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

The Game Room
501

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
I am starting to really understand sach’s frustration in Cecilvania.

A bunch of you are ready and willing to lycnh me because I said everyone, when I meant to say most(the sloppy typing part), and because I posted from work where I couldn’t access the full rules and so went off the set up from the last game. There’s no backpedaling, there’s clarification.
[/QUOTE]

story claimed sloppy typing for hi sslip in Cecilvania. I got lynched for my aggressive pushing of him there, but lo and behold I was right. I am so not accepting that excuse here.

502

[QUOTE=Santo Rugger]
It can be included in a post with content, just like I did.

And I think it would be quite nice to be able to hold up a list later with who was for and against the plan. It won’t be foolproof, of course, but it’d be nice to have another analytical tool.
[/QUOTE]

It may be nice to hold it up, but it would be utterly useless. What would you infer from someone who voted for or against the plan.
I worry that this is a wolf strategy where half will vote for and half against. When at a later date when a small case is built against someone who voted one way, the opposing wolves can trot out that persons vote as further reasons to push a lynch.
This is a plan dropped during the night by one person and another has taken up the torch and pushing for a vote in the face of a lot of comments pointing out flaws with the whole plan. Add to that a few smudges against those who are suspicious of the motive for raising the mass reveal in the first place , it all looks weird
So unless Santo Rugger can tell us how the vote would be useful to town and not equally usefull to scum I

vote Santo Rugger

503

Everything is going to be equally useful to scum during the Day. Sure, the Wolves might be able to use it to cull the heard and force the remaining Townies into formfitting the data, but I don’t think that’s a huge problem. I think that our numbers advantage will make it a greater tool to us than it is to them, however.

More than anything, it helps the Town because it forces people to give reasons for their thoughts, instead of simply sitting out of the discussion altogether. I’ve used that technique in the past concerning mass roleclaims, in fact, I used it in Conspiracy 1, IIRC. I’ll tell you one thing, IMHO, scum are just as scared as town is about having a mass roleclaim, if not moreso. The uproar against the idea is not at all surprising to me.

I am especially interested, NBC, that you only mention Wolves being able to use the list against us, and not any of the other factions.

504

[QUOTE=Zsofia]
I’d also like to draw some more attention to ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies post 187:

I was a little reluctant to bring it up, since I figured people would think it was an OMGUS, but I find it very strange that while essentially everybody posting on Night Zero at that point was talking setup and how it might be different or the same from the last game and if we have x will we have y, but she (she, right?) only called out two names. The substance of the post was answered and argued by several people, but I’m still wondering - why name names, and of all the names to name, why me and Dio? (Especially since I wasn’t talking about why somebody might not be present, which is the stated point of her suspicion, but rather what the powers were in the last game and that we would probably have all groups.)

On the other hand, somebody also made the comment way upthread that that’s Cookies’ aggressive playing style, which could certainly be the case. But the comment stood out to me - she called out two people of many, and I at least wasn’t even doing what she claimed was the suspicious action. Perhaps because she knows I’m not on her side?
[/QUOTE]

(bolding in my quote is mine)

One more time, again…

The bold portion applied to you. “what the powers were in the last game” (your quote) = “role mechanics of Conspiracy 1” (my quote).

Yes, other people had already been hypothesizing and speculating on the set up of this game, but the specific ways that yourself and Dio were speculating are what I was concerned about.

505

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
Yeah, I don’t think I explained myself real well on that. My problem, chiefly, was with pedescribe, and it really exists independent of my opinion on “role-fishing” (which is, by the way, that everyone does it, Town and Scum, I have done it, as Town and Scum, and I see it as a null tell).

My problem, though, is that pedescribe voted for Cat, and in his explanation, averred that it was not because of Cat’s everybody-claim idea but rather because of Cat’s “role-fishing.” This makes it look like he’s building a pile of evidence. My point is that they are the same thing.

[/QUOTE]

This wasn’t posted when I started my last post. It makes much more sense to me, doesn’t seem nearly as defensive, and gives names. It’s critical of a specific argument, and leaves open debate on CIAS.

To my mind, defending a player differs from attacking an argument in that the attack is specific and the defense is general.

Thus:

unvote storyteller0910

To address the rest of the recent posts, I see Nanook’s comment as possibly confusion over the rules, but with a better than average chance of being a substansive slip. I’m somewhat less certain that this slip would indicate that he has a non-town role. It would seem to me that the holder of the undead hidden power and the town hidden power would both have the same point of view when it comes to hidden powers. This makes it less likely that Nanook is wolf or cabal, the fact that he lied about it makes it less likely that he is town.

To address the matter directly, the statement that every role has a hidden power definitively states that the role the poster who made that statement has a hidden power. Following this up with a claim that the poster does not have hidden power leaves nothing but a direct contridiction.

That’s the problem, Nanook. You said every, which kind of has to include you. Then you said, nope not me. I think I want to here how it makes sense that everyone has a hidden power, but you don’t.

So:

vote Nanook of the North Shore

============

I already made my feelings on a mass role-claim known. I like the idea locking the scum into a claim, but I think that the benefit of that is out-weighed by the risk to the witches, coroner, detective and seer. I don’t see the scum sticking to the safe roles, and recent games have shown that scum can fake major roles pretty well. The confusion will be rampant when we have 3 seers, 4 detectives, and who knows what else.

vote against a mass roleclaim

506

Saying everyone when you meant to say most is not a typo, it’s a slip. The follow-up contradiction and backpedaling is just icing on the cake.

unvote CIAS
vote Nanook

Vote against a mass claim, too.

507

My theoretical involved wolves because Pleonast said the Cabal were few in number, so I can’t see how they would have enough critical mass to push a lynch, and as far as I know undead don’t talk. Wolves I assume have numbers and ability to communicate.
I am not entirely sure about the Cabal team and how they operate, but I have only followed vanilla games in the past.

Most people have given reasons as to why the role claim is a bad idea, how does the vote proove anything.

508

[QUOTE=NaturalBlondChap]
My theoretical involved wolves because Pleonast said the Cabal were few in number, so I can’t see how they would have enough critical mass to push a lynch, and as far as I know undead don’t talk. Wolves I assume have numbers and ability to communicate.
I am not entirely sure about the Cabal team and how they operate, but I have only followed vanilla games in the past.
[/quote]
What percentage of players do you consider to be a critical mass? Surely less than 50%? It only takes one good argument and a couple “me toos” to get a bandwagon rolling. Even though the Undead can’t talk, it can become very obvious who they need eliminate. Hell, **HNC, Zoggie (Freudian) **and I were able to coordinate a plan during the last game, and we weren’t even all in the same faction!

This just seems very suspicious to me, but I’m not sure if it’s because you subconsciously distanced yourselves from the Wolves and think your team can’t do that, because our definitions of critical mass differ, or if it’s because you (and your team?) have decided that the wolves are your biggest threat.

It forces people to give their reasons, which can be looked back at later. I’m pretty suspicious of those who have simply chimed in with an indigo post without expounding at all or having committed to the discussion before. I’ll come back to this in a bit.

509

[QUOTE=Oredigger77]
I don’t see a benefit in the mass role claim. The only good thing is that we can believe certain statements the certain power roles make and later in the game scum that have to make up additional data will make a slip. But while we are waiting for that the scum will have free reign to pick us off. If nothing else look at the two claiming detectives from the newbie game and how bad that got the town spanked. I think that role claims prior to lynching are necessary but other then that will force town to not look at people’s posting history to avoid lynching an important role.
[/QUOTE]

Just to clarify #319 Vote no mass role claim

Now on to the important debate about Nanook’s slip. When I read through my first thought was that he was talking about the fact there are no vanilla roles. But after a reread and all of the additional debate his post still doesn’t set off any alarms for me. Based on the way that the rules are stated the hidden power can be held by an individual or a group. It would make sense that the group must come to some sort of majority about its use in order to do this the probably all know what the power does and have some way of communicating in order to vote. This basically eliminates the wolves and the cabal.

If the power is held singularly is would make sense that who ever holds the power would be told that they alone hold that power. This is problematic because if Nonook was told that he holds his power singularly then he would at least know the rest of his group didn’t have a secret power and wouldn’t state it as such. I think that if he had a group telling him what to do or say the slip probably wouldn’t have occurred or he would have some more defenders.

Because I don’t see a logical way for him to make this mistake outside of his explanation I buy his excuse. Please let me know if I’ve made an error in my logic.

510

[QUOTE=Santo Rugger]
.It forces people to give their reasons, which can be looked back at later. I’m pretty suspicious of those who have simply chimed in with an indigo post without expounding at all or having committed to the discussion before. I’ll come back to this in a bit.
[/QUOTE]

But it was not your intention to force an exposition of reasons. Back in post 490 when you first suggested the idea, you gave your reason for voting yes, but only requested a vote from others. Only later when questioned about why you wanted a vote did you add in the purpose of the vote was to gather peoples reasons. Did you forget to mention the primary reason for a vote in your request for everyone to vote, or it just came later.

511

[QUOTE=NaturalBlondChap]
<snip>Did you forget to mention the primary reason for a vote in your request for everyone to vote, or it just came later.
[/QUOTE]
It’s not so much that I forgot, but more that I assumed everybody was accustomed to giving their reasons when they vote for players, so they’d give their reasons for this vote without prodding. You know what they say about assuming… :smack:

512

So, in an effort to get my head around the mass role claim scenario, I decided to run a little simulation of what I thought might happen if this idea came to some sort of fruition. Here’s what I came up with in terms of potential claims (note - these are all complete guesses, and were devised with a “scum sticking to safer roles” mindset):

**Coroner – 1 **
(I doubt scum would claim this since it’s just a matter of time until they would get proved wrong)

**Detective – 2 **
(I could potentially see a scum claiming this, since they could stall and claim they investigated a vampire victim, meanwhile they’re fingering someone else who will get lynched)

**Freemason – 4 **
(All Town would likely claim truthfully since they know they can confirm each other. No scum claim for the same reason)

**Magician – 3 **
(I would expect multiple claims here since it is not readily confirmable)
**
Scotsman – 3 **
(I would expect multiple claims here since it is not confirmable without death, which reduces the value of the role)

**Seer – 1 **
(I doubt scum would claim this since they would likely get proved wrong fairly quickly)

**Vicar – 3 **
(I would expect multiple claims here since it is not readily confirmable)

**Vigilante – 2 **
*(I could potentially see a Wolf claiming this since they could use a night kill to pseudo-confirm, and maybe even get someone to block them after they “accidentally” kill Town.) *

**Warlock – 2 **
(I would expect multiple claims here since it is not readily confirmable)

**Witch – 0 **
(I suspect the real witches will lie, and scum will not want to take the chance)

**Witchdoctor – 2 **
(I would expect multiple claims here since it is not readily confirmable)

Non-compliance - 8
OK, how do we figure out who’s lying? :smiley: Really, if we take the above as some sort of reasonable facsimile of what might happen, what would the next step be? I could see potentially taking a less useful role, like maybe Magician, and force all claimers to account for themselves, and try to find out which of them are lying. But the problem with that is what could they possibly say in their own defense this early? Do we target those who wouldn’t play along, assuming there are several scum among that group?

I’m seriously trying to figure out if this makes sense. Could one of the proponents take me on the next step?

513

I am against a Day One mass claim

I think it was pointed out last game that even if all of the roles had honestly claimed on Day One, Town would have lost the game. Not to mention that there are town roles who may not want to claim honestly. And given the delayed reveal mechanism of dead players, the usual town tactic of trading numbers for information is blunted considerably.

I could, however, be talked into some kind of PM reveal where some part of the PM is used as a handshake…but that may not be all that effective, either, because Pleonast probably didn’t write role PMs similar enough for that to work.

514

[QUOTE=dotchan]
I could, however, be talked into some kind of PM reveal where some part of the PM is used as a handshake…but that may not be all that effective, either, because Pleonast probably didn’t write role PMs similar enough for that to work.
[/QUOTE]
I fail to see how this would work, considering my own PM is virtually identical to the one posted in the rules section. Furthermore, what roles would be able to handshake this way? Sounds like fishing for how roles are constructed to me.

515

…except last game, Omega Wolf Pygmyrugger claimed Freemason, investigated-as-undead (Vampire) CatInASuit claimed Necromancer with a Bomb, and Necromancer Zoggie claimed Wolf.

Of course, this happened at Endgame, but still.

516

What are you trying to say?

That sounds like a point for mass claiming, if anything.

517

[QUOTE=Santo Rugger]
What are you trying to say?
[/QUOTE]

That we shouldn’t assume that scum would or wouldn’t claim a certain role.

518

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]

Hm.

[/QUOTE]

Well, like I said earlier, I definitely felt there was something not quite right. And these posts, quoted by storyteller, strengthen my conviction to
vote Nanook

And I oppose the full reveal. Mostly because in this game we have the advantage of having several opposing factions that don’t have perfect information. I say: let’s keep them in the dark!

519

If Nanook is not lynched today, who would you like to see embrace the noose Today?

520

[QUOTE=Drain Bead]
Saying everyone when you meant to say most is not a typo, it’s a slip. The follow-up contradiction and backpedaling is just icing on the cake.

unvote CIAS
vote Nanook
[/quote]

What a lot of other folks have been saying. The first “slip” was apparent even to me.

The “typo” is even more questionable. When I screw up typing most it looks more like msot than everyone.

Vote Nanook