Open 28 - Quack Mafia. OVER! But who won? before 466

[Hjallti]

Im surprized with the voting

I'd rather look to agree on a claiming tactic discussion beforze going to lynch

[Hjallti]

Partly OMGUS

FoS:theopor_COD

Of course I have been planning, I want to win the game. But that is no scumtell.

Look 1 out of a possible 4 townies died the first night.

A townie could die by a scum night kill of a quack protection.

We know that 1 guy died this night. We also already know that Dral tried to protect him. I didn't protect him but someone else. The possibilities are still big, but if we collect data we could find out how the puzzle works.

@Dral: Don't suicide but avoid night choices from now. We need to lynch scum, quacks can stay alive without problem.

[Hjallti]

do I still need to fill in the blanks in the post for curiouskarmadog or was the clarification clear enough. (And yes I meant I protected somelse that the late FeRnAnDo)

First of all a quack can't be used as a Vig since a quack can't kill mafia (by wrong protection), so if someone has reason to believe he is quack (s)he should not protect someone that night.

In fact I find it hard to believe experienced Battle Mage missed that point:

vote: Battle Mage

It sure is scummy to try to get rid of a discussion of what might be a winning strategy for town. (Note that my reasons are not as OMGUS as the vote seems!)
As I see it, we should mass claim on the second or third day about our night choices. Probably we could filter out the wrong information by scum and find the target. And if the info fits together sum might have claimed very late (when they could see what to do) and thus even that might be info.

Dral is not freed of any suspicous. It is possible his night choice caused the death of FeRnAnDo without him having to be a quack.

[Hjallti]

Okay Battle Mage I'm happy with your answer:

unvote

, except with the part claiming Omgus. I did feel your vote was trying to get rid of discussion: you vote someone who tries to discuss town strategy.... it still feels strange to me.

@Jordan: I think you shouldn't clear yourself so easy. I also protected someone who didn't die. If we would have protected the same person it would we possible one of us, or even both still are quack (both would take four protections but that is still possible).

[Hjallti]

If you go to the netherlands... wireless coffeeshops* are likely to be found... weel anyway the wireless should be taken not to the word

*You can get cannabis in coffeeshops in the netherlands (for coffee you should go to tea rooms)

[Hjallti]

I protected Jordan... so we were 2 anyway, and don't know nothing, so theo isn't free of being quack, scum attacking Jordan, scum not attacking Jordan... and I'm not longer sure not to be quack....

[Hjallti]

Please all check this list to be sure your choice is in it.
Remember 3 of us are lying


Alive (number of claimed protections)
AmeliaLi - protected JDodge (1)
curiouskarmadog - didn't protect
theo - protected JordanA24 (2)
Hjallti - protected JordanA24 (2)
Jordan - protected Mert (3)
Indy - protected curiouskarmadog (2)
Dral - protected Fernando (1)
Mert - protected curiouskarmadog (2)
JDodge - protected Mert (3)
BM - protected Mert (3)
ControlledBurn - protected Hjallti (1)

Fernando's only rescue would have been a doc.
If he was attacked by scum and Dral is doc-townie then Dral would have saved him. So we are sure Dral is either scum or quack. (unless a townie lies (because it might reveal him as quack) but that is no way helping town please, if so claim now)

[Hjallti]

My last remark should read:

"unless another townie lies (because it might reveal that townie as quack, and that townie thinks it is better not to be revealed). That is no way helping town however, since we would deduce from it a wrong consequence. Please, if you claimed false because you are quack and voted FeRnAnDo please claim now so we can see what really is the case. "

[Hjallti]

There are 6 doctors (5 left) 3 quacks and 3 scum. I think 'to pick out the doctor' is here a bad word choice.
The puzzle is indeed easier for scum than for us, but the task is different as well:
if we find the puzzle even at lylo we win (if we don't we do not nec. loose: we might lynch right and stay at lylo till endgame and thus win), scums' task is to prevent us from finding this puzzle.

[Hjallti]

At this point we can only try to conclude something about FeRnAnDo's death. All other groups give some info but it is to scattered around that it basically leaves us with no conclusions to day except that we loose some possible combinations.

For AmeliaLi people have already given some possibilities. For the 3 voting on Mert there are some more.

Remember we don't know the following things:
1 Who of us is lying? (should be 3)
2 Who was targeted by FeRnAnDo?
3 Who is quck and who is not?

Only scum know their role and Dral knows his role, which might be scum or quack.

I think we may assume FeRnAnDo to be a regular doc.

Another thing I'm curious about (sorry bad joke):
Why did curious say it is crap we have only 3 rather than 6 quacks? It looks like you wanted the opposite, and thus a scum tell:

FoS: CuriousKarmaDog

[Hjallti]

The reason I use 'think we may assume' is because I am pretty new here and it seems it is a general rule that the mod gives away the thruthful line up of player on his death. I would expect that with a 'quack doctor' this would be told at the death scene. Maybe the

mod

can answer the question:

Would you reveal of a death player that (s)he is quack or not?

[Hjallti]

Nice research CuriousKarmaDog! Clearly Dral is playing it bad. The question remains whether it is bad-town or bad-scum.

I don't think the argument of quiting other games should be used. Even if you can pin it down to: you left the others and not this one because it is more interesting you could explain this via the theme... if you played more regular games you might be interested in this theme and what happens much more than in a regular, apart from the fact whether you are scum.

Other arguments convince me certainly of bad play and I am enclined to say scum.

Fos: Dral

[Hjallti]

Battle Mage, is the 'you' in your previous post me?
In that case I think you missed my point, since I didn't use emotion in it.
I just argued that even if metagaming might lead us to the conclusion that Dral finds this game interesting over another game, that this is not a scumtell since this game is not really comparable to regular games.
I already thought this set up was more appealing, because of the possibilities of nice puzzle logic, regardless my line up, when I sign up, so before I even knew my line up.

Therefor I can conceive that even if Dral admits he prefers this game over another it is not a scumtell.

[Hjallti]

Sorry I even didn't notice the quote because it was underneath... stupid me... Anyway I made my point more precise...

We might try to setup the choices for next night in advance thus gaining the most information like you would do if you play MasterMind, going for a combination that gives more information. But I don't see at forehand a way to direct this. Any thoughts?

I automatically come to another question: Should we not claim before the night has come whom we will take, or makes this the task of scum easier?

Remember: We are trying to find scum (and we might need to deduce quack meanwhile, but it is only a tool and finding scum is the goal), while scum is trying to eliminate us before we find them.

By the way, like in most mini's I guess nolynch is not an option today.

[Hjallti]

I can't help but just be confused by Mert's question,

"So your strategy was to try and target someone you believed would be targetted so you could test your role?"

Just seems like an odd out of the park question. It was first round... how would anyone know who might be targeted? What made you choose Curious? What made anyone choose anyone first round, it was like a stab in the dark trying to turn suspicion to me.

I don't see what the choice and the reason for the first night choice might tell us something. There are various reasons and ways to choose:

each of the following occured to me as possible before we started discussing (Note that I didn't join this part of the discussion before this because I think it is really no tell at all).

try to choose unique
try to choose not unique
choose a certain person because you want to play with them (2/3 you safe him 1/3 you attack him)
choose a certain person because you don't want to play with them (2/3 you safe him 1/3 you attack him)
choose randomly
not make a choice

Of course asking only one player to explain his choice is remarkable indeed!

[Hjallti]

I learned not to interfere when people get personal picking each other, but I must say complaining to be offended while in the same sentence you call someone jerk is a bit strange for me. Probably my English is a bit to bad to grasp that. I also wouldn't have you 'village idiot' to express that you believe Dral is playing 'bad as town'.

Anyway it looks a bit distancing here and that is the third* part I don't like about this last posts.

(*1st: "offending" and 2nd: "distracting away from the game")

[Hjallti]

i don't think that was touchy... as an outsider I am also interested in what you find fishy, or rather whom you find fishy in that discussion. I feels fishy for me as well but I want to see at least some explanation (not an entire case or so).

I find your last reply a bit dodgy... well, yeah, okay, not really inexpected

[Hjallti]

I find your last reply a bit dodgy...

well, yeah, okay, not really inexpected Smile

Pun intended?

I readded the part you left out and bolded, that should be the answer.

But I mean it, I wouldn't have called it dodgy maybe but it is a nive word for it.

@JDodge
Please, either make your case or say you postpone to hear other opinions!

[Hjallti]

So while the setting is nice to try different tactics because we know more, you are trying tactics applicable when you know less.

Funny, you use such a lame excuse: open games indeed give raise to other tactics, but not this way.

FoS: JDodge

[Hjallti]

I still don't see how you can experiment play styles for regular maffia games in this open game with totally different setting where we can gain info other ways. Using this games as guinea pig test sites so to speak is in my opinion also wrong. This is as far as we know, our only chance to get a go at this setting, so play it and stop dodging with the lame excuse that you want to use this to experiment style. It just won't give you info about your style because this setting is totally different.

[Hjallti]

I am using you as a chance to try a more subdued playstyle than what I usually used.

...which is quiet useless since the play will here be so different that benefits and backdraws of this subdued style will not be the same as in regular mafia (and by the way I never said you used us as guinea pigs, but rather that you use this game as guinea pig test site.... I know it is a small difference but it was intended).

Anyway, I don't see this subdued thing anymore as a scumtell (for now):

unFoS: JDodge

[Hjallti]

It is indeed strange that Indy changed his explanation, and it seems like he made it up afterwards and thus scummy:

FoS:indy

[Hjallti]

Well Indy, fair enough, but we will keep a couple of eyes on you anyway

[Hjallti]

I think going for scumtells is what we have to do. The list will be helpfull day2 or day3 for us. As for the scum it is helpful already as they have extra info on which 3 tells were lies (that is the main reason I was reluctant at first giving it first day). Note that in case of Mert we have a lot of possibilities, like that all 3 protecting are regular townies and two of them being quacks is still a possibility (since FeRnAnDo could have protected as well).


@Dral and Battle Mage:following without contribution is a scumtell and noted!

[Hjallti]

if

CKD is a quack

then

meaning Mert and I are any combo of doc/quack, quack/quack, or doc/doc.

(

italics added

)
You are trying to confuse everyone again about the rules: please make deduction based on the real rules! Your way of misinterpreting the rules at page 10 is a scumtell. Even if you would not have missed the combos including scum.

CKD is a quack-
meaning Mert and I are any combo of doc/quack, doc/doc, scum/doc, scum/scum.

Mert and indy cannot be together quack if CKD is not scum
I don't see why CKD couldn't be a regular doctor, there is actually no way to tell why to tell if he is real doc or a quack doc. Let's say you, JDodge and Dral are the quacks the only thing that follows is that Mert is no quack or CKD is scum.

[Hjallti]

CKD is a quack-
meaning Mert and I are any combo of doc/quack, doc/doc, scum/doc, scum/scum or scum/quack.

I inserted scum quack which also is possible if FeRnAnDo's night choice was the same. Basically only the combo quack/quack is not in this list for it takes two doctors to erase their double effect and there is only one doc that didn't tell us his night choice.

mod: may we assume FeRnAnDo was no quack from the night scene?

[Hjallti]

in the next week i'll try to check, but it won't be much.
just to be sure

unvote

[Hjallti]

Tomorrow I will try to give a small summary of the game in my opinion so far for now I come back and say

FoS: Ms Piggy

and I keep my eye on Mert.
I can't read 13 pages in 10 minutes and understand the game, as other seem to be able to do

[Hjallti]

Here is my summary of the game so far.
I leave out the discussion on the settings and the claims since what it will tell about scum is only to be seen later, except for the misinterpretations after everything seemed to be settled because they might be meant to mislead and thus are (small) scumtells.

I used the names from the very first post, and wrote don what I thought was interesting. Only to find 2 players with remarks... strange!

~N9V~ (replacing AmeliaLi)


curiouskarmadog


Stewie (replacing theopor_COD)


JordanA24


Indy

Ms Piggy (replacing Dral)

*First post: "lol - is it fair to ask if anyone else targeted FeRnAnDo last night? Smile". Meanwhile we know he is the only one claiming this. It is clear that this could be genuine or setup. As scum I wouldn't have claimed that early, but WIFOM comes in to fight that argument.
*the interaction with Mert (see post 152 of CuriousKarmaDog)
*post 244 is copying my idea (whether JDodge style experiment is scummy) which JDodge and I already discussed through and following my lead when I left it. It feels like providing content that is already there, this is either active lurking or buddying up... scummy... (I am sort of happy that discussion brought some content after all)
*Ms Piggy needed 10 minutes I am at 2 hours now, probably she knows something I don't.

Mert

*First one to make a statement with really bad logic, as it comes behind Dral's request to know if he was the only one (I don't mean he didn't consider being scum, with he shouldn't have, but not considering being quack is strange): "Hi everyone, my name's Mert and I'm a Doctor. Last night my target didn't die, meaning I'm either not a Quack or my target is Mafia. "
*the interaction with Dral (see post 152 of CuriousKarmaDog)µ
*post 168 is better to understand if Mert is scum (and best if Mert/Dral are both scum) "Seriously, poor line of attack on Dral. As it happens, I think he's probably town right now."
*¨craplogic in 'scum attacked me' thing (post 259). scum could have attacked anyone that has a protection on the list, and even someone that have been targetted officially by only 1 townie. You could have been not targetted at all, or by 3 quacks to give only two of the numerous possibilities. Figuring out the Mert day 1 targets will be one thing I don't think will work before end game, unless we really ask those 3 to target in a setting made to figure it out.
*this unsettling me as well:

The aim of this game has to be to get two doctors confirmed as quickly as possible, correct?

No the aim to find scum! At least for town it is!

JDodge


Battle Mage


ControlledBurn


I

vote:Mert

because Dral and Ms Piggy play to bad to distinguish scum from town.
by the way... with a mislynch or nolynch we could be unlucky and be at lylo or worse tomorrow.

[Hjallti]

As for Hjallti's point that the aim is not to confirm two doctors but to lynch scum, surely you understand that two confirmed doctors is a guaranteed town win, as they'd effectively become unkillable. Yes, the ultimate aim is to lynch all the scum, but having two living confirmed doctors gives the chance the best way to do this.

I think 2 quack, 2 confirmed docs and 3 scum is not a certain town win:
mislynch leaves 1q2cd3sc
right NK leaves 2cd3sc a mafia win
scum can kill docs by lynching rather than by NK's

Did I not acknowledge that I had a gut feeling I was targetted last night and did not, in fact, present it as fact?

I am and was aware of that. My point here is that I do believe the Mertday1 puzzle is the hardest to solve, and that any assumption to break it down leaves the other trail as well. I just mentionned two extreme different solution to illustrate the point.
Did I not acknowledge that I didn't see this as a scumtell but just said the whole argument was logically invalid.

[Hjallti]

I would like Mert and Ms Piggy themselfs giving their view on the connection before curiouskarmadog gives his!

[Hjallti]

And no, i don't do it to deliberately annoy the incredibly lazy-i do it simply because its the easiest thing to do when i am replying to something.

I don't understand this point. It is as easy to type under as above. Looks like in both cases you type the same letters.

[Hjallti]

waauw I need some hours to reread what happened this weekend in the game. Or rather to think to get out of this standstill.

[Hjallti]

I want everyone to give either a top3 list of scum of everyone with reasons in own words, or two really important open questions for other players, to kick this game.
if you fail to this I will ask a prod and will consider it a scumtell. you may refuse with a good reasons and another proposition to kick this game!

[Hjallti]

Sad that people volunteer to replace and need prodding/replacement themselfs a week later....

[Hjallti]

I'm still waiting for the promised summary by ~N9V~ who also till has to answer a question from another game: Where does this name stand for?

[Hjallti]

At last some posts...
Hopefully Piggy and Vampaneze get back as well

[Hjallti]

Oops: EBWOPASNMM* I was confusing with another game, where we are waiting for Vampaneze. I only meant Ms. Piggy

*(Edit by way of post after some noticed my mistake)

[Hjallti]

Ms. Piggy was prodded Aug 2nd (post 340), I think she should be replaced.

Mert was asked more than once to give his view on the alledged connection with Ms/ Piggy. He still didn't answer, but dodged the question;

I'm usually not in the business of thinking of possible partnerships on Day One, but there is something noteworthy about Ms Piggy / BM though. Needs further investigation once we know one of their alignments, definitely.

Therefor I

confirm

my

vote:Mert

[Hjallti]

Looking at the most recent votecount, I see 3 votes on Mert by Indy, Hjallti, and Curiouskarmadog, one of whom I suspect to be scum. Had they all been doctors, mafia already would’ve piled on for the hammer. Of the three, I suspected curious the most.

Huh, so Mert is not scum for a fact. Nice logical flaw. Congrats. The only way your statement is true if Mert is no scum. IF you know that you must be scum yourself.

unvote

since the game might get speed while I am at limited access

FoS:mert&d3sisted

[Hjallti]

I think if you want to play 8 town against 3 scum, you should sign in for a normal mini.

Reason why we shouldn't protect (d3sisted): we can have 4 townies killed, while without protection it is 1. Indeed, but it is 1 for sure, with protection we can even get 0 kills.
Reasons to protect: we get info about quacks. We already stated that Dral should not protect this night:

d3sisted should not protect

. If afterwards 4 townies are dead we have positive evidence against scum.
On the other hand the likelihood of the 4 deads is very small, unless nobody protects double, so we might want to avoid that. I have no time to finish my argument but I will do later.

[Hjallti]

Dral did protect Fernando or is scum and scum nightkilled fernando. Unless some other townie then Dral is lying as well! (I guess this is pretty simple logic from the fact that Fernando is dead) ((Can't imagine a townie is lying, but then again it could be, but two townies lying is pretty strange))

I find it strange that you want a 'seperate' case against you: for all in game comments you are the same as Dral and Ms. Piggy. You can't mindread them, so you can't explain why they did there scummy things, but the case against them, is the case against you. If they gave away they are scum, you have to fight the truth. If they played bad town, you have to convince us. WE DON'T NEED TO MAKE A NEW CASE! you need to advocate them and yourself. And at this point I am not impressed.

[Hjallti]

I beg to differ. Voting someone because their predecessors were scummy is scummy in mine eyes. Mainly because any previous evidence effectively becomes nullified, and you can't be bothered to come up with new reasons to support your vote.

I think otherwise. The evidence is not nullified. The replacing creates some problems:
1. to read the player, which is the same (alignment) but not the same (playstyle).
2. to retrieve more info from questions like: "why did you say/do this"
granted
but that doesn't nullify the evidence. To give a very extreme example, if some player claims Vig and get replaced, the claim is still there. The replacement my wonder why on earth the claim was made, but can't say boldly: "Forget the claim". Basically that is what you are trying here, in a less straightforward situation. Dral's claim to have protected FeRnAnDo means that either some other townie is lying, Dral was quack or Dral is scum. Regardless of the replacing one of the those 3 possibilities is true, and frankly I don't believe the first one. So you are quack or scum, that is proven and can't be nullified.

[Hjallti]

So basically you're saying the only reason I have any votes on me at all is because Dral claimed to targeting Fernando? That is inane.

And i'm not talking about claims. I'm talking about minor tells that others happened to pick up on. Tells that appear solid but are nonetheless ambiguous and misconceived. Those tells ought not be attributed to the replacement player.

At any rate, at least a distinction should be made between the two (e.g. "Though D3sised is not nearly as scummy as Dral, I'm still voting for him because of how Dral played before him.")

Sorry I would have thought I made my point clear enough, but you managed to totally miss it again.
All minor tells of your predecssors are minor tells for you as well and are not nullifiable. The problem is that indeed it is not possible to call the replacement responsable for those mistakes (if she*(it seems your habbit to use she for males, so I will do the same here) is indeed scum the scumtells are mistakes), but the mistakes are there, and that information, can and should be used against you. It is a pain if you have to replace someone as scummy as Dral and Ms. Piggy in this particular game, but that pain you have to take!

[Hjallti]

Hjallti's last post was 7 days ago....

you are right to send a prod. I just got it. Will be back on monday 3th for more play.

[Hjallti]

I'm thinking over whether d3sisted is an acceptable lynch or a terrible lynch. (D3sisted replaced Dral, who we know is either Quack or Mafia.)

Hard choice. If he is scum it is a good lynch. If he is quack killing him would give us one less chance of getting nightkill by a quack, but that is also the case if D3sisted just doesn't protect.

[Hjallti]

Who got nightkilled by scum (and why) and who was wrongly protected?

[Hjallti]

Mafia - kill JordanA24 - FAIL (protected by Hjallti and maybe also Fernando)

So mafia knew I was doctor from the very first night. This means that I was right during day 1 to say we (town) should claim protections later than day 1. In the very first days mafia was able to puzzle much better than town. After day 3 the puzzle should have been solvable for both. The only problem was that the puzzle got more difficult with more missing info. But we would have had more docs around.

You were lucky a qucak did your work. If you would have NK night 1 you would have been unlucky a quack made the same move.

At night 2 I protected Stewie.

[Hjallti]

That said, the Mafia lost out too - all the Mafia were replaced several times. Further, on Night 1 if they had targetted Hjallti, the town would have been in lylo. This was quite a costly scum mistake

It should have been a mistake, but it wasn't because I was killed anyway.

I believe the game is balanced like it is, but that the balance can be (and was in this particular game) shifted to scum by accident very easily. I mean scum can win without playing well (outsmarting town) easy if the nightchoices fall good. Like the fact exactly one doc manages to target the same player as the scum night 0 is almost as good as killing a doc night 0, just for the information.

[Hjallti]

I had figured out that I was a quack, but I was almost certain that SSF was scum, so...

even then you shouldn't have targeted as scum survives quack protection.

@BattleMage, I protected Jordan because I saw a game of him I found his playstyle a bit different than other players. I do think that it actually gave you enough information to be worth a miskill... If we didn't claim first day, it might have been different. I agree we didn't have the best strategy as town, but you have together. You can't have 6 players claiming and then say you don't want to claim, I guess...