Mystery Mafia -- Game Thread

[NAF1138]

@Silman

okay the first thing that stuck out is wow, you guys have a completely different culture to us. The general sort of how you read people is mostly the same, but the way you phrase it, and the mannerisms are completely different.
we have a bunch of catch phrases to cover most of what you’ve been explaining in your posts.
ie “when I’m sheriff (seer) I usually wait for 2 investigations, more is too risky”
we have a “2 live peeks = hardclaim” rule of thumb for 9 player games, and generally how we do things is seers will out their peeks, but all the villagers (and the scum/wolves too, to look like villagers" will put out fake peeks that look like they were made by a seer, to give cover to the seer.

You also mentioned that someone who you find suspicious is more likely than not villager, and the people pushing are wolves/scum.
IMO you should be finding different things suspicious
A good rule of thumb is
“Villagers vote for weird, or things they don’t like.
Wolves try and look like what villagers don’t lynch.”
so the more likely wolves/scum are those who are trying to blend in, not really creating new ideas, but echoing those already present.

We really aren’t so different. It’s mostly a language thing and the fakepeek thing. The fakepeek thing is really really different though, so it exaggerates the other differences.

[gnarlycharlie]

@NAF1138

We really aren’t so different. It’s mostly a language thing and the fakepeek thing. The fakepeek thing is really really different though, so it exaggerates the other differences.

yes, fakepeeking is certainly alien to us but the way they do it makes it feasible. if a cop did that and no one provided cover that would be the end of that.

also, i notice that they also have pressure votes like players from CFC. it’s quite intriguing voting for someone for no real reason except to see how players especially the votee reacts.

[NAF1138]

@gnarlycharlie

yes, fakepeeking is certainly alien to us but the way they do it makes it feasible. if a cop did that and no one provided cover that would be the end of that.

also, i notice that they also have pressure votes like players from CFC. it’s quite intriguing voting for someone for no real reason except to see how players especially the votee reacts.

I have been doing that for years, and I am not the only one, but it’s not the most common technique around here.

[Silver_Jan]

Wow, this game is going really fast, it’s taken me a few hours to read.

Peeker does seem to have changed his game-play since he was called out on it In fact so much so that I could imagine him jumping up and down and saying “NO, no, don’t vote for me yet”

Vote Peekercpa

My vote could change but he does look like the most likely candidate at the moment.

[Drain_Bead]

unvote Guiri

I’m okay with his explanation, especially combined with Scathach’s statement that he meant in this game as well. I don’t necessarily think peeker is capable of changing his playstyle in any real way, mind you…he is perfectly well aware of what gets him lynched.

1. Not acting like peeker
2. Acting like peeker

Seriously, he has been a Day One lynch in almost every game I’ve been in with him. At this point, a Day One peeker lynch is a big blaring null-tell because he’s an easy target. Not sure what to think of given that a good portion of the players in this game aren’t used to him. This is in no way a defense of him–I think the initial case against him isn’t the greatest, and I hate metagaming peeker because he’s the proverbial loose cannon, but his defense is raising my hackles. I need to do a reread of prior games he’s been lynched in before–I seem to recall this behavior happening before, but I don’t know if he was Town or Scum. My guess is that I’m going to find examples of both.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Even if “pressure voting” isn’t done here, it’s still wise to be mindful of the vote tally, and also, push several folks as candidates at once for the lynch.

Your odds of pressuring a scum increase if several people are threatened with death at once. Since in the early game you have no leads, such “playing the odds” tactics are stronger than wagoning one person.

[special_ed]

@Silver_Jan

Wow, this game is going really fast, it’s taken me a few hours to read.

Peeker does seem to have changed his game-play since he was called out on it In fact so much so that I could imagine him jumping up and down and saying “NO, no, don’t vote for me yet”

Vote Peekercpa

My vote could change but he does look like the most likely candidate at the moment.

Vote Silver Jan

[Drain_Bead]

Before I look more in-depth at peeker, I wanted to make a vote that I might end up moving later, just to get my suspicions on record.

vote Krayz

Mainly for his series of posts between 426-439 (I hope I’m getting those numbers right). Noises up the thread, doesn’t provide any reasoning or analysis for any of his multiple smudges (or soft exoneration of peeker and giraffe), and generally giving us nothing to go on other than “lolwolf.”

[Drain_Bead]

goddamnit

vote Krayz

[Silver_Jan]

@special_ed

Vote Silver Jan

What’s up** Ed**, bullying me already? :rolleyes: Bah!

[Drain_Bead]

@special_ed

Vote Silver Jan

Bleached vote.

ed, care to provide a reasoning? I’m pretty sure I know what at least a portion of it is, but I want to know why that’s worth a vote on Silver Jan and not another of the later bandwagon peeker voters. I figure there has to be something more than the obvious. I want to hear it, not just see the vote.

[special_ed]

@Drain_Bead

Bleached vote.

ed, care to provide a reasoning? I’m pretty sure I know what at least a portion of it is, but I want to know why that’s worth a vote on Silver Jan and not another of the later bandwagon peeker voters. I figure there has to be something more than the obvious. I want to hear it, not just see the vote.

It’s not to Bully that’s for sure

That said, I had been toying with voting for Krayonz myself

Since I was actually on the peeker bandwagon (maybe even started it, can’t remember if Giraffe was first) It’s not that.

My initial vote on Peeker was to gauge his reaction. He hasn’t really given me a solid Scum feel in his reaction, but, I’m stil suspicious.

Silver Jan, however, has come in, and basically said:

1. Oh my, there’s so much
2. Commented only on peeker
3. Cast an easy me too vote pushing him farther into the lead.

So, it just seems like a lazy and easy thing to do. Something a Scum might do.

oops, got to go make a presentation. be back later

[Meeko]

First things first, this game is moving with a speed that I have NEVER even dreamed of seeing for a Mafia game. I guess this means I’m closer to a regular volume poster than I thought, my attempts to post more than Peeker be damned. (And even then, I wasn’t actually trying for the record, things just happened.)

I have real concerns with the speed of this game, to the point that I am already considering dropping out. There is no way I can mod my own game, hold down my job and play in a game that moves this fast. Something has to go, and it’s obvious to me what to pick.

However, I’m still here.

@Krayz

probably a villager here.

Krayz, you ping the hell out of me. Are you sure you aren’t Pleonast?

You come off with an air pretentiousness that Pleonast can only dream of. You are at best guessing about things that you can’t possibly know yet. The voice you are using here, and indeed in other posts, is condescending to the rest of us. Either play the game, or comment on it, not both. I’m not sure if I can explain it any better than this, but if I had to summarize:

**
You come off as “I can’t be bothered by this game, I’m already over it.”**

Both of the above come together. I already feel like I can’t give this game the time I need to give it. I get the feeling you could give this game the time you need to give it but you won’t. One of the two is far worse than the other, and I don’t like where you are going with yours. If you don’t want to play this game, get out.

Vote Krayz

I’ve voted Pleonast in other games for less. You might not have claimed yet, but I wouldn’t hold it against you. As for Pleonast, as for you, you are holding the game to your standard, and that in turn breaks the game, and does not make it better.

[lilflower]

@TexCat

I am going to vote for someone with a bad idea. First MykBot has the bad idea:
Below, I believe that he is referring to NAF’s bad idea, but perhaps he is already trying to explain that his own bad idea doesn’t make him scummy? Though I wonder why he continues to think that targeting yourself is an OK idea.

This is a bad idea from someone who played in the previous version of this game. Wouldn’t he realize that targeting yourself is a way to kill off all of the vig’s? And yet even after we pointed that out, he’s still recommending it as a viable option that he’d try himself. Looks to me like a wolf trying to get a few naive vig’s to off themselves.

Vote: Mykbot

@MykBot

<snip>
Plankton: That’s why I said targeting yourself last night was smart. Now that all the power roles are presumably live, I think targeting yourself is on the table but it’s obviously riskier. In the first game I targeted myself, got nothing, then targeted someone else, got nothing, then targeted myself AGAIN because I was obviously not dangerous, still got nothing. . .I ended up never even knowing what the hell my role was doing.
<snip>

I think **TexCat **is misreading Mykbot’s suggestion here. He is pretty clearly saying that last Night would have been a good Night to target yourself (although I don’t agree but that doesn’t make him scummy). **TexCat **goes on to say that **Mykbot **is telling us all to target ourselves every Night which he clearly is not.

I also don’t think we should be voting for people for what you might think is a bad idea. Firstly, at least it generates discussion which is what we need. Secondly, it’s not like putting an idea out there forces everyone to actually do it. I’ve always been bothered by this thought process that if one person makes a suggestion that others don’t agree with, that they are scum. Townies should know not to take the advice of a single, unconfirmed player.

This is a lazy vote.

**vote TexCat **

Also, nothing happened to me last Night that I know of.

[lilflower]

NETA: TexCat’s vote is lazy, not mine.

[Silver_Jan]

@special_ed

It’s not to Bully that’s for sure

That said, I had been toying with voting for Krayonz myself

Since I was actually on the peeker bandwagon (maybe even started it, can’t remember if Giraffe was first) It’s not that.

My initial vote on Peeker was to gauge his reaction. He hasn’t really given me a solid Scum feel in his reaction, but, I’m stil suspicious.

Silver Jan, however, has come in, and basically said:

1. Oh my, there’s so much
2. Commented only on peeker
3. Cast an easy me too vote pushing him farther into the lead.

So, it just seems like a lazy and easy thing to do. Something a Scum might do.

oops, got to go make a presentation. be back later

Well you are right about there being a lot to read and as I wasn’t able to play this last night I serpent the best part of the morning reading and Peeker was the person that pinged my the most. There is another person that pinged me but I can’t remember who or on what page it’s on so I have to go back and find it. I also thought that it was best that I get a vote in before EOD. Just remember Special Ed that you have been wrong about me in the last 2 games so I take it my playing style is still not to your liking :mad:

[Normal_Phase]

Went back to look at Dancecat. Strategy and fluff posts mostly excepted:

@Dancecat

there is one thing in this post that makes me want to vote you, and another that makes me want to tempclear you. i’ll lean towards tempclearing if you can tell me which is which.

I want to hear the answer to this myself. I think TimeLady responded around the time I was last online yesterday.

On the NAF thing, this is response to NAF’s “Bad Idea ™” –

@Dancecat

:eek:

you see no downside to keeping such a list?

really?

@Dancecat

**vote NAF1138

@Dancecat

wanna answer the question I asked you yesterpage about revealing the targets of night actions?

@Dancecat

The huge, borderline catastrophic downsides are as follows:

1. It gives the wolves more information, since villagers probably aren’t going to lie about who they targeted.

2. It gives the wolves another vehicle to manipulate the villagers, since they will be providing misleading or otherwise bad information.

3. It’s terrible for seer cover and worse for the real seer(s) since the peeks are going to be out there in plain sight and you can only fakepeek the player you’ve targeted, which is going to be a gigantic trainwreck. When you’re targeting someone you find wolfy/scummy (as you should be), are you just going to fakepeek them wolf? You can’t fakepeek a villager, which is a much better play. And if you fakepeek someone wolf and you are wrong, you’re setting yourself up to get mislynched.

I can go on and on and on if you need more, but I can very safely say that revealing the targets of our night actions is a freaking awful idea. It’s so bad that I can’t believe that any villager/townie wouldn’t see the huge advantage it gives the wolves/mafia, therefore I think you’re scum.

“Therefore I think you’re scum” pings. That’s far too much to hang on such a slender thread, even if you honestly believe every word of what you’re saying about how bad an idea it is.

@Dancecat

No. What NAF suggested is extremely (and imo, very obviously) anti-town.

@Dancecat

I wouldn’t, and this is the crux of our disagreement. A cop who can come out midgame with a handful of live peeks is a huge asset, and is definitely worth more than a 1-1 trade. I have a feeling that this is more of a cultural thing though, so I’m not sure that I can fairly call you wolfy for it even though my gut instict is to do just that. But if anyone made your suggestion in a game on the board where I usually play, they would catch all kinds of hell for it (and usually rightly so).

@Dancecat

I like this sachertorte person. I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

The point of the early vote on NAF was that, at the time of the vote, he had done (or suggested) what I thought was the most anti-village thing of anyone so far. The purpose of the vote is to apply pressure and hopefully generate discussion, and I’m glad that said discussion followed. As I said in an earlier post, I’m not sure that I can justifiably call him wolfy for it just because the idea was anti-villa/pro-wolf, especially since there’s a huge cultural difference between here and “home.” In fact, I am actively looking for someone who I think is a better vote (and I have a suspect or two), I’m just not quite sure what direction I’m going to take yet.

Does that help?

For me, no. “That’s anti-town” is too easy of a reason for voting someone for it to mean much to me. I don’t think it’s remotely a good tell or a justifiable vote. Your backing off a bit on the basis of cultural differences is hard to evaluate. I would really like to see these other suspects of yours.

@Dancecat

Sup fool?

I’m trying to keep it to a dull roar so that I don’t ruffle any feathers. Somehow I don’t think spamming the thread endlessly and verbally bitchslapping everyone who pisses me off would bode very well here.

For what it’s worth I don’t find this quote in itself to be all that incriminating. I’m more interested in your ability to find suspects.

@Dancecat

Um, I’ve been pretty loud and opinionated thus far. Not sure why you think I’m purposefully trying to blend in; I’m merely trying to keep my personal style of playing in check since it can be VERY abrasive and I’m new to this board.

@Dancecat

I have the most posts out of anyone in the game, and have actively participated in important strat discussions, yet Giraffe thinks I’m trying to “blend in” and it’s scummy. wtfingf.

@Dancecat

Can anyone tell me anything about Giraffe’s level of experience playing mafia?

@Dancecat

Could you please give me a ballpark estimate of the number of mafia games you’ve played on here?

@Dancecat

Very useful info on Giraffe (and that’s how I got the posting numbers for this game; it is a technique in which I’m well-versed )

I don’t think anybody who’s reading what I’ve written could legitimately argue that I haven’t posted anything controversial. In fact, I was pretty much the first person to call NAF’s idea out, and generated a lot of discussion around it.

Ok, that’s what I needed to know. In that case, your vote on me isn’t made for scummy reasons (even though it’s still wrong). If you were an experienced player and made that post, it would be a major scumtell since someone who’d played 20+ games and had read the posts I’ve made here would know better.

With this last post you’re reminding me of someone I know from another site. (Secura ring any bells for you, ATPG? The so very sure no one could possibly find her scummy and be honest about it bit.)

Tentative
[color=blue]vote: Dancecat
for the early over-confidence on NAF, possibly for lack of scum-hunting relative to total volume of posts, and possibly for going too easy on Giraffe for the wrong reasons. Rescindable if the scum-hunting materializes and makes sense.

[Scuba_Ben]

I dislike Krayz’s smudges:

@Krayz

{referring to Special Ed} lolwolf

@Krayz

{referring to NAF1138} lolwolf2

@Krayz

{referring to me} hi wolf #3
while it may seem I’m calling every person who votes peeker a wolf, I’m not that stupid.

You may not be that stupid, but that’s certainly anti-Town. If you think peeker is Town, make a good case to defend em. Smudging people for their votes doesn’t help anybody. Well, not the Town at any rate.
unvote peekercpa
vote Krayz

@Askthepizzaguy

So I think I can rule several things out if that was me.

I’m not a seer, or else I’d have results and therefore I’d know what I am. Not sure how seers are supposed to *work *in this one… I’m not a nightkiller of any kind.

Please RTF rules, PizzaGuy. As far as we can tell, no Night kill actions would have been effective on N0. There ain’t any certainty that you aren’t a Vig/SK/Assassin/Strongman/other killing role. We’ll have better information on killing roles Tomorrow morning. (I hope we do, Gad promised early bloodbaths to shorten the player list.)

[Blaster_Master]

Wow, you guys have been busy. FFR, Wednesdays tend to be bad for me, so I haven’t read anything yet, but I’m going to try to spend some time over the next several hours to read and catch up. That said, some initial thoughts:

We have 37 players, so going with the two rules of thumb for scum, square-root as a lower bound and a quarter as the upper bound, we’re looking at 6-9 total scum for a typical game. Now, since everyone has a role, depending on assumptions about those distributions, we can get other estimates. With so many roles, I would be surprised if at least one isn’t a vig-type role. I’d also be surprised if we don’t have some sort of PFK that could result in additional kills. So we’re looking at at least 2-3 night kills right there (including the typical scum one). Also considering that we’re likely to have at least 1-2 doctors and 1-2 roleblockers, and that our illustrious mod promise some quick trimming of the ranks, I wouldn’t be too terribly surprised if there’s more, possibly even a scum hitman.

So, I guess my estimate would be to expect 3-4 attempted night kills. If scum have a hitman, we’re probably looking at the lower end of their numbers, say 6-7, and if they don’t, we’re probably looking more at the upper end, say 8-9.

Anyway, unsure if any of that has been discussed yet, so I’ll comment further as I read through.

[Drain_Bead]

Since we can’t Night-strategize, I wanted to throw this discussion point out there. As Town, should we be trying to target people we think are Town tonight, or people who we think might be Scum? My inclination is to try to target Scum, as I can think of only one role I might have that could actively hurt in that situation (Doc) and a lot of roles I might have that would help (blocker lol, vig, cop, watcher/tracker, etc.). Is there anything I’m not considering here?