• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Wizard101 Mafia Game Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Viral Maze

Verb the adjective noun
Joined
Feb 5, 2010
Location
Canada
Vote Tally

DekuNut (5) - LittleGumball, Shroom, Pendio, kokirion, Johnny Sooshi

No votes cast: Tristan, Jamie, Doc, Frozen Chosen, Ver-go-a-go-go, Libk, Justac00lguy, DekuNut, Eduarda, Mido, Timeless, Sadia

Day 2 will end on Sunday, August 14th, 2016 at 9 PM MST. With 17 players alive, 9 is majority. 5 votes are required to lynch.
 

Sadia

Have a Punderful Day!
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Vote: Dekunut

It's been almost 72 hours since the game day started. I don't see us going in any other directions, and there's no other leads. I guess Deku has said all that he wanted to. He didn't exactly start up a counter wagon as I expected, and I get that he's busy but I'm also not finding his posts all that helpful. What's the point in waiting until Sunday?

There are a few people who haven't posted yet on Day 2 though, so maybe they saw something the rest of us haven't. We should wait for them lol.
 

DekuNut

I play my drum for you
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Location
Tangent Universe
Starting with Koki, because out of my list, he's the one I randomly clicked on first:

Really original opening. Bravo! In order not to be rude, I'll just assume that it only took you 2 nights to prepare this entree.

Interesting set-up. But also a set-up that could potentially tell you a lot about people's roles. As a true scholar I'll have to get my notebook (or just my laptop, but do we have laptops in wizard101. actually, if we don't posting might also pose a problem... but never mind that, I'm creative).

I wonder if the mafia has been randomly distributed over the schools, or spread out as much as possible (max. 1 mafia member per school). I hope it's not the second one, that might make it just a bit too easy to establish townies. I also wonder, though, if every school of magic has an equal number of wizards (I mean if that isn't the case, it will still be hard to claim a school of magic if which it is known that it no longer contains a mafia member, because without a limit anyone can unverifiably claim)

Also, I'm still mad at anyone who did me wrong in Anonymous mafia. Dammit p9, how easy for you to hide behind that vote tally. I would've cast a spell at you right here right now...

Vote: Johnny Sooshi. You were second on my list anyway
kinda like Kill bill (but than reversed...). RegalBryant is third on my list, and ALIT 4th being that player who says bullying is wrong but doesn't really undertake anything to stop it from happening.
So, in this we have:
Game opening joke
Basic setup talk
Guessing mafia flavor
Revenge voting
Nothing much to say here I feel, except maybe his list of people. May be worth glancing at if he flips scum eventually

That is kind
Just quoting it cuz he said it. There's less in this than his opening post.

and you feel uber super duper good about Koki, no?

...

anyway. Gumball's "I want to get lynched" behaviour doesn't seem incredibly scummy to me, if only solely for the reason that if you're scum and trying to survive (I mean at least to not screw your scum mates), asking to be lynched is the single most stupid action you can make.
I'm not joining an RVS wagon if I think the chances of randomly hitting scum there are nearly zero. I prefer a different target. Although, I'm gonna be honest, anyone who begs to be lynched on day 1 pretty much deserves to be lynched.. sorry gummy, but I won't shed a tear this game if you do end up dying : '/
Basic reading of Gummy based on her actions. Something that's apparently a joke, but multiple people didn't realize that was a joke, so that was something else that contributed to my suspicion of him. Still seems kinda weird for that to be a joke IMO - the only thing I picked up as trying to be funny was the crying smiley.

I actually agree.
I'm fine with lynching one of the 3 non-posters. All three are fine players, so I'll just randomly vote for Jamie.

Vote: Jamie
Throwing a vote at an inactive. Not something I look down on Day One.

This next post is big, so let's break it down.

no. I never said she's town. I thought this move made it unlikely that she's scum. Similair, but different. I don't see it as a town move, I just see it as a move that would be a strange combination with being scum-aligned, so by deduction I think it is less likely that she's scum. I'm neither saying that it is so incredibly unlikely that I trust her for the rest of the game, but I think the chances of her flipping scum are lower than the chances if we would pick someone at random. In that case I'd rather choose a different target.
Pretty much the reasoning I figured. Kinda noncomittal, but it works I feel. There's not a lot in that to commit to.

You also make this whoooole thing about her joke and how I don't understand it (while being completely unaware that I'm joking myself, that aside) of which I don't see a connection with my alignment.
I stated my opinion on her above. Afterwards I just boldly said something sarcastic. Which is hardly more than flavour (like defending someone and acting on that, but adding afterwards that you do still hate him/her (I don't hate you Gymmu, I love you). Which would have nothing to do with the argument you bring forward). So don't read so much into that, jeez. It's freaking page 3, plus I've been making a sport out of being direct and making sarcastic oneliners at mafia the last couple of years.
I didn't read into that as a joke either, as previously mentioned. We don't blame you for trying to make a joke, only for saying something that people took seriously and saying it was a joke. This is a WIFOM to some extent - do you decide that it was always meant to be a joke (like most people did) or that he's using the joke argument to cover it up (like Eduarda and I did)?
I'd also like to point out he explains it as an "I hate you" joke when he really didn't say that, and instead pretty much said "if you die, it's your fault". Still makes me a little wary.

The same goes for you. Besides, your little explanation, quick vote and because the argument itself alreasy is very weak, it seems like you're just jumping on this wagon for the sake of simplicity. Not a town-tell.
FOS: Dekunut
The beginning of his distaste for me in this game. I defended myself, I could again. He makes some decent points, and the only argument I have apparently nobody considers to be worth it so :coolhecks:


Out of Vergo, Regal and Jamie, I would almost never choose Vergo if it's not necessary. I like his playstyle and I think he's one of the best players around. I also think that Jamie is a great player, but I don't think Regal is a bad player either. From what I recall he played pretty good in Anonymous mafia, so in my opinion all three of these players fall under the good player category. Out of Regal and Jamie, I picked Jamie pretty much randomly. Perhaps I chose him because I assume most people will automatically go for Regal, whereas I think he's a bit underestimated, hence I chose the opposite.
Saying that he kinda chose Jamie for the "good player" argument. While I think this is a decent thing to do, it's still a reason that the mafia can use to their advantage, which is why I have distaste for it. I always point back to Green Lantern mafia for this.
As a whole though, using that argument is pretty null, but if either Koki, Vergo, or Regal flip scum, this may be a post to come back to.

I pretty clearly said I didn't want to lynch her. Only on a personal note I added that I wouldn't mourn anyone's death if they've been begging all the time to get lynched. In that case you kinda deserve it : / but still, in my analysis of the situation I don't think she is the best target. So I don't vote.
I accept this argument. Still though, didn't you say that was an "I hate you" joke? Here you're bringing it on in a more serious light.

but... wait.

aren't you kind of doing the same? You accuse me of not actively voting for Gummy but still trying to support people who vote for her. Right in that same post you first defend her and then suddenly say "But if it comes down to it, and it needs more numbers, like I said, I'll join".

Wow! Are we mayhaps... scumbuds? :eek:

Something else about you Eduarda, in games when you are town I tend to have had the feeling that you were very considerate of who you voted, not to make mistakes. In games where you have been mafia you've quite frequently used shady arguments and were less careful. Here you use quite a weak argument to push for a lynch, I don't recall that to be town-Eduardish.
This is actually good reasoning in my opinion. May be worth rereading Avengers to check out her townplay in that (though she posted a ton in that game, so that'd be fun to read).

no, if someone is not at home lynching that person for not posting a lot is rather pointless.
Unvote
I accept this as well. He has a legitimate reasoning for not posting, so it's not like he's purposefully avoiding the limelight.

You vote for me because you think "there could be some reasoning there".
Yes.

Guys, I got lynched day 1 (as a townie) in anonymous mafia just now because I FOS'd someone (who in the end was mafia) while still having my RVS vote on someone else. I'm not gonna get myself lynched again for such a silly reason. You have your vote on me because someone else accused me of promoting a Gumball lynch while not voting for her myself, based on a tiny joke on page 3, while Eduarda even did exactly the same in the very post she accused me in. The first time that you speak about your reasoning yourself you speak in cryptic sentences about something however slight that may be there. Then what is that "some reasoning", how does that compare to the behaviour of other players, heck how does that compare with Eduarda's own statement in that same post herself?
This is the post that began my interest in Eduarda. He has an excellent point here, regarding Eduarda at least.
And that wasn't trying to be cryptic, that was me being honest. There's a reason there, nothing specific.
This post is kinda hard to look at objectively tbh, since this is where the landslide on me begins. The first vote. Intense heat on me for being a follower. I'll do my best though.

Someone brought up the first real structured argument against another player and that was convenient for you.
It could be that
Or it could be me going "Hey! She might be onto something here!" The only reason I'm being pushed for this is because there's not a lot to the argument. Later in the game, let's say she found a major disagreement between two of Doc's posts. If someone voted immediately after, they wouldn't be crucified. People would be like "They saw a decent argument and joined up". So how is this any different than that really?
Convenient to say the argument is well-structured, better than RVS and hence a good reason to vote. If the player flips town you can just say "it was still better than no lynch because now we have information" and get away with it.
But aren't all those reasons true?

You jump very quickly on a vote, without analysing the situation yourself.
Yes

When counter-arguments flow in you first ignore it, and later try to justify your choice by saying "I feel like there could be some reasoning here", without addressing the actual debate about the validity of the argument.
... yeah, some of the stuff I have against him here is OMGUS, I admit it. I still feel there's tunneling going on though - he's pushing for my lynch over a small thing, and even after other people show doubt later on, he remains resolute in wanting to speedlynch me.

It's somewhat ironic that you think the chance of me being scum is slightly higher than average, while I'm thinking exactly the same about you.
Vote: Dekunut
No it's not. That's not irony at all. In fact, that's more like rain on your wedding day. Or a free ride when you've already paid.

But because neither Dekunut or Eduarda provided a proper analysis of the situation, let me analyse it myself.
Oh, this is going to be so unbiased (actually it's pretty decently unbiased)


Alright, so this is the post that drew suspicion:

The argument was that first Koko decides not to vote for Gumball, but does add on the end a sentence in which he supports her death. This way, Kokirion might try to play it safe. He may try to support the Gumball wagon without burning his fingers by actually being on it (a psychological trick to kill off Gumball with clean hands).
In his next post he says the following:


So perhaps Koko's strategy is the following: he is betting on 2 horses. Either killing Gumball or killing Jamie. By betting on 2 horses the chance may lessen that another alternative could arrive last-minute, and so reduces the danger that a mafia member might die. Whereas both Gumball and Jamie are excellent players to get rid of on day 1. By not actually voting for Gumball he avoids being blamed for her death later on if she gets lynched, and Jamie is inactive, and through the façade of a policy lynch he can get away with that too relatively easily. Very much a Koko way to manipulate stuff. I can't agree more, so all the way up to this point I get your point.

But now let's be a bit more critical.
First of all, how does Koko usually try to manipulate stuff when he is mafia? Well, I'll take my answer out of a QT (paraphrased) from Lineages, in which he was mafia together with Toxic and Storm. They had a small discussion about it there, and Koko more or less said the following: As a mafia member what you should never do is attempting to control the game. You cannot fully control every asset of the game and it is not necessary. Instead, you need to steer the events in the game. Plant an idea in someone's head and make him/her pursue it, and you may very well openly try to influence something, but drop it as soon as it could damage you. The only things you need to achieve as mafia is to simply stay alive and to avoid drawing suspicion. Whoever dies is irrelevant as long as you can achieve the first 2 objectives.
Koko's style is indeed to sneakily manipulate events from the background. However, he really only cares about survival and not looking suspicious. So there is my first critical note, why would he stick his head out to get Jamie or Gumball killed this early? Is it necessary to his survival? Probably not, Koko would probably let it go, pray to any god in the world to get one of them killed, but would not intervene.

Anyway, let's look at his posts in more detail.
Basically he does 3 things:
1) defend Gumball
2) sarcastically say he wouldn't mourn her death if she does die
3) support lynching an inactive and voting for Jamie

Koko, as scum, tends to try to be as cost-efficient as possible. With the minimum amount of action the maximum amount of change.
His first move, to defend Gumball, is in that light already peculiar. If he is scum and indeed tries to get her killed without voting for her, why would he defend her? That's actually not very logical, because by giving an opinion about the Gumball wagon will obviously attract a response from others. He will have to defend his opinion right away, and what for? If he tries not to be seen as suspicious and tries to survive day 1, creating such a debate is a very sloppy move. It also has another negative effect on his "scum-cause". Namely, he might accidentally save Gumball. If you make a move to defend a person, it may lower the chance that that person dies, so if Koko wants her dead, why would he add part 1 to his posts? If Koko would want to kill her he could've more easily left part 1 out. He would only sarcastically say that he wouldn't mourn her death (without voting for her) and then supporting lynching an inactive player. That's probably more like Koko's scum-style.

Let's now take a look at part 3, where he votes for Jamie. Although that too may seem as a Kokish scum move, it probably isn't. Because why Jamie? He had the choice out of Jamie, Vergo and Regal. Out of these 3, Jamie is probably the most difficult target. Jamie tends to fights back fiercely. If Koko would be the first to vote for Jamie he might get into a big sparring contest with Jamie, and how will that keep him both safe from getting lynched and away from suspicion? Vergo at the other hand, while also being a fantastic player, has sometimes shown during the last few games to not become more active before the end of the day. With Vergo the chances are bigger that he'll stay inactive and so that Koko won't have to face him in a debate. And Regal is an even more easy target. Regal is not the type of player to fiercely fight back, but responds in a more mildly manner. Most people also probably favoured Regal out of the 3 (as seen by many of the reactions after Koko's choice for Jamie), so no one would've thought he was more scummy if he chose for Regal. For Koko, who would've wanted the least amount of damage, Regal was probably his favorite target if he were scum.

So, having analysed his posts in more detail, we found 2 major sloppy mistakes scum-Koko may have made. Defending Gumball and voting for Jamie instead of Regal. It's kind of unkokish for scum-Koko to make so many sloppy mistakes so early on, hmmm. And, given the fact that Koko is actually writing this post and completely aware of this all, why wouldn't he have been aware of it yesterday and just not made these mistakes? If he knows it, why would he do it, if he's scum...

Hmmm, maybe if I analyse it further it actually looks like it's unlikely to have been a scum move. The chances may actually be slightly bigger for now that he's not scum.

But let's finally discuss the scenario where he did do it according to the Koko-books. Koko left out his part where he defended Gumball and targetted Regal instead of Jamie.
Now, as much as this is the ideal version, does it still make him likely to be scum?
It reminds me of a south park episode I saw on tv yesterday. The boys were playing detectives and tried to solve crimes. At one point they were asked to solve the dissappearance of a pie. Of course, the dog ate the pie, but the boys came up with the megalomanic conclusion that the old lady's husband tried to murder her, was filled with rage, and then at some point ate the pie in the process. The thing is, if that man really was that filled with anger and wanted murder her etc. etc., it was kind of a fair analysis of the situation. But what made you think he had such murderous intent? What made it more likely that he wanted to kill her than the normal explanation that the dog just ate it?
In the case that Koko is scum and really wanted to bet on 2 horses and tried to manipulate people into killing Gumball or Regal, the only thing we have still established so far is that we cannot exclude that he didn't do it with evil intentions (and in reality we did, because we found 2 major flaws in this reasoning already). But what excludes the fact that he didn't just do that as a townie? Lots of people made jokes about Gumball's situation, it was page 4 afterall and Koko very often makes such comments. If he'd be town he probably still would've made that comment. Maybe he just didn't add the Gumball-defense part because he was tired and didn't want to take it serious, and maybe he took Regal as a target purely by chance. Many people would've chosen Regal as a townie, so why wouldn't he? So even in the most ideal situation we just concluded that we cannot exclude he was scum, but neither could we exclude he was town. So in that case it would be a random chance at most. and with these unkokish flaws we found, I'd say he's a pretty bad day 1 lynch.

That is how you underbuild why someone is or is not scummy. Not by cryptically saying "there may be something", or taking a joke so far out of its context that you come to a bizar conclusion
Once again, this argument is leaning heavily on self-meta reading. I don't make meta arguments, like, ever. Because I find that comparing people to other games doesn't always work, and even so I have a hard time trying to come up with a good explanation of a person's playstyle. Hell, it took me two years to describe my own.
Anyways, that's why I never bothered to fight this argument (think I said it before).
Over that last sentence, didn't you yourself say earlier (I won't find the post now but I talked about it earlier in this one) that you also meant it as "it's her own fault if she gets lynched"? Make up your mind if it's a joke or not, because that doesn't sound like a joke.
Unless I'm misinterpreting this. If so, please tell me.

I'm going to Frankfurt for the coming days, I probably won't be able to post in the meanwhile
*Insert lame frankfurter joke here*

I was out of town for the last few days. Yesterday I did read the thread, but because quoting etc. was hard I decided to wait.
I know that feeling. I hate quoting on mobile.

Anyway, obviously I'm gonna vote for Deku again. I made my decision yesterday and nothing has changed, except for the fact that we didn't get a majority. I'm in for a speed lynch.
Vote: Dekunut
And this is where my current distrust of him comes from. The whole speedlynch thing. I described it earlier, and assume most people find this as OMGUS as Gummy does. I'm not sure how I can defend it without saying that it's not, which would be taken with a grain of salt. So oh well.

I'm also getting increasingly suspicious of Pendio, and also Sadia a little.

Unaware that the day ended so quickly. Yesterday he also explicitly said that he may not always suppport the lynch threshold if he wouldn't agree with it. Which is very logical, but I found the reason he stated this so publicly pretty odd. It felt as if he already knew he was gonna obstruct a number of lynches this game, and was giving himself an alibi already, which would be a good move for a mafiosi. And now, all of a sudden, he votes for Dekunut with an apology for his non-action yesterday. I cannot really fathom why he changed his mind, and if his position was really that weak yesterday, why did he then take such a radical step like obstructing the entire lynch? He also doesn't mention any new reason for voting Dekunut. It makes me wonder if this was rather a change of strategy instead of opinion.
This is actually a good argument about Pen. I'll be talkign about him myself later. I will say though that I find it unlikely overall that those two are scumbuds.

And in the post I quoted from Sadia, she makes somewhat similar remarks, but less strongly. Despite these accusations, the 2 of you don't yet stand out to me as "probably scum". Perhaps, I cannot exclude the possibility, but I just want to say that I do not trust the 2 of you as much as other people trust you.
If I were dead already, would you vote for either of them, and if so which would it be?
In short:
I have some problems with how I feel like he's handling my wagon. However, to the average observer, this probably looks like OMGUS, so you guys probably won't take it seriously. So yeah.
 

LittleGumball

Slammin' Salmon
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Location
upstream
(i would rather throw this at the top rather than have it potentially be lost at the bottom)
That's it, Timeless...?


@DekuNut tyvm friend
if you have a moment I'd love for you to build a case against the others you mentioned :uwu:

now for a response i guess
Kinda noncomittal
I mean not really, it's a day one read so idk what you expect

We don't blame you for trying to make a joke, only for saying something that people took seriously and saying it was a joke.
So..... you're blaming him for....... people misunderstanding his joke...?

To most people it was very obviously a joke and I absolutely cannot understand why a. this is still being brought up as "evidence" and b. why it even matters. He made a joke. Big deal. I made lots of jokes. Want to lynch me for them? I'd be happy to have some ~discourse~ about them.
I'd also like to point out he explains it as an "I hate you" joke when he really didn't say that, and instead pretty much said "if you die, it's your fault". Still makes me a little wary.
You're really just nitpicking at this point........

Also he said the "i hate you joke" bit as a comparison. That much was also pretty obvious. He didn't actually say "i h8 u lol jk xDDDD" and he knows that. you know that, i know that, everyone knows that.
(like defending someone and acting on that, but adding afterwards that you do still hate him/her (I don't hate you Gymmu, I love you). Which would have nothing to do with the argument you bring forward).
bolded 4 truth

Saying that he kinda chose Jamie for the "good player" argument. While I think this is a decent thing to do, it's still a reason that the mafia can use to their advantage, which is why I have distaste for it.
I don't get this, is this still "oh don't kill the experienced players!!!! protect them!!!!!!" or is it "don't judge based off experience!!!!!!!!!" or "only mafia wants to kill experienced players!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

gettin sum mixed signals here

I still feel there's tunneling going on though - he's pushing for my lynch over a small thing, and even after other people show doubt later on, he remains resolute in wanting to speedlynch me.
>has made one singular post in which 2 sentences involve lynching
>HE REALLY SUPER DUPER WANTS TO LYNCH ME IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!1!!!!!!!!!

I don't make meta arguments
Does that mean that no one else can?

Over that last sentence, didn't you yourself say earlier that you also meant it as "it's her own fault if she gets lynched"? Make up your mind if it's a joke or not, because that doesn't sound like a joke.
wh

he DID make up his mind

it WAS a joke

I accept this argument. Still though, didn't you say that was an "I hate you" joke? Here you're bringing it on in a more serious light.
what
 

DekuNut

I play my drum for you
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Location
Tangent Universe
(i would rather throw this at the top rather than have it potentially be lost at the bottom)
That's it, Timeless...?
^ Dis

Anyways, I guess I can just reply to your reply with one or two total sentences:
1) I blamed him not for us not getting the joke, but for the joke seeming like cover because I didn't pick it up. Thinking about it, I shuld give him more benefit of the doubt, since I'm in the minority, but eh
2) Well, he does kinda super duper wanna lynch me immdiately. He kinda said it. He thinks I'm scum and is so convinced he's ready to speedlynch.
3) Me not making meta arguments doesn't mean he can't; it just means that I can't argue with his wall post concerning his own meta. It was me explaining why I have no opinion about or argument against that post.

Moving on, I'm going to make my next post the Eduarda reasoning. Be back soon.
 

Mido

Version 1
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Location
The Turnabout
Moving on, I'm going to make my next post the Eduarda reasoning. Be back soon.

I definitely would like to see this since your perspective is something relevant to her situation, I'd say.

On another note, I find myself in agreement with Sadia's observation of the DekuNut vote train in that Shroom and Pendio's votes appear suspect; however, I would replace Pendio with Timeless's recent move.
 

Mellow Ezlo

Spoony Bard
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Location
eh?
Gender
Slothkin
Honestly, I still don't really see the evidence against Deku as being extremely sound, but eh. We're at half majority now, so there's no need for me to vote.

As for alternatives, I feel like we've wasted two whole days on Deku. Why don't we take a look at some other players? What about the people on his lynch? I'm feeling good about LG (I have a hard time believing that mafia would be the first person, and pushing for the same lynch, two days in a row, regardless of the lynchee's alignment. Also, joking about lynching her is bad mafia play that I would never expect to see from her). Shroom's vote has me slightly wary, but he explained it and I feel good about him overall. Pendio's vote is the sketchy one, especially seeing as he said earlier he absolutely wouldn't join a lynch he disagreed with. Now he did say that he didn't trust Deku anymore/less than anyone else, but he only voted for him when he was questioned over not voting for him. Trying to save your ass are you? Next up is Kokirion, who I feel pretty good about, as he's been actively scumhunting and acting like his usual self. Johnny's vote is important, as it gave us the half majority we need to in order to get a lynch in. Similarly to Pendio, he only voted after he had been questioned about not voting, and he was one of the ones voting for LG earlier on in Day 1. I haven't seen much scummy play from him this game, but he may be worth taking another look at later. Sadia's vote doesn't concern me, she was simply adding another one to help ensure that a lynch will go through. Then comes Timeless, who literally voted for Deku for no reason other than that other people are voting for him. Terrible reasoning, especially since he is already past half majority. I can't tell at this point if it's a scummy vote, or a newbie vote (or both). I'll take another look back at his posts later too.

Of all the people currently on Deku's wagon, Pendio, Timeless, and Johnny are the ones I wanna take another look at, in that order. Everyone else I feel pretty good about. Also, I wanna look back at Eduarda's posts too, as many people have already pointed out that she hasn't been consistent with her regular town play. Also, she was involved in Deku's attempted lynch during Day 1, and since it's likely Mafia gain pips from successful town lynches, it's almost guaranteed that there's going to be at least one scum on his lynch. And this goes for whether he flips town or mafia.

@Eduarda if you were around for most of this game day, would you have voted for Deku again?
 

kokirion

Just like you. But cooler
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Location
Wherever history is in the making
Basic reading of Gummy based on her actions. Something that's apparently a joke, but multiple people didn't realize that was a joke, so that was something else that contributed to my suspicion of him. Still seems kinda weird for that to be a joke IMO - the only thing I picked up as trying to be funny was the crying smiley.
I'm not going into much detail here because I feel like Gumball already said everything about it there was to say, but people have really blown this out of proportions. And although it may seem now that many people didn't realise it was a joke of some sort, this is only because 1 or 2 people keep bringing it up. To be truthful, I don't recall more than 2 people to have misunderstood it in the first place. That still leaves 15 others that did get that it was sarcastic.

Saying that he kinda chose Jamie for the "good player" argument. While I think this is a decent thing to do, it's still a reason that the mafia can use to their advantage, which is why I have distaste for it. I always point back to Green Lantern mafia for this.
As a whole though, using that argument is pretty null, but if either Koki, Vergo, or Regal flip scum, this may be a post to come back to.
Hmm, I wouldn't put that under the "good player" category. I had a choice out of 3 players. I said I considered all to be good players. I added that I like Vergo a lot as a player and so am inclined not to choose for him. But that's not ignoring evidence surrounding him because I think he is "too experienced", the fact is that there was no evidence. I was picking someone at random for the reason that they didn't post much. And when all 3 players are in the exact same situation, you just pick someone based on gut feeling.

Once again, this argument is leaning heavily on self-meta reading. I don't make meta arguments, like, ever. Because I find that comparing people to other games doesn't always work, and even so I have a hard time trying to come up with a good explanation of a person's playstyle. Hell, it took me two years to describe my own.
Anyways, that's why I never bothered to fight this argument (think I said it before).
But the reason I brought up this discussion about "my meta" is because the entire argument against me was based on "my meta". Eduarda found me suspicious because of a pretty normal post, but she saw in there some possible plot from my part, thinking that such a plot is my style. And imo she wasn't completely off track, that tends to be my style a bit. But if she brings forward an argument based on my meta, I find it natural that that should indeed be discussed. And although it wasn't thát far-fetched, what I wanted to point out is that if you looked into it deeper, it actually didn't make that much sense.
That was one of my criticisms on you. You find her reasoning based on my meta solid, while you later claim to have no idea about my meta, making me wonder how you could judge in the first place whether that was reasonable evidence or not. And secondly you avoid having to discuss it by simply saying you know nothing about people's meta, which is a very safe way out.



____________________________________________________________________________
Enough about the response on your post. Some other things.

I'll elaborate a bit more on why I decided to re-vote for Deku and how I see him and others.
Originally I FOS'd you, if I recall. I did this to pressure you, because I found your vote somewhat odd I hoped this would move you to elaborate and start a discussion, rather than being killed on day 1 by a trigger-happy mob. At the time you did not really elaborate and so I decided to vote. I had the feeling this wagon was just convenient for you, rather than that you really thought you were onto scum. What at the end of the day solidified my vote on you was perhaps that it seemed so hard to lynch you. Of course, the vote threshold this game might catch people off guard, and surely the reason you stayed alive was for a big part because of quasi-active townies who didn't really care, but it was still peculiar. How often does it happen that we cannot lynch someone on day 1? Usually we have a big wagon and... well, lynch a townie. From my experience, when someone is easy to lynch on day 1 they are probably town. Simply because mafia doesn't want to screw up that much as to lose one of their members during RVS, if they can do something to save him/her, they will. That made me wonder if some mafia members, if you are scum, hesitated to join on the wagon for the sake of not losing a member this soon. They didn't know if there was a majority, may have waited a bit, and in the end there really wasn't a majority. This theory is strengthened due to a number of people who were strangely hesitant at the end of deadline yesterday (such as Pendio). Today a lot of them have suddenly joined the bandwagon, perhaps because they are passed the day 1 chills and now realise that Deku will probably die anyway and they might now look very bad. They made a mistake and may now perhaps try to buss you (while trying to keep there story "coherent").
It's just a theory, but I don't rule it out.

I made up my mind yesterday about who to vote. Nothing happened last day and night, so in my opinion we're still at day 1. At most, the night scene was just a pee break. So why would I now suddenly decide not to vote for you? We have an extension of day 1. My first reaction was "why would we need that", so of course I wanted to speed lynch you. And not because I am so fixated on you (honestly, if every player has a 25% chance of being scum, I'd list you as 30-35%. So most likely you're town, but your chances are better than those of most others).
But I did change my mind on that, I don't want you to be hammered. We now finally have a decent discussion and I like that. I find your input very interesting, and I would love to hear your analyses about other people.
At the moment I do still want to lynch you. You're scummy, some others are as well, but you happen to be linked to so many people. You have a link with Eduarda, with me, with Pendio, etc. Your death will by far give us the most information, even if you end up being town.

But I'm not saying my vote on you is set in stone. If you or others may bring great arguments forward against other people, perhaps someone else might come up who is a more suitable target. Or if others are convinced they do not want to kill you and want to kill someone else who I also find scummy (even if I see them as less scummy), I might be willing to switch targets. With this lynch threshold we need to agree on a target afterall.
 

LittleGumball

Slammin' Salmon
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Location
upstream
From my experience, when someone is easy to lynch on day 1 they are probably town.
This.

With this lynch threshold we need to agree on a target afterall.
This is the most important part about a lynch rule like this one. We have to work together. I like this lynch rule in certain ways because it forces the players to work together instead of every player being hesitant like they still are now. Day 1 is (hopefully) a lesson to this game's players in that you can't chicken out. (hopefully it's also a lesson about learning to read the rules =^) )
 

Pen

The game is on!
I'm also getting increasingly suspicious of Pendio, and also Sadia a little.
Unaware that the day ended so quickly. Yesterday he also explicitly said that he may not always suppport the lynch threshold if he wouldn't agree with it. Which is very logical, but I found the reason he stated this so publicly pretty odd. It felt as if he already knew he was gonna obstruct a number of lynches this game, and was giving himself an alibi already, which would be a good move for a mafiosi. And now, all of a sudden, he votes for Dekunut with an apology for his non-action yesterday. I cannot really fathom why he changed his mind, and if his position was really that weak yesterday, why did he then take such a radical step like obstructing the entire lynch? He also doesn't mention any new reason for voting Dekunut. It makes me wonder if this was rather a change of strategy instead of opinion.

The reason I wanted to make sure I made my statement as clear as possible was so that I would be able to go back and quote it easily, should I be accused for something related to it later in the game. I fail to see how that is necessarily a good move for a Mafioso in particular. Anyone playing the game would benefit from a tactic like that, no matter what side you are on. Also, my mind was never changed. My opinion on DN is the same today as it was yesterday. I already explained why I never voted yesterday. And I did explain why I voted for DN when I did today. Today is ultimately just another day one - at least for most of us (I assume for players like the Cop it is more than that) - so I do not have much to go on about anyone yet. You are right in that I did not add any new reason for suspecting DN when I voted for him, but that is only because I did not have anything new about him to add. I explained very clearly that I voted in order to help ensure a successful lynch today, and that I would change my vote if something else came up. Nothing about this has anything to do with either a change of strategy nor a change of opinion on my part.

On another note, I find myself in agreement with Sadia's observation of the DekuNut vote train in that Shroom and Pendio's votes appear suspect; however, I would replace Pendio with Timeless's recent move.

What does this mean exactly? Are you saying that you have become more suspicious of Shroom and Timeless than you are of me?

Pendio's vote is the sketchy one, especially seeing as he said earlier he absolutely wouldn't join a lynch he disagreed with. Now he did say that he didn't trust Deku anymore/less than anyone else, but he only voted for him when he was questioned over not voting for him. Trying to save your ass are you?

I already explained that it was a miss on my part that I did not vote yesterday. I thought the day would last longer than it did, which was why I did not feel the need to vote. Had I been aware of the correct time of the deadline I would have voted, and I would have hoped to prove that today by helping out ensuring DN's lynch this time. There are other players that I would have also been very okay with lynching, such as Eduarda (for similar reasons to DN), and Timeless (due to posts lacking in content). These are both players that I am going to want to look more into, especially if DN ends up flipping Town.

@DekuNut I think your suspicion on Kirion that you have explained makes sense. I would love to hear your reason for suspecting me and Eduarda too, before the day ends.
 

LittleGumball

Slammin' Salmon
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Location
upstream
I thought the day would last longer than it did, which was why I did not feel the need to vote.
What was the need to wait until the very end of the day? Why couldn't you vote when you had the chance and the means to?

Timeless (due to posts lacking in content)
Why specifically Timeless and not anyone else who's barely posted?

@DekuNut I think your suspicion on Kirion that you have explained makes sense.
how tho..,,.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2011
Location
The State of Love and Trust
Okay, so the reason I jumped on that is literally because we're already at 5 votes on Deku now, with the day ending soon. Especially the way things have been going with the "we need a lynch" I wanted to ensure that it would go through so we'd have something to work off of. Especially after he admitted himself (some pages back I'm sorry I'm currently on mobile so quoting and stuff is a pain) that he's fine being lynched so long as it gets us somewhere. I know it's a fairly controversial and likely scummy looking move to do it so plainly and simply, but alternatively, if I was scum, what would I have to gain from risking getting myself killed almost immediately? The way the rules of the game work, Town gets pips from lynching scum. So at the end of the day, in this scenario, I would have given anyone who voted me out some space to cast more spells, AND I would've put a serious dent in the mafia's already limited numbers. That makes absolutely no sense strategically. Especially being unfamiliar with both the play styles of the other players, and having not played mafia in an eternity, I don't have terribly much in my arsenal to be able to do terribly much else. While it's still a numbers game early on, It's fairly low risk with a sizable payout (if we're right) to help solidify the bandwagon we have now, versus doing nothing, and risk another no lynch day, where we have zero leads and are sitting ducks to the scum players.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom