idea why ham thought it was a good plan to hammer him, considering his mindset, though.

[Sensei kakashi]

ok extremly bad choice of words, i ment that he is playing the game so that i am sure he wants to win. as far as ham goes i dont like what he has been doing (good enough reason to have my vote at this time, absolutely). feelings run day 1 pretty much and my feelings told me AE was fake claiming power to be left alone then he gave detail (which could be fake) and they fit in so well with the flavor that it has convinced me otherwise, whats wrong with that?

What made you think he was fakeclaiming? The fact he used a name that might have been in this game or was it his tone? Or do you just distrust anyone who claims with however many votes he had on him? And um, the whole point of fakeclaims is to fit with the flavor... No idiot claims Vash the Stampede in RE mafia or something like that. And I doubt anyone fakeclaiming Claire would say her ability was to find Forrest or something like that.


no, i really dont think he's his partner. in fact im starting to think Ham is scum. the way i see it is like this:
Ham (scum) tries to defend a known townie. he does this to gain a little sway over the crowd. then as he see whats going down reverses what he was doing as the role name would suggest a power role. i never called him a moron, i think. though i do think he would do the exact same thin i would in his situation.

Does he now? He does it for sway? interesting go on. Power role you say? Go on. I see. So you have intimate knowledge of what Ham was planning? No? So this is all speculation? Ok that's fair. It's every town's right to speculate on what he sees and why it might have happened. Let me ask you this, what evience is there that ham is more likely scum then town right now? His quick vote change? He wanted Cashew lynched, easiest way would be to finish off AE, see he is town, and go after Cashew tomorrow. Is it the "best" strategy for town? No. But it's just as likely as you're theory with just as much evidence.

He tried to gain sway? Why can't he be town and simply believe AE is town? Why can't he believe AE's calim? Why can't he be like me and just plain ol' recognise the BS being pushed against AE? Would you say I'm defending AE? All I'm trying to do is prove how full of S*** you and Cashew and anyone else who was or is voting AE is. Doesn't half yoru theory about Ham applie to me as well? So me and ham are both scum or do you like selective suspicion?


i do find it odd, but cant do anything about it until i see N1 results. i would change my vote to ham or DLF, but...let me ask: did Ham drop the hammer or was that vote not valid.

Add another point to "questions asked for the fifth time!" The only person who knows would be TH and last I checked all questions to the mod had to have some bold in them. Also this "I can't do anything until I see N1 results" Is just further proof of innocence with Ham. Are you town? Why is it you're allowed to want AE dead over yoru top suspects but Ham isn't? Why can't his vote be the exact same concept as your vote?


i for 1 vote that 1 must unvote before they change as it is the way i have always played and it adds to what can happen as we have just seen.

Well when you're the mod you do what you want. But there are just as many players who think unvotes shouldn't be necessary. I personally don't care either which way. Until Th checks in though would you mind not trying anything to sway his change of mind either which way? My experience is that doing so is always detrimental and ends pretty poorly for the town.

[Sensei kakashi]

he never asked any

Yes he did. Now you have ignored it twice.


So, TH, is he dead or not?

Finally someone who knows how to do things. Gotta love you mat...


I'm puzzled about one thing: why are people attacking others because they're against voting AE? AE is a highly irritating mafia sign-upper (he doesn't really play), but his claim certainly warrants more than a speedlynch.

Cashew wants to set up lynches for tomorrow and i suppose it's possible people are attackign Ham becuase he looks like a good candidate for a lynch.

[Tekkactus]

Yeah you find me where TH ever says he HAS to unvote and I'll continue with the day.

Rule #2 on MDV's Mafia Rules thread:

* Unvote, if necessary, before casting a new vote.

TH's first post:

One quick note I would like to add. I'm going to be VERY strict on the 'quoting mod PM' rule. One slip-up of this rule and the penalties will vary depending on the player. For a newbie, it's a slap in the face and nasty warning. For an experienced player or a newbie who's already gotten the first warning and it's an instant-death.

Other than that, all normal rules apply! Have fun!!!

Note the "all normal rules" bit.


That's more of a formality, and not an epic-fail as Tekk put it.

On the other hand, please find where I even used the word fail, let alone with an epic tacked on. I called it a screw-up. You know, a mistake?

[Sensei kakashi]

Note the "all normal rules" bit.

Note the "if necessary" part. EM left that rule in the mod's hands, TH never specified and thusly the rulng on this issue was never acknowledged.

[Devious little fox]

i think it was the time and manner in which he outed his role that put me off to his "reliability" and i know he wouldn't say he had the ability to find a tree but i wasn't expecting enything along the lines of being able to find someone. i also feel that he seriously though it was over.

[FrycHiKn]

Wait, in this case we have to wait so TH write something about AE's state or keep playing?

[Tekkactus]

Note the "if necessary" part. EM left that rule in the mod's hands, TH never specified and thusly the rulng on this issue was never acknowledged.

That's bull****, just admit you're wrong for once. "If necessary" refers to the fact that you don't need to unvote if you're not voting yet.

[Sensei kakashi]

The time and manner? Was the moon full? Was the manner too... posty? Phrased incorrectly? You're going to have to do better then that.

And you trust his claim because it's not what you expected? What did you expect?

And thinking it's over doesn't change anything. How many scum honestly go "Oh... you found me! ha ha ha"?

You need some serious facts here DLF.

[Sensei kakashi]

That's bull****, just admit you're wrong for once. "If necessary" refers to the fact that you don't need to unvote if you're not voting yet.

I suppose that is one way to look at it. But it could mean either one equally. Words are fickle that way.

[Devious little fox]

time - ummm i believe it was day 1

manner - he wanted to be left alone

expect - claiming something more impotant

r u serious? thinking it's over changes everything! how many mafia players get killed and go man im dead i guess the host will tell you im town?

[Tekkactus]

I suppose that is one way to look at it. But it could mean either one equally. Words are fickle that way.

How do you do it? It's like you have pissing me off down to an art form.

[Sensei kakashi]

How do you do it? It's like you have pissing me off down to an art form.

Actually i's like you want me to piss you off. I've done nothing but read something a different way then you have and you take it like some personal attack. The question should be why are you so defensive about how we interpret something written by EM.


time - ummm i believe it was day 1

Meaning...? You distrusted it simply because it was made on Day 1?


manner - he wanted to be left alone

That's arguably a completely different topic. But alirght. where did he say this?


expect - claiming something more impotant

What, if he had claimed cop or doc you would have believed it less? What do you define as important? I think any town, especially one that has potential to confirm another town, is pretty damn important.


r u serious? thinking it's over changes everything! how many mafia players get killed and go man im dead i guess the host will tell you im town?

are you agreeing with me here or what?

[Devious little fox]

yes if he would of claimed doc or cop i would have believed him less.

i know its important to be able to confirm town thats why i dont want ae to be day 1 food.

no i dont agree with you, you said thinking your dead is not important and i say it is. take this in for an example and tell me how it is not important:
last game when i died ( i was town ) i said i was mafia before the host registered me as dead, now what if the host came in and said a vote didn't count or their wasn't enough yet or something. now i am still alive but everyone thinks i am mafia when i am town because i thought i was dead.