Trouble in Paradise (Mafia Game Thread)

It is taking much more time to put together my analysis than I originally thought it would. I will post what I have tomorrow night after work – with a vote.

I will say this. I think we have a lot of good and suggestive information for so early in the game.

I always suspect people who think I’m Town. I find support suspicious.

We do? Now, I can’t wait to see what you think we have.

Wow, I had not idea how hard this game is - I’m putting way more time in to it than I thought I would. Which is great, of course, because it means I’m having a lot of fun with it. More than once now I’ve typed up a post and on review realised I have leaned both scum and town on the same player in that post!

This is going to be long so bear with me, but here are some quotes I have picked out pages 3-7 that I think could be important.

This is interesting - a (now) confirmed scum, pursuing lynch the lurker because it suits his game, listing lurkers. He also says he won’t vote for Sario in case it looks like retaliation, then later votes for Sario anyway and lists retaliation as one of his reasons! But can we read anything into that? Well, my read on it is that “the others should know not to lurk by now” (i.e. WFTomba, as he then excludes Sario) is a hint for them to get on and post lots, because wolf strategy this game is going to be lynch the lurker (as dictated by the Prof’s posting style, really). Obviously being day 1, they can’t have agreed to this in secret (I think - or are wolves allowed to chat privately on night 0?), so this is Prof P explaining to his team-mate WFTomba that this is the way it’s going to go down. Just a theory.

As Astral pointed out nearer the time, this is a confusing post. It looks to me like WFT is over-thinking it. Both seem scummy characteristics (confusion and over-thinking) to me.

I like this post, and while I may have said so before, on re-reading it still gives me a warm town feeling, coupled with the fact Octarine was named on Prof P’s shortlist above (albeit with a plausible get-out, so nowhere near confirmed town yet).

Getting your excuses in early? The only puzzling thing, if we assume WFT is a wolf, is suspicion of Prof P. But it’s early on day one so I don’t put much weight on that.

At the time I said this gave me a town lean, but now I’m not so sure. It could be a ploy to look “honest” from someone who by definition is actually not.

“Please feel free to dissuade me” - because I know you’re my team-mate and I want a good reason to change my vote later? I think these posts could very easily be from a wolf trying to look town.

Or, as it turns out, why not vote for one who is town? Which does cast a slight shadow over the others named in the post above.

Most people seem to agree day one lynches are a net positive for town, so is it a scummy move to argue against it?

Making an excuse for why he might not look townie. Smells a bit off to me.

And lo and behold, the vote on the Prof disappears!

Making excuses for lurking.

If you’re a wolf, you certainly don’t want a tie that results in not lynching a townie.

A pity that my incorrect switch gave this excuse for letting the Prof off the hook and lynching the innocent Sario instead. However, maybe this will help us in the long run.

Another excuse for lurking.

Well, some of us are/were. I’m still not sure if that is true for you.

At this point I think several of the posts I had intended to multiquote have gone missing (I guess there is a limit), so this is TBC shortly for now.

Actually, further to the above post, I think that’s all I had after all. What it seems to amount to is strong suspicion of snfaulkner and WFTomba, and slight suspicion of Dante G and Mahaloth. In fact, that’s the order I’d put them in, in terms of most likely scum, at this point in the game (actually, maybe I could switch Mahaloth for IRConfused - but that’s fairly immaterial at this stage). Interestingly, these are all the people others have currently voted for (except IRC).

The problem with that, of course, is that WFTomba and snfaulkner have voted for each other! If both are wolves, there is now point in them trying to engineer a tie, as that just guarantees one of them gets it. At the moment, and based on toDay’s postings, I’m inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to snfaulkner as a new player. Therefore:

VOTE WFTomba

After that, here’s an unofficial vote count:

Dante G 2 (Precambrianmollusc, HookerChemical)
snfaulkner 1 [del](Dante G),[/del] (WFTomba)
WFTomba 5 (Suburban Plankton, Octarine, Dante G, snfaulkner, Dead Cat)
Mahaloth 1 (IRConfused)

By my reckoning that leaves three players yet to cast their vote at this stage. I’d be fairly comfortable with any of the above being lynched, so I may not post much more toDay (and certainly today, as I’m going out tonight).

** Your official Wednesday morning vote count:

WF Tomba - 5 votes: (Sub Plankton 372)(Octarine 377)(Dante G 378)(snfaulkner 384)(Dead Cat 404)
Dante G - 2 votes: (Precambrianmollusc 365)(Hooker Chemical 379)
Mahaloth - 1 vote: (IRConfused 376)
snfaulker - 1 vote: (WF Tomba 386)

**

I had time for a re-read yesterday and had a sleep on it. First up, the Astral kill I think might be due to his posts at the end of day. It is possible that scum thought there was something there. Plus he’d be in the scum kill pool anyway. [spoiler]

[/spoiler]

Second, the Prof P voters. I’m putting Biotop in the firm town column. And I’m putting PcMollusc and DeadCat in the soft town column. I do note that DeadCat was the vote switch that moved the count from 5-4 for Prof P to 5-4 for Sario. And I note Burby’s comment (that he taught me the hard way during our last game together!)

I found DeadCat’s impassioned arguments for Prof P to be townie. I’m less sure of PcM who voted early and decided not to switch.
**Third **are the ones who were never going to vote Prof P: Mahaloth and Hooker. They both claim that they just never saw the professor as scummy at all.

Are these just townies who had blinders on? Or scum subtly trying to protect their mate? I’m particularly leary of Hooker who attacked DeadCat with some theory about combativeness. Both of them seemed reluctant to support Prof P, but isn’t attacking his attackers the same as supporting him?
Fourth are the Sario voters. Tomba stood out for me.

Encouraging someone else to move to Sario.

And then blaming DeadCat.

I haven’t decided where to vote yet. I’d like to see Biotop’s thoughts first, but it will likely be Mahaloth, Hooker, or Tomba.

I don’t think I fall far from you on this one. I think it’s naive to not suspect everybody but confirmed (or practically confirmed) town. I’m shocked it took until TexCat’s post 406 to finally throw some suspicion my way after I missed the call on Prof P so badly yesterday. Good on TexCat for the paranoia. (It’s misplaced, but paranoia is good.)

Speaking of paranoia, Dead Cat is making a compelling case for WF Tomba. I wanted us to put on the breaks and take a look at him earlier, but I’m satisfied that the case has been made on the following elements:

[ol]
[li]Paranoia about veteran players and proposing to off them early (especially Astral)[/li][li]The abundance of thin reasons not to get in on the Prof P/Sario discussion and lynch, which included suspicion of Astral, wanting to avoid a tie, thinness of Day One evidence.[/li][li]The timing of his vote. It made it 6-4 for a Sario lynch and making the Prof P lynch much more difficult (and potentially allowing him to throw suspicion on anybody who moved it to 6-5, but that was probably a side benefit).[/li][/ol]

UNVOTE DANTE G
VOTE WF TOMBA

Au contraire! If there’s one thing I’ve learned from reading and playing Mafia on this board, it’s that confusion and over-thinking are townie characteristics. What do the wolves have to be confused about?

I feel a responsibility to defend myself, and to try to prevent the mislynch that’s looking here. I’ve already explained my reasons for everything I’ve done in this game so far. I can’t force you to believe them. However, I can make the following additional points:

First, it was sheer luck that we initially looked at Prof. Pepperwinkle as our first lynch target. I was slightly suspicious of him, but I never really got on board with the case against him, because there simply wasn’t much of a case.

Second, the unpopular idea that I floated at the start of the game has taken on an interesting life. I would encourage you all to go back and read the actual post, to see what I actually proposed, and then compare it to how other posters have described my idea later. It’s been fascinating watching the idea get twisted and mutated. Is that Scum manipulation, or just Town sloppiness?

*mislynch that’s building here. Sorry.

Here’s the quote in its entirety.

I think you’re getting at fact that the above post doesn’t advocate “lynching” them, only “picking” them. I also interpreted it to refer to them as experienced players, though my initial response isn’t explicit about that either. Really, I’m not sure what implication your early post is trying to make if not those two things. I don’t see how “picking” a players is different from advocating a lynch. If you were trying to voice some generalized wariness about them (as I did Astral, and let me voice wariness of Mahaloth explicitly here), it doesn’t come across that way. How do you see your suggestion as being mischaracterized?

I agree with Hooker on this analysis of Tombas old post. The way I always interpreted it, and still do upon reread, was that Tomba wants to bring attention to the players that are very good players of Mafia. To me it seems like a way for a Scum player to figure out his biggest threats and try to push for a lynch or in other ways to target them at night for Blocks or Kills. The thing is though, that by trying to get us to focus on other players, he instead got us focusing on him.

Sticking to my Scum lean of Tomba.

I’m now going to take a look at TexCat.

Piles on my idea, though apparently not understanding it. Fairly arbitrary Day 1 vote. Neutral post.

This post seems slightly townie to me, although it wouldn’t be out of the question for a wolf to throw a little suspicion at a fellow wolf early on.

Neutral. Encouraging lurkers to post more is pro-town, but this is also a risk-free participation post.

Talking strategy, avoiding taking a strong position. Slightly scummy.

Neutral strategy post.

Weakly defending Prof. P; maybe a little scummy.

Now this is a post I have a hard time imagining a wolf making. Why would they throw a comrade under the bus so early? Very townie post.

Neutral. Everyone likes more post counts.

More pressure on a now-known wolf.

Buttering up the mod? Neutral.

Still hammering on the Prof. This is either a Town player or a very ballsy wolf.

General commentary on game setup is neutral.

Pretty good post, slightly townie vibe, even though it casts suspicion on me.

Conclusion: likely Town.

If I had meant lynching, I’d have said lynching. (Why would you think I wouldn’t say what I mean, unless you’re assuming I’m scum?) “Generalized wariness” is a good way to sum up what I was trying to express.

A player who plays exactly the same way no matter which side he’s on is only a good scum player. The ideal Townie would be someone whose manner changes blatantly depending on his alignment, so that the Town knows when they can trust him.

Rereading the thread, I noticed this early post from our lurkiest player:

Rule 5 is the rule that encourages participation. I wouldn’t say he’s fallen afoul of it yet, but he hasn’t been posting much. I am perplexed by the reference to Pliny the Elder. Is he saying that if he doesn’t participate enough, he wants to be killed by a volcanic eruption?

Emphasis added. Pliny the Elder.

My spidey-senses told me that someone was in here talking about beer…
I’ll be the first to admit that my participation wasn’t as good as it should have been on Day 1…I blame ‘real life’ for that.

As for Day 2…we’ve still got plenty of time left, and I’ll be back later today (real world time) with any new revelations that I might glean from the Day’s posts But really, I think that the most important factors in considering other payers’ guilt or innocence comes from their voting records (unless you get lucky with an investigation of some sort) and so far those are still pretty sparse. I expect there will be more to say as the game progresses, when there’s more evidence to build on, and fewer people left to consider.

For the moment, I’m happy with my vote as it stands.

So I’ve been trying to get through another re-read. And everytime I get to this:

it pings my wolfdar harder and harder. I’m not sure how experienced a player WF Tomba is, but certainly more than I am. Might it be a legitimate question? possibly.

But every time I read it, I hear my wife trying to manipulate me into doing some tedious chore. “don’t you think the trash needs to go out?” or “wouldn’t it be nice if the patio was cleaned?” or “Isn’t it great when all the bills are paid?”…yeesh, no wonder I agreed to come on this 3 hour tour to this island paradise.

But anyway, personal issues aside, even when I try my hardest to read his posts as if he’s town, I can’t seem to do it. Today’s post all seem a bit flaily to me now.

My vote for him is solid.

Dead Cat, you made some compelling arguments today. I wasn’t quite paying attention when i first read them, since i had just gotten to work and had to deal with some stuff. But I was thinking to myself "if i wasn’t so solid on WF Tomba, I’d totally be looking more into this guy, snfau… OH SHIT, that’s ME! I’ll see if I can address your concerns later toDay, or even Today.

I will say that if you can’t catch scum, there are worse mislynches than me. I have no special powers and have already been notably wrong in this game. You won’t be losing a valuable player if you lynch me. You’ll just be missing a chance to possibly hang a wolf.

What do you mean? We’ll still have the next Day phase and probably more. So we’ll still have chances.