Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT TWO

The Game Room
61

Hey, I wasn’t around over the weekend at all. I am catching up but did a quick skim of the thread. I plan to spend a bit more time today (as in the next several hours) going over what has been said in more detail and posting a bit more of substance. But as it stands…I am ok with my vote where it is, and thanks Hawk for answering me. Now I need to look at that answer and see if it makes sense.

Someone asked how many masons and scum we likely have. I think it is safe to assume that there are 5 scum based on the 4/5 dead 1/5 alive ratio, which means that scum were likely balanced on a 6 person scum group. Hopefully this means that the scum themselves don’t get too many extra powers. It also means we likely have a vig of some sort (good) and possibly an SK.

We might be Night lynching also. (4 kill per Night potential) I don’t think story would have declined to state if it wasn’t something he wanted us to think was possible. If he wants us to think it’s possible then he thought about it at least. So I say we treat each Night as if it is possible that there is a Night lynch. For toNight at least, I think it would be in our best interest to unvote and see if there is one less kill toNight. Which means that if our vig can choose not to kill, I would like them to take this Night off in the interest of getting us a shot at some extra information.

I could run some numbers for the rest of the pro town roles out there, but I don’t know that it’s a great idea to do that. But we should think of this as a six scum game, I think. I don’t have any ideas about how to lynch that last 1/5 of every scum, but if we don’t figure that out soon we may be in a world of hurt.

Ok, off to do real reading.

62

All right, I’m back home. Go us, for managing to make a significant dent in the scum pool already! That’s almost enough to make up for losing our investigator.

Where I stand on the night kills: Thing Fish, IMHO, was probably hit by the Vig or SK. Scum would not have spent a kill on someone who had a handful of votes going into Day 2. I’m betting on the Vig trying to carry out the town’s wishes, by lynching the next-most-popular candidate. After all, our only confirmed Mason was voting Thing Fish–he probably seemed like a reasonable choice. I’m not really convinced by the “Night Lynch” theory–that feels like betting on zebras.

Pleonast was almost definitely hit by scum. He’s experienced, and maybe they had a Mason read on him. I have no idea how, but hey…

The Vig/SK took out Buffy (I’m calling her that from now on, skanky vampire that she was)–probably the SK, if I’m right about the Vig. We don’t know the SK’s exact win condition in this game, but isn’t the idea generally for both sides to want to get rid of the SK and vice versa? Can we pretty much confirm that we need to lynch a SK now, as well as the scum, in order to win?

More posts in a bit…must go over the Day more carefully…

63

Ok. Going to get this off my chest and then move on.

We’ve got LTL, scum skimmers, third vote and now, apparently, the peek fluff gambit. Oy vey.

You know I hear this shit every game. I admit that I am having fun. But, you know what. Go back and read what I have had to say. Percentage wise maybe low but actual content I would hazzard to guess that I am in the top 27.

Fuck even the top 65 make it into March Madness. So I should get a home seed, FCS.

I told you why I voted for Fishy. Wrong, you bet you. But were other folks wrong as well, you bet you. Did Nat ask some specific questions, you bet you. Did I attempt to address them, you bet you. Did it change his/her position, don’t think so. Why would that be, one wonders? Hey, Nat you got something you want to share with the rest of the group?

Ok, winding down. Do we really want this to be pablum fed to the masses. I truly do enjoy the more cerebral aspects of this game. I also believe that each Mod brings their own flavor to each outing. That’s why when dealing with story and his set ups that I get a little Christie. As opposed to Idle when you just need to make sure you pack an umbrella.

Blizzard, anyone?

Peek Explanation

Pablum: too often town has gotten to relying on power roles to achieve victory. I continue to believe that discourse and analysis is the most fundamental part of this game. Additionally, it promotes interaction which should be (or in my case specifically) secondarily beneficial. Hence my confusion about non participants.

With story I approach these games as solvable ala Agatha Christie. I mean he is so boxy that I have trouble imagining little story’s coming out of the womb not already potty trained (Ok, now I owe you three). With an Idle game it’s a little more, how should we say it, free form.

It’s kind of like the difference between a blow job and female superior. They are both cool but it feels a tad different.

Capiche.

64

I like this idea, but I would be surprised if story doesn’t sub Blam out at dusk. HMm…I wonder if there’s a limit to the number of subs?
At this point, I see that the Cookies and Hawkeyeop debate is taking center stage. I’ll be honest–I don’t have any hard evidence to add. But I’ve got a feeling that Hawkeyeop is scum and that Cookies is town. It’s a gut feeling, nothing more. Cookies is not a mason.

Unvote DiggitCamara
Vote Hawkeyeop

65

Just to be clear, I’m having fun deciphering your posts as well. I got vacation and in case I got killed early, I’m trying to get as much out out of it as I can, so I post a lot as well.

Well, when I unvoted Day one, I got called out immediately, so I thought to let my vote hang until I found someone else to vote for. And if I unvote now, it’ll even look scummier because called that out…

Fine, unvote peekercpa.

Again my vote was because I did find your posts confusing, but everyone should be aware of it know (if they didn’t already). Not convinced you are town, but haven’t got a strong case for scum either (for details see my response to special ed).
I don’t disagree with lynch the lurker (esp. since the rules allow it), but I rather discuss and vote for someone with reasons other than they’re not posted.
I’ll probably vote for Hawk or Cookies, but dotchan is an alternative if she stays silent (or if I decide first two are both town).

66

What is the opposite of FOS? Can we please have a phrase for adore… what about “kneel with admiration”??

I KWA before you Great Peeker!

I like this very much and just wish I could write like this in English!
You’re very right - Town need to solve the game without waiting for Poirot to do it all.

Blaster Master told me in the last game that the greatest job for a vanilla town is to put out new ideas and to stick their neck out (even at the risk of getting lynched) just to make sure town wins.

We need new ideas and we need to allow town to come up with suggestions that can win the game for us. Not all ideas can do this - but some might.

To me one of the most pro-scum-sctions is to try to keep someone quiet
(and when that is said I feel really BAD about the way Idles game is being discussed in here - I really think we should keep two games at the same time a part!!!)

67

I agree with this. Let’s please limit discussions of current games to their respective game threads. I don’t feel comfortable commenting on Idle’s game in here, and I wouldn’t feel comfortable commenting on this game in there. It also isn’t fair to the people who may be involved with or following only 1 of the games.

As it is, I’ve already confused myself. I spent 30 minutes looking for something cookies said, just to find it wasn’t said in this game sigh

I’m due for a re-read later tonight. I’ll be concentrating on cookies and hawkeyeop for their interaction. (It’s most of what’s happened today), also Netlaw and peeker for their interaction. I’m surprised that peeker didn’t go more strongly against netlaw. When I read his peek’s post #63, I started thinking about how netlaw’s approach could be pro-scum.

I suppose I ought to look at dotchan too. I’m not sure how she’s gotten momentum…[fluff]and I never trust totallost…never, and I don’t know why. I think I need to lock her in a bathroom.[/fluff]

68

[fluff]
But that’s fine - I don’t need to be trusted… just want to be loved… in the bathroom!!!
[/fluff]

69

I’m running through things at a steady clip and I feel the need to bring up peekercpa’s Post 262 during Night 1: 262

“…we always have a LTL discussion early on (because that’s what scum do)…” Seems like a possible slip. Is he referring to himself as scum? Surprised nobody jumped on this. Could be nothing, but it just looked fishy. And it’s ironic, because he’s talking about this very sort of thing. (I think. I can’t figure out what he’s on about, half the time!) Thoughts?

It’s not enough for me to hang anything on, especially since I’m really confused by a lot of that post, so I’ll carry on with my reading…

70

I took it to mean that lurking is what scum do. Not talking about lurkers is what scum do. That was just my interpretation.

You do have a point though - I have no idea what he is talking about most of the time.

Post 63 (I’m not linking to it because it’s just up-page from here) seemed mostly incoherent to me. You bet you? Is that some kind of local dialect. I guess it means some type of affirmative?

Oh, and could someone let me know what LTL is? I’m pretty sure it is ‘Loves to Lurk’ or ‘Lost time Lurking’ or something pertaining to lurkers, but I’d like to know the exact acronym so we’re all on the same page. FWIW, google has lots of answers to LTL, but none apply here too well.

71

lynch the lurker generally.

72

And never mind, because he corrects himself right afterward. :smack: Sorry, all this catching up is making my head spin a bit.

73

Ok. Let’s really take the hinges off. Thanks, millet for correcting yourself. brewha kind of skanky hopping in like that. Kind of opprortunistic b flap. But scum would never do that.

Honestly, I’ve played a couple of games but this puppy is the most vocabularally (word?)challenged one yet. Cripes, I really feel like a hick from the sticks attending an English teachers’ convention.

Ruler On

GD, that’s the last dangling participle that will be allowed

Ruler Off.

Ok, righteous indignation. Natlaw. You lying piece of mischaracterizing stuff that comes out of a Cow’s uterus (could be masculine, however - keep trying to sell that FCOD).

And total if we are seriously taking this to the bathroom it ain’t gonna just be a BJ or momma on top. Matter of fact I don’t think we’d have a prayer of getting our security deposit back.

And LTL stands for I Really Like Beer. We just abbreviate a little differently over here in the lower 48.

74

Bathroom bondage eh? Does anyone not have a crush on TL? :wink:

75

Hmmm, exactly where did I lie?

<peekermode on>
If a calf comes from a cow’s uterus, then the cow starts giving milk. Milk contains calcium, which is good for your bones. So you’re saying my unvote was spineless? Or is it because I haven’t voted for someone else yet?
Or are you throwing me a smoke bomb, so when people see the smoke, they assume there must be some scummy fire burning? :confused:
<peekermode off>

76

So you expect scum on day one to try to get each other lynched? I know scum can do anything, but they don’t generally purposely sacrifice there own day one.

“Anyone who pushed someone else’s lynch is by definition attempting to protect Macey” is a factual statement. If you are voting for candidate A, you are making it less likely candidate B is lynched. This doesn’t necessarily mean such an action is scummy, but it has that effect nonetheless.

I find nothing scummy about lurking, so yes ignoring Macey is more scummy. Many many things are more scummy than lurking.

This counts your post where you cast suspicion upon Hockey and the two posts you refer too. I would include your reaction to my plan of analyzing Macey as a reason for pushing the vote towards you. More than I had on Amrussell and Naf.

I have not referring to that vote. Nor have I taken a close look at Hockey, since she has done nothing more suspicious then any number of other players.

I cultivated that post from watching the town get slaughtered in SDMB. I entered the game thinking that it was the best way to catch scum. Macey was in trouble in part because I was pushing his lynch early and strongly. I would think if I was scum I would want a little bit more upside then lose a teammate to cast a bit of suspicion on a random non-scum player. Your theory makes no sense from a scum perspective.

Two or three includes you, Naf, and AMRussell. Naf is the or 3 player, given he could just have liked the alternate better.

77

Why did you not count bufftabby along with me, Naf, and amrussel in that group?

With regards to bussing fellow scum, considering that the two Deadites that have been killed aren’t actually dead, there is certainly a wrinkle to the usual disincentive to bus one’s scummates.

78

Peeker burning your dog!

The magic rock!

…anyways…

I’m stuck between a couple of choices. Peeker is up there for going back and forth on some things (from what I can tell, anyway), such as lynching BlaM for lurking. And the metagaming and constantly throwing out what appears to be random thought–it feels like he’s trying to put on a persona for the game. Which is annoying, but not damning…shifty at worst. Why create a smokescreen around yourself if you’re pro-town?

Looking at the votes gives me some other good candidates. The people who voted after macey started getting votes but who did NOT vote for macey are:

zeriel (one jokey post voting and un-voting dotchan)
NAF (voted chucara–that vote still stands)
buffy (SCUM–voted cookies)
Pleonast (Mason–voted JSexton, unvoted JSexton, then voted Thing Fish)
Diggit (voted chucara–that vote still stands)
Cookies (unvoted JSexton, voted BlaM, but currently voting for Hawkeyeop)
amrussell (unvoted peekercpa, voted Rapier, currently voting dotchan)
Natlaw (unvoted Diggit, voted peekercpa, has since unvoted)
chucara (voted Thing Fish, unvoted during Night, sounding almost like he knew his vote might have immediate consequences)
Almost Human (voted Millit the Frail, then quickly unvoted)

I would expect to find more scum in here and in the pool of never-voters (MHaye, BlaM, Nanook, Hal).

I can give the second-listers some leeway, as they weren’t around to make votes or got caught in the board outage. Lynching the lurkers is a gamble, and I want to hear more from all of them before I throw out an actual vote. (Despite my belief that, statistically speaking, there’s probably at least one scum among them.)

It’s the first-listers that I want to focus on. There are potentially a few scum diversion attempts in there, none of which really went anywhere, possibly due to the board outage, but more likely due to the fact that they couldn’t herd enough townies toward any other candidate without being extremely obvious.

More analysis to follow, stay tuned.

79

I did mean to clarify this in my post. My inability to comprehend your ramblings has nothing to do with your alignment. It has not swayed me to think you any more or less town. You just have an odd way of putting things that I don’t really follow.

It’s that kind of odd behavior that got Autolycus lynched in my only mafia game with him.

I’m really not sure what is opprortunistic about agreeing that you are difficult to follow. Had I said that you talk funny and are therefore scum, it would be a different story.

There’s really no reason for not stating things plainly. It’d be easier for us to follow where you are going with a thought.

80

This is false. Attempting to protect is a question of intent. Making it less likely that the person is lynched is a matter of consequences. That you are attempting to conflate the two is highly scummy IMO.

Lurking is, if nothing else, highly anti-town. It can also turn into a pro-scum maneuver if that’s why the lurker lurks. This has been discussed before. I find lurking at least somewhat scummy.

The upside is twofold: not only would a scum you snag a high-level participating town, but (assuming no-one sees through it, which, while typically a safe assumption, didn’t happen) you look town. That is a very strong motivation for scum behavior, and it is scummy that you neglect to consider it, IMO.

Why do you keep pushing suspicion away from NAF?