Mafia: Conspiracy 2: The Cabal Strikes Back! [Game Over]

The Game Room
441

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]

On the other hand, I don’t honestly think the bulk of this Town will be persuaded that your plan is a good one, so I’m not sure spending a big chunk of Day One discussing it is a wise use of time. You know?

It’s interesting. I’m all but dead in the other Dope game, and so I’m comfortable saying the following: based in part on my Cecilvania experience, I think Towns have been hurt in recent games by a kind of dogmatic thinking that makes the Town actions in response to nearly anything very predictable. Especially in a game like this, it is worthwhile, I think, to go back to zero, abandon your preconceptions and try to consider each thing that happens independently, in the context of what is known about this game in particular, and about the players in it.

[/QUOTE]

I was getting ready to post something fairly similar to this, but **storyteller **did the work for me :slight_smile: Nevertheless, let me be explicit about what I agree with him on. The first point is convincing everyone to go along with the mass role claim - I don’t think that’s ever going to happen. I’ve tried to get an entire group to go along with an idea before, something uncontroversial like getting all votes in 24 hours in advance of the actual deadline, and simply could not make it happen. A mass role claim is certainly more controversial and it won’t work unless everyone (or nearly everyone) participates. I suspect that there are certain Town roles that are going to be very reluctant to go along with it. (I’m also still not certain it’s a good idea. I think I need to run a “simulation” or something to wrap my head around it).

I also agree that Cat’s motivation here is not necessarily anti-town. He’s certainly got the discussion off to a great start! But it doesn’t surprise me that he’s picked up some suspicion and votes for it. I’m not sure I agree that those suspecting him are necessarily scummy, though - as I said above, some Town roles are not going to like the idea either.

Finally, I completely agree about your Cecilvania comments re: Town, and it’s not only dogmatism, but also complacency that’s killing Town in that game. Which is why Cat’s idea is intriguing to me, even though my gut says it’s not a good idea.

442

[QUOTE=One And Only Wanderers]
Not quite true, our win condition becomes harder if the witch numbers < 2, as we then need to eliminate the cabal, but we CAN still win without 2 witchs alive.
[/QUOTE]

Right, we need all the wolves, all the undead and all the cabal pushing up daisies. With the witches we can at least scrub off the cabal from that list, which saves us how ever many required lynches with fewer town available, on account of having more of our witches dead. I think we are deep in the crap if we loose witches.
(did we ever get to a consensus on approx cabal numbers?)

Now given that a mass reveal was unlikely, what would **CatinaSuits **motivation have been to raise the whole plan in the first place?

443

I’m caught up for now, and I am retracting my pointy finger from CIAS. Not for the **Nanook ** incident, but because his further explanation of the role claiming has changed my mind. I think **CIAS’s ** intentions here are good, but I still think the mass role claim is flawed. There are town roles that need to stay hidden, at least for now. Maybe we should revisit the idea in a couple of Days, but I think that we will screw ourselves big time if we do it now.

Now as far as **Nanook ** goes…I’m going to leave it be for the moment. I’m not sure what I think about his odds of being scum or town.

More later in the day.

444

[QUOTE=NaturalBlondChap]
Right, we need all the wolves, all the undead and all the cabal pushing up daisies. With the witches we can at least scrub off the cabal from that list, which saves us how ever many required lynches with fewer town available, on account of having more of our witches dead. I think we are deep in the crap if we loose witches.
(did we ever get to a consensus on approx cabal numbers?)

Now given that a mass reveal was unlikely, what would **CatinaSuits **motivation have been to raise the whole plan in the first place?
[/QUOTE]

That’s an interesting question, but I think a flawed one - I don’t think it’s necessary to overthink CIAS’ actions to that degree. “So, I’mna ask everybody’s opinions on a mass roleclaim, but they’ll never do it, so that will get me ____” - particularly since a good thing to fill in the blank with is “lynched”.

445

And I disagree with you on this. Remember, we have no idea how many or which roles are in the game. Although the true scotsman may go, “Hey, how many true scotsman are in this game”, the rest of us can’t do that (because we aren’t true scotsman (by which I mean we can’t just pick one of the 5, say, warlocks and say, "Okay, that one’s the real warlock)). Each of us has a very slight advantage, by which I mean, when there are five people left, we have an advantage. However, I’m not sure that giving scum their tastiest targets on a platter would be a good trade-off to an endgame advantage (unless we lie…which negates the advantage in the first place)

446

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
On the other hand, I don’t honestly think the bulk of this Town will be persuaded that your plan is a good one, so I’m not sure spending a big chunk of Day One discussing it is a wise use of time. You know?

[/QUOTE]

Which is why I raised it now at the start of the Day. The good thing is that we have over a week to go. If it doesn’t gain any traction by the weekend, or someone can poke enough holes in my reasoning, then I will put it aside as an idea the town are unwilling to go along with. Which leaves enough to hopefully find a scum.

[QUOTE=NaturalBlondChap]
My main problem with the whole mass claim deal is our witches. We need at least two of the witches alive to win, so any strategy that reveals the witches is just not going to help us at all. Add to that, the fact that our witches are very powerful when all of them are alive (protect and investigate) then the strategy to reveal our witches just gets worse. All scum sides will want the witches dead so there will be, no doubt, a fair bit of firepower gunning for them once they roleclaim.
Storyteller makes a good point, suggesting a bad strategy is not always indicative of scum. That said, I did not see Catinasuit raise the fairly critical problem of keeping our witches alive, which is odd for such a seemingly well thought out plan. (OK he may have done and I missed it , if so please point it out).
[/QUOTE]

Ok, I will spell it out for you. They give false role-claims.

There, I’ve said it. The witches lie to the rest of the town.

And you know why, because if they do get challenged, they can back up their new claim as Witches, using Witch pro-town powers. Something the scum cannot do, because they will have to continue to fake pro-town powers consistently once outed. And for this game only, because everyone is a power role, that fact is key.

Anyone get any other holes to poke in the idea?

[QUOTE=NaturalBlondChap]
Now given that a mass reveal was unlikely, what would **CatinaSuits **motivation have been to raise the whole plan in the first place?
[/QUOTE]

Motivation?
I had a good idea I wanted to run past the town which I believe is beneficial for the town. I am not averse to someone proving me wrong.

I am averse to gaining votes because Day 1 roleclaiming is “a bad thing” without consideration of the setup and possiblities.

447

The proposal is anti-town because there’s no way it can benefit town, plain and simple. If most of the false roleclaims are easy to see through, then scum will have our most powerful roles sniped at their leisure (witches, witchdoctor, coroner, etc.). If the false roleclaims are as believable as the true roleclaims, then scum will still have their pick of the power (why? because think about it…how many scum do you think will claim witch…or witchdoctor…or corneror…etc. I don’t think many scum are ballsy enough to do it.), but at least in this scenario we might survive long enough for the mass roleclaim to have a tiny advantage. So, okay, it’s only a mostly anti-town proposal.

Of course, this isn’t enough to make it scummy. The reason why it seems scummy is because of the Nanook fish. As storyteller noted,

Point is, the fact that you were fishing in other places threw your proposal in a different light. All of a sudden, it looked less like an attempt at different strategy and more like an attempt to snag all the power roles on a trophy wall.

My vote stands.

448

[QUOTE=Hockey Monkey]
Would you prefer Eyebrow of Doom, or Hairy Eyeball? I’m still reading and getting a feel. I use it to make a note to myself that I was suspicious of that person when I re-read again. There are several things going on right now that I am still parsing to decide which is best to vote for. When I get ready for the blue pen, I’ll use it.
[/QUOTE]
Fair enough. I think I was just venting a bit of frustration from the lack of votes before the last day of the Day that seems to be all too common lately.

449

[QUOTE=CatInASuit]

Ok, I will spell it out for you. They give false role-claims.

There, I’ve said it. The witches lie to the rest of the town.

And you know why, because if they do get challenged, they can back up their new claim as Witches, using Witch pro-town powers. Something the scum cannot do, because they will have to continue to fake pro-town powers consistently once outed. And for this game only, because everyone is a power role, that fact is key.

Anyone get any other holes to poke in the idea?

[/QUOTE]

Right the witches lie, but your plan has a significant element relying on the fact that those lying are more likely to slip up and we town can somehow see through the lies to identify scum.
Now you have our key players lying, which the scum could see through just as well as we can. This reduces their pool of unknowns, from their type of scum and everyone else, to their type of scum, townies who are apparently not lying, other scum lying and townies lying.

If we latch onto a witch as a mislynch, the witch cannot for many days do anything to prove they are a witch, unless they all confirm each other.

Anyway, probably done this to death.
Motivation
Yeah helpful townie suggesting something that is unlikely to pass.
Helpful town trying to get discussion going hoping the clamors of yea or nay would give some indication of team.
Scum pretending to be helpful town, after all who would suggest this idea, it would be too obvious a scum fishing expedition and would clearly attract heat. No scum would do that, so most likely town.
Hell I don’t know, my head starts to hurt with the permutations

Anyway, probably done this to death.

450

[QUOTE=Santo Rugger]
Not to keep razzin’ on you or anything, but next time try using the [ code] flag.
[/QUOTE]

How does that work I’ve never tried pulling over an excel sheet before just [ code]paste sheet[ /code]?

[QUOTE=cckerberos]
Oredigger77, I appreciate the work but think some good points were made above regarding the problems with a “lynch the lurker” strategy. I don’t think any of the votes tossed out at lurkers in Doperville actually hit scum, for example. As scum in that game I didn’t really post all that much, but it was only during the last two Days that that was part of an intentional strategy.
[/QUOTE]

Well, like I said above when I responded to this as far as I’m concerned at this point hitting scum is a secondary purpose to the lynch the lurker strategy. The real purpose is to get people to post, notice that Drain began posting after I voted for her (sorry about calling you a him earlier). Now we have something to analyze her scummyness with. With that;
Unvote Drain Bead

[QUOTE=Drain Bead]
Also, Oredigger, now that I look at your list, what makes you say that Pollux Oil and I have been around to participate in ways that the bottom three have not?
[/QUOTE]

Basically I based that on the fact that you had some time to come in a post about the game. While the others didn’t do more then confirm or make a drink order. I think it takes much more involvement to read and post about the game then pop in a drop a nothing post. I may be wrong but it works for logic at this point. I get the not being a fan of night strategizing because I think it may lead to burning out but I still tried to at least stay abreast and post once a day or so just so there is some trail to analyze me. Seeing as how Pollux still hasn’t posted I’ll switch my vote over there and try to get a similar response.

Vote Pollux Oil

451

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
You know what, Cat, fuck me but I think I find myself agreeing with you. I’m also massively suspicious of the folks who are FoS-ing you and/or voting for you because they don’t like your idea - especially the folks who, having been around the block with this group a few times, ought to know by now that an odd strategic idea that you disagree with does not equal scummy. I am especially intrigued by the accusations of “role fishing” that have been laid at your feet, especially by players who use it as an additive criteria for voting for you. You have explicitly said that you want everyone to claim. THAT is role-fishing, as straightforward as it can be. Next to that, your mild pressure on Nanook shouldn’t warrant an extra mention; pedescribe’s post, in particular, seems like trying to build a case with multiple points by iterating the same point in different ways.

On the other hand, I don’t honestly think the bulk of this Town will be persuaded that your plan is a good one, so I’m not sure spending a big chunk of Day One discussing it is a wise use of time. You know?

[/QUOTE]

While I don’t agree that a mass claim is a good idea (I will get to that in a bit) I do agree that people voting for CIAS because he is “role fishing” or because he proposed an idea that they don’t like are wrong. It’s really what I was trying to say with my vote for Dot earlier. (And to be clear, I really did intend to vote for Dot, not Rugger)

It’s a big game, I am more than happy to lynch people for bad play in the first couple of Days. I have seen too much bad play that has just been forgiven in the past few games, and frankly I don’t want to deal with it anymore. So, I will not be random voting or voting for the lurker, but I do plan to vote for people who are conciously doing things that will harm the town. We can survive the loss if they are town and will be better off as a group for it. Also, it is more likely that scum will be the ones exhibiting bad play, and if they are not they are only helping us find them. As far as I see it, it’s win win.
What is bad play? Bad play is voting to lynch someone for a reason that doesn’t hold water. Bad play is not contributing to the game in any meaningful fashion. Bad play is voting because of reasoning provided by other people with no thought or contribution of your own. Bad play is being unwilling to change your mind about someone.

Are any of you following Cecilvania? The lynch of Sach in that game was BAD play.

Bad ideas are not bad play, bad actions are.

Oh, and since I have had my posts misunderstood fairly severly in the other game I am playing let me make this really clear THIS IS ONLY FOR THE FIRST DAY OR TWO, OR HOW EVER LONG IT TAKES TO GET A SOLID BEAD ON SCUM. HARD AND FAST RULES THAT ARE STUCK TO DOGMATICALLY WITHOUT THOUGHT ARE JUST AS BAD AS ANYTHING.

Hope that was clear.

452

[QUOTE=Oredigger77]
How does that work I’ve never tried pulling over an excel sheet before just [ code]paste sheet[ /code]?
[/QUOTE]
Yep.


ab	cde	fghi
j	kl	mnopq
rstuv	wxy	z
453

[QUOTE=NaturalBlondChap]
(snipped)

Now given that a mass reveal was unlikely, what would **CatinaSuits **motivation have been to raise the whole plan in the first place?
[/QUOTE]

It’s usually suggested by someone in almost every one of the games I’ve been playing around here. I don’t know exactly why, but there’s always that meme floating around and (so far) it’s always been rejected, at least during the first couple of Days of the game.

Having said that, it seems… odd… that it’s become justification for some folks to suspect others. I’ll have to take a closer look at that.

454

[QUOTE=NAF1138]
<snip>It’s really what I was trying to say with my vote for Dot earlier. (And to be clear, I really did intend to vote for Dot, not Rugger)
[/quote]
Huh? You did vote for dot.

How do we tell the difference?

455

[QUOTE=Santo Rugger]
Fair enough. I think I was just venting a bit of frustration from the lack of votes before the last day of the Day that seems to be all too common lately.
[/QUOTE]

Didn’t we just start the Day? Seems a little too soon to start fretting over the lack of votes. :slight_smile:

456

[QUOTE=Hockey Monkey]
Didn’t we just start the Day? Seems a little too soon to start fretting over the lack of votes. :slight_smile:
[/QUOTE]
Sure, but it seems like we’ve been playing for a week. :stuck_out_tongue:

But, seriously, although the lack of votes at this point isn’t a problem, I have a sneaky suspicion that it will be at the end of the Day. Just a bit of preemptive concern.

457

[QUOTE=NAF1138]

Are any of you following Cecilvania? The lynch of Sach in that game was BAD play.

[/QUOTE]

That is entirely a matter of perspective, my good man.

458

[QUOTE=Santo Rugger]
Huh? You did vote for dot.
[/quote]

Yes, I know. She asked ifI hadn’t meant to vote for you instead because I spent most of that post talking about you. My response post, I felt, didn’t make it clear that I hadn’t voted for her by mistake.

Well, unfortunatly we can’t. But I think everyone who is using “roll fishing” as an excuse to FOS or vote for CIAS (especially the early folks who buit up that idea) are thinking backwards and should be lynched. If they aren’t doing it on purpose and are town, well that sucks for us and them. But in the first couple of Days we shouldn’t be afraid to lynch people who are hindering the town because we are afraid they might be town. We have enough players that we can afford a mislynch or two.

459

[QUOTE=NAF1138]
<snip>I think everyone who is using “roll fishing” as an excuse to FOS or vote for CIAS (especially the early folks who buit up that idea) are thinking backwards and should be lynched. If they aren’t doing it on purpose and are town, well that sucks for us and them. But in the first couple of Days we shouldn’t be afraid to lynch people who are hindering the town because we are afraid they might be town. We have enough players that we can afford a mislynch or two.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t necessarily think those specific players should be lynched, but I mostly agree with your premise.

460

[QUOTE=Santo Rugger]
I don’t necessarily think those specific players should be lynched, but I mostly agree with your premise.
[/QUOTE]

Well the thing is…if we don’t start getting agressive about this shit it doesn’t really matter if we agree.

I am more than willing to change my vote to someone who makes worse mistakes. I fully expect to change my vote several times toDay as people talk more and more, but I am beyond the point of FOSing. I am voting toDay.