***"I wouldn’t count on it… I’ve been toying with you mortals.
Now the time has come for death to take you away.
Now you will experience the FULL power."***
-IC-
I don’t get people sometimes.
Congratulations, neither does anyone else.
double ouch! vote me, damn it. at least i can defend myself against that.
All About Weedy – Day 3
So, OK. After spending a good bit of time trying to wrap my brain around this game, I’ve decided to play under the following assumptions: (1) That this is regular Mafia, and that all the trimmings are distractions from the essence of the game; and (2) That Weedy was part of a traditional Scum team – that he had confederates and knew who they were. If #2 turns out to be a false assumption, then nothing that follows is valid… but at some point, I’m going to have to assume something or nothing will ever happen. So I’m working my way backward, looking at what Weedy did and what people said and did about and to her; I’ll be leaving out obviously fluffy or neutral posts, and posts related strictly to discussion of game setup-type stuff. Starting with Day 3.
WEEDY (1763) – Asks if Astral and Mosier are confirmed on the basis of the “no involuntary alignment changes” rule.
WEEDY (1850) – “Normal may have a point that choie wouldn’t go after her as Scum.”
CHOIE (1851) – Suggests that it’s unfair for Weedy to judge her (Choie’s) playstyle after just a few games.
WEEDY (1852, 1866, 1867) – Long-ish post, with follow-up, iterating a bunch of reasons to find choie suspicious without actually placing a vote. To me – now that Weedy appears to have been Scum – this is suggestive of choie as Town. Weedy is throwing a bunch of reasons-to-suspect-choie out into the open. If others pick up on this and choie is eventually lynched, Weedy can hide in the crowd when it comes time to review the vote record. If others don’t – well, no vote was placed, so it’s easy to back away. I think if choie were Scum working with Weedy, Weedy would have: (1) had more clear and defined reasons for the vote; and (2) actually placed a vote here. If you’re going to bus a Scum team-mate for Town credit, a suspicion-pushing post that doesn’t include a vote isn’t going to cut it.
ASTRAL REJECTION (1873): “Town read” on Weedy. Meaningless to me in either direction.
WEEDY (1925) – Says he believes BobArrgh’s explanation for his protection of glee (a rather in-depth explanation that Weedy views as too complicated to be a lie). I actually agree with Weedy here, but don’t know how much that tells us about Bob.
Now the bandwagon that will eventually claim ToeJam starts at 1937 (with Visorslash). Weedy decides to vote for MHaye – not choie. This strengthens my belief that choie is likely not team-mates with Weedy.
GADARENE (2023) – Flat out states that Weedy is “not likely to be Scum anymore” based on a vague “toneread.” Let me say this: Gad is playing strangely in this game. Short-tempered, impatient with being asked to explain anything… just… strange. In most cases, I’d say there’s no way one Scum clears another this definitively with no stated reason but in this case, I don’t know. There’s something going on with Gadarene. Nonetheless, this moment is a suggestion that Gad and Weedy are probably not aligned with one another.
SILVER JAN (2032) – Includes Weedy on her “most likely Townie” list, along with four players who are still alive.
Weedy votes for ToeJam at 2048. Then MHaye does the same at 2055. ToeJam is now at four votes – one Scum (Weedy), one Town (MHaye), and two from an unknown (Visorslash).
Quick aside: I hate the double vote thing. I think it’s an anti-Town power early in the game, and that Visorslash and Normal shouldn’t be using it if they have a choice (I have missed whatever discussions might have been had on this subject previously). I REALLY hate the triple vote thing that is happening, and think if we can ever figure out who is doing *that[i/], they should be the first one against the wall.
septimus’ vote for ToeJam at 2097 takes ToeJam to five versus three for his nearest competition (MHaye). Astral Rejection adds one for MHaye at 2109, thus clouding the issue. Now that we know that neither ToeJam nor MHaye was Scum, can anyone think of a Scum motivation for Astral to do this in this spot? Because I can’t. It’s a mislynch either way, and taking it from 5-3 to a dicier 5-4 so late in the Day is bound to draw some attention, and for what gain?
Bit of late action from Normal, ensuring ToeJam’s death over MHaye’s.
Conclusions from this part of the analysis:
Town reads on: Astral Rejection, choie
Weirded out by: Gadarene
Voting for: Nobody just yet.
Can’t we POE the triple voter by looking at who hasnt voted each Day?
How would that work?
I plan to vote for Visorslash or Suburban Plankton, whoever seems most lynchable according to the vote tally. VS is trying his best to kill me, using the “Phere resurrected him” argument to get as many people to attack me as possible, even though Phere has proven not to always act as a scum agent (for example, by killing a scum in a Night attack). SP stops talking whenever anyone mentions him, and plays with his cards a bit too close to his chest. He’s power-role hunting in the most blatant way, and has changed the outcome of a Day by convincing people not to vote for the lynch leader since Day one.
If neither of those two are scum, I’ll eat my hat. If I survive the Night, one of them is going down down down.
I don’t have a choice, story. My vote counts double, end of story. To not use it I’d have to not vote at all. Now tell me why giving a townie double vote power is anti-town.
Why?
No comment on this, why?
Please discuss why you can’t try to draw any conclusions from Bob being likely honest about his reasons for protection of glee.
Why did you fail to vote yesterday, or ever place a real vote the day before? (This is nothing to do with Gadarene’s question, btw – for mechanical reasons I doubt that the triple vote is restricted in any way – the player likely has four votes, not three, and public one not linked to the rest.)
I’m seriously bothered that you did a whole WoW without coming up with anything remotely resembling suspicion on anyone. This is not like you, Story. It IS reminiscent of you when you are not town. And calling choie (or even Astral, as paranoid as I still am) as likely town isn’t exactly a risky stance either, come to think of it.
Based on this post and your lack of (real) voting the last couple of days, I don’t think you’re town. I’m not sure you’re actually scum, but you’re going to have to work harder than this to convince me you’re not.
Only someone who didn’t otherwise cast a vote at the end of each day can be the triple voter, presumably, right? Let’s triangulate.
Normal, if you’re saying the triple voter actually has FOUR votes - one visible and three invisible - that seems overpowered and kind of ridiculous? Why just reject my idea out of hand?
It just seems too easy to me – if this were a game where we did NOT have 1/3 of the players AWOL all the time, then the triple voter would be identified in that way by around about day two. It’d be trivially easy and I don’t think Pizza would design that way. I think it might be a team ability rather than a single player – Bob’s idea that it might be one extra vote per living scum-team player appeals as it would give the town some reward for lynching a scum.
That said, I’m wrong about setups more often than I’m right, so knock yourself out if you feel like it.
Because it makes the vote record more difficult to parse. I hate extra votes, unless they are carefully controlled. They are strongly pro-Town in one particular situation - endgame, in the case of a tie.
I don’t understand the question. A player with a “Town read” on a player who turns out to be Scum could either be a Townie who is wrong or a Scum player trying to spread misinformation. Absent additional information, there is no way to tell which, and so the act itself is meaningless.
See above.
Because “Bob protected glee” is not something with any alignment implications. If Bob had a protective ability, then whether he is Scum or Town or something else he most likely wanted to use it. That he thought about how to use the ability, and then used it, does not tell me anything about his alignment.
Because I was not caught up enough to make a meaningful vote.
I agree with this.
I want to say the following in bold face:
The quote above is not true.
Relatively few participants in this game have played with me before, but I want to note that the foregoing is an entirely inaccurate description of my historical playstyle. I claim no credit for this in the present game, but as Town I am generally much more careful and conservative. I am not going to come up with someone to suspect just to satisfy some kind of arbitrary criterion that “oh, hey, I did some reading so I ought to have a vote.” I’ll vote when I have someone to vote for. As Scum, in fact, I am much more free with suspicion, since it’s easier to invent one then to find a real one.
That sentence: “this is not like you, Story. It IS reminiscent of you when you are not town” is demonstrably false, and Normal has played enough with me, I think, to know this. That the demonstrably false statement is being used to direct suspicion in my direction (among players not familiar enough with me to know better) is of concern.
So how about this:
Vote Normal Phase
For lying. Happy now?
Are we interested in taking risks primarily, or in being accurate? I could make a bunch of random paranoid accusations and be very risky, but I’m more interested in establishing a knowledge base, not taking risks.
Happier, actually. But I’m not lying. That game when you and I were both PFKs I got a ping on you the first or second day for a ‘recap of thus-and-such bandwagon’ post much akin to this one – basically you talked a lot but didn’t go much of anywhere with it. The one time I remember being town with you, you beat me up one side and down the other for days for a stupid day one vote I made. Even though you were wrong, you were the opposite of cautious about your accusation.
So you want to re-think that a bit, or don’t you?
As for your last comment, you should know better. Accuracy is all well and good, but sticking a limb out there once in a while (even if stupidly sometimes; it’s unavoidable) is a hallmark of being a townie. “Gadarene is being weird and the two most concensus townies in the game look townie” – I mean, why even waste your time?
You can’t vote yet, Story. It’s Night.
I find it strange that someone healed gnarlycharlie.
I don’t remember which game you’re talking about. I can only remember being a PFK once, and it was a strange game and I was terribly distracted the whole time.
But if you look at my history, what I did above is how I always play: I pick a chunk of game where somethign happened, read through it, and see if anything jumps out at me. Those recap posts are generally how I generate ideas. Unfortunately, sometimes I do a recap and nothing particularly compelling jumps out. So I try again. And so on.
Oh, I’m extremely aggressive once I have something in mind. “Cautious” doesn’t mean “sure I’m right.” It just means I’m not going to talk unless I have something to say, just to satisfy some kind of arbitrary metric.
No. Your statement was flat out wrong. It’s possible that it was not deliberately so - and your last response to me is tonally much more like someone seeking the truth than someone trying to manufacture an artificial outcome. I will most likely unvote you once I find a better place to land my vote.
Sticking a limb out there is all well and good if there’s a reason for it. My vote on you, for instance, which was about seeing how you respond and challenging an untrue assertion. But taking a risk for its own sake, so I can look Townie to you? Not interested.
That’s not really very fair. The obvious answer is that while the players in question might be “consensus Townies” to everyone else, until I did the reading I just did I was not part of the consensus. This is more my own fault than anything else; I shouldn’t have fallen behind and don’t expect sympathy for it. But this is my way of catching up. Not every revelation needs to be earth-shattering; there’s value in establishing a few solid things and building on them.
I just want to throw this out there: Normal, you were clearly, demonstrably, terribly wrong about me when your case involved phrases like “in past games…” I’m not the biggest fan of metacases like that.
The rest of your case is fine, talking about risky stances and whatnot. I can see where that is coming from. I don’t agree with you (yet), because too much of your case relies on metagaming. Any case that ultimately boils down to “trust me, he was X in the past” is unlikely to sway me.
It’s still Night?
OK, dammit.
Well… I WOULD vote for Normal, if it were Day.
Bah.
Was he even injured prior to this?
Why did one of the healing attempts fail?
I was just getting ready to say that. I haven’t seen anyone express a town lean on him, so it’s curious someone decided to heal him.