Mini 837 - Stratego Mafia! (Game Over!)

[Kast]

Confirm

General Stratego Stuff:
I normally play with a set where 10 is the highest number (although the spy can kill the marshall). I also normally play with the rule where attackers win and don't die on a tie. I also like the rule where attacker reveals his piece and defender only reveals if he lost (or if it is a scout).

Mafia Specific:
-I don't think Gorrad's question necessarily reveals anything about his game specific role. I dislike Sajin's implication that it does so as it feels like he is fishing for Gorrad to confirm or deny (as well as possibly get other players to share whether numbers will affect their roles)

Similarly, I dislike dramonic's question as phrased, although I can easily see that as confused town following the mod statement.

From public game rules information, numbers have no known effect. Private roles may indicate otherwise, but I strongly doubt that getting a majority or universal claim from players to confirm or deny this is beneficial to the town at this point in time.

[Kast]

Ugh, didn't see page 2.

I dislike that Gorrad claimed non-spy, non-bomb, non-flag.

-In normal games, the object is to capture the flag. This could easily be an objective for mafia or a third party.

Normally the Spy is not assigned a numerical value on his piece, although he is treated as the lowest value (1 in most sets and 10 in the backwards sets).

[Kast]

@AlmasterGM-
-Your initial point starts off assuming the game will play similar to a Stratego game and therefore it would be helpful to speculate on powers scum may have, but your second point departs from this and argues that this game cannot be similar to a Stratego game. I don't like this inconsistency.

-You aren't directly addressing the point that you quote. Setup speculation at the expense of "regular" scumhunting is detrimental to the town. This is true regardless of whether the game theme suggests that setup speculation will be helpful.

-Scum team compositions are often made in an arbitrary manner. In a theme game based on a two player game where each player has an identical set of pieces pitted against each other, the chances are quite good that there is an arbitrary determination of who is scum.

From flavor, the bomb is a defensive piece. It could easily be pro- or anti-town. It could even be neutral third-party.

I agree that if there is a single "Flag" player who mafia is searching for, then there would need to be mechanics in place to protect that player. However, I strongly disagree that this would be impossible or extremely difficult for a moderator to come up with mechanics to do that. I think your claim otherwise is bogus.

It's more likely that the flag is a target for the town, not something we want to protect.

This is completely unjustified by anything you posted. I strongly dislike this assumption. If there is a flag in this game, then your post strongly suggests to me that you are anti-town searching for it.

Vote: AlmasterGM

-I agree that there is nothing inherently wrong with allowing Sajin to take 72 hours prior to making his case. However, I hope his case actually makes sense with needing to wait.

If his case is simply that he feels Gorrad gave away information that he is a numbered piece that interacts with other numbered pieces, then I see no reason why he would need to wait 72 hours. Also, he would be mixing thematic mechanics with game mechanics. I also hope he is not simply taking 72 hours to discuss with his buddies and gauge townie feelings prior to committing himself to any particular argument.

Generally, though, if there is a case strong enough for a townie to place a serious vote within the first day of the game, it is something that townie should share with the rest of the town. I find it hard to conceive a situation where communicating scum can come up with a "correct answer" to the case, but an individual scum player cannot do the same. This changes on a game by game basis as individual players may have differing amounts of private information.

Since Sajin has stated he will probably claim as part of his case against Gorrad, there is an implication that he has some private information which would be better shared when scum are unable to discuss it.

@Vaya-
Claiming to not be a particular role narrows the field for scum. This is especially dangerous if/when flavor suggests possibility that scum could be searching for that role. Even without that suggestion, the reasoning is the same as why townies don't generally claim "not cop" or "not doc".

@Hoopla, 61-
I believe you are misunderstanding or misrepresenting dramonic's post 47 and he seems incapable of calling you out on it. Post 47 IS referring to the Gorrad wagon and is explicitly the reason why dramonic says he will not vote for Gorrad yet. It has nothing to do with the votes on him.

Post 65 is a direct misrepresentation of what dramonic posted. He did not suggest the game should stall or go on hiatus. He did not ask players to remove their votes from him or stop discussion. He only explained why he is choosing to wait before placing a vote.

I am disliking Hoopla's posts just a bit less than I dislike AlmasterGM's posts. Hoopla seems to be looking to jump on an easy lynch target rather than looking for scum.

[Kast]

@Gorrad-
-I agree that your comments on the roles and why you would not want to claim being any of them makes sense. At the same time, I don't think you addressed why you would want to claim not being them. The comments for the Flag and Spy both indicate that you realize scum might be inclined to target those two roles. Why would you then narrow the field to allow scum to better find those high priority roles?

-I'm reading a stronger affirmation of the implication that Sajin raised earlier. You seem to be softclaiming knowledge that roles other than your own (specifically a spy role but implication that this applies to every role) has the ability to kill weaker players. Please confirm or deny whether you are trying to softclaim this.

@ElectricBadger-
-Yeah, actually people here like to misuse the term breadcrumb and apply it to unsubtle direct claims (particularly claims of what roles they don't have) that happen early in game. Direct claims like what Gorrad did are not breadcrumbs nor do they function as breadcrumbs.

-Why do you say Gorrad has claimed a power role? Fishing or just assuming much?

-You are taking something that is not indicative of alignment, looking at a skewed but possible situation in which it harms the town, and assuming that this single situation is enough to conclude that Gorrad is probable scum. I strongly dislike this kind of argument.

---Lots of irrational behavior this game---

@Mafia composition-
It's going to be arbitrary. Stratego is a team game between a Red and Blue team (different team names in the variants). Both teams share the same piece types. Some pieces have special abilities. Some pieces are movement limited.

If we were playing a Chess themed mafia, I don't think anyone would have a problem believing it was the Black team vs the White team OR that it was some subset of playing pieces vs a larger set.

@Setup discussion-
There are 12 unique pieces and 12 players in this game. There is a potential that each player has a unique role name. I didn't notice this before, but it seems like some people are assuming this already and others (like myself) have not been making the same assumption.

I don't see anything in my role that makes me assume this should be the case, and I'm inclined to believe that townies would not automatically assume this. I am inclined to believe that people who assumed (or posted as if assuming) this was true could have more information about the game setup that suggests this is the case (such as scum buddies with different role names and/or information about specific townie roles).

[Kast]

@Ort-
There are multiple players who have posted with the assumption that each player is a different one of the 12 pieces. Some of it may have been players who have private knowledge (probable scum) and some may be players who took the hints and ran with it. None of that is nearly as suspicious to me as the player I am voting for or the other players I have specified by name for posts I disliked.

@ElectricBadger-
You don't know what arguing semantics means. That is an invalid defense against Ort's post. Answer the points instead of hiding please.

The primary purpose of a breadcrumb is to leave behind information that others will not see. You admitted knowledge of this earlier and now are contradicting yourself by claiming otherwise.

Good breadcrumbs are most successfully used to show commitment to a particular roleclaim which aids the player in future if they come under suspicion and are forced to claim. They usually are not valuable post-mortem due to player roles usually revealed on death and players usually not able to include decoding mechanisms in their death reveals.

If anything, Gorrad's post asking about player numbers could weakly be considered a breadcrumb that his role is a numbered playing piece. He later confirmed that this was his intent. There's really nothing else bread-crumb like about it. While claiming non-spy/non-bomb/non-flag might have some minor benefit for scum targeting, it is nowhere near as dangerous as you are acting.

You are also being inconsistent in claiming that Gorrad's role will draw pro-town actions but not anti-town actions.

You are seriously pushing a crap-logic case over something that is quite neutral.

[Kast]

@ElectricBadger-
You state that you think Gorrad's "breadcrumb" will draw power townies to target him (doc and cop). If this were true, his breadcrumb should ALSO draw scum to target him. You are inconsistent in ignoring this aspect.

@AlmasterGM-
-Your post does nothing to justify your claim that a flag would be something the town is trying to hunt for. Your comment is a complete non-sequitor.

-We continue to disagree that a moderator cannot or would not be able to balance a game that included a flag piece. I can see many mechanics which would protect a town flag, many of which fit extremely well flavor-wise. This type of speculation is something I will avoid sharing as it could easily help scum if we are in such a situation.

There is no logical problem with the moderator designing a specialized role into a theme game.

-You are inconsistent in claiming that a town flag piece must equal town loss if flag dies, but simultaneously proposing that mafia could have a flag which would not equal mafia loss if flag dies.

-I have never unilaterally condemned setup speculation. I was extremely clear about my position on setup speculation in my third post. It can be useful in some games, but it should never be used at the expense of regular scumhunting.

-There is a big difference between you insisting that your irrational claims are probable, and me pointing out various possibilities and thoughts on what each of those possibilities would mean if true.

[Kast]

@EB-
-Consistency please. You claim that if Gorrad is a townie who made a breadcrumb of a PR and publicly drew attention to it, then you claim that a doctor would protect him. You also claim that scum would try to kill him. This is a win for town.

If you are assuming that only one group would target him, then you are being inconsistent.

Your argument about Gorrad as a scum PGO is a straw man.

-Current situation is not what you are assuming. Gorrad has not breadcrumbed a PR. Gorrad has directly claimed to be not Bomb/Flag/Spy.

-Applying your crap-logic to yourself; you have claimed to be a PR and further claimed that your role makes you believe everyone is a PR; townies wouldn't do this; you are not a townie.

Ignoring that crap logic, you made a completely unprompted claim that, if you are town, helps scum with their night targeting and assessment about the game setup.

-Your penchant for throwing out mafia jargon that you don't understand is not an example of other people acting without knowledge. It is an example of your own ignorance and only serves to create confusion.

-Context is important. I agreed with you that what Gorrad did (claiming non Bomb/Flag/Spy) is not equivalent to breadcrumbing. I then explained why you calling Gorrad scummy for the "breadcrumb" makes no sense. How about addressing arguments made instead of hiding behind jargon you don't understand?

-The AlmasterGM vote is going nowhere. I am fine with an EB lynch/pressure to claim. I don't mean to indicate that I am any less suspicious of AlmasterGM (though all are free to take this as they wish).

Unvote, Vote: EB

@Hoopla-

I believe you are misunderstanding or misrepresenting dramonic's post 47 and he seems incapable of calling you out on it.

-I think this pretty clearly answers your question. I see no evidence that Dramonic made any posts that successfully clarified his position which you were misrepresenting. If you disagree, then please show those posts.

-Agreed that unwillingness to vote out of fear of a D1 quicklynch is silly. That is not the entire content of dramonic's post.

To be clear, are you expressing discontent with a player waiting until more than 3 pages of discussion before placing a vote?

@Setup Discussion/Synx-
-I think it is silly to cut off one of the town's tools out of fear that scum may misuse it. If we follow that line of thought, we should stop voting and stop discussion. Setup discussion can be very helpful. It can also be dangerous. It's not that hard to tell the difference.

-Please point out the hypocrisy. My posts regarding setup discussion have been completely in line with each other and with my behavior in all other games on site (both as scum and town). Setup discussion is helpful. Setup discussion at the expense of other scumhunting is anti-town.

@Tentative language-
Null tell. Scum are often afraid to be direct in attacking townies because they know the townie will flip and they will look worse in the eyes of many players as a result. They can also be direct at times because they have more information. It's much more a matter of personal playstyle than affiliation (possibly useful with good meta on the specific player).

@Sajin-

-Bombs not being actual pieces seems like a vastly inferior game.

-I am assuming that the setup information you are claiming is that your role PM does NOT include any reference to your piece facing off against other pieces. We need to be careful here; if this is what you wanted to share, then your post includes the kind of setup information that can be dangerous and can easily help scum fish for townies who may be capable of facing off.

This is NOT contradictory with anything Gorrad posted*. He did not post anything that indicates his role PM has a mention of facing off. He only posted that his role PM includes both a name and a number AND that the number is consistent with a game where the Marshall is number 10.

I can see a more applicable case which would be that your role PM has no number (or a combination of no number AND no reference to facing off), however this would only be valid if you were claiming to be a piece that is normally numbered but does not have a number (mod has already publicly clarified that this is not the case).

*-ex. You could easily have asked the mod if he is using a game where bombs hindered movement without being a bomb, without being a miner, and without having any mention of a movement mechanic in your role PM.

-Gorrad is one of the players saying setup speculation is bad. Read more carefully.

-Agreed that claiming "I am not one of the following" is usually not helpful. I question your decision in claiming you are not a player who can face off.

[Kast]

@EB-
-YOU said cops and docs will target a breadcrumbed PR. YOU said scum will NK a breadcrumbed PR. If things go according to how you claim, then it is good for a single townie PR to claim. I say your assumptions are BS (which you apparently agree with).

How does pointing out that your argument is crap show that I am scummy? Are you suggesting that townies should accept crap-logic?

-You are correct that you did not claim a PR. That was my mistake (mixing you up with another player in another game, though it's up to you to believe that or not). Feel free to ignore that point.

-You have posted multiple crap-logic cases, repeatedly take statements out of context, and repeatedly present inconsistent arguments. All of these are scummy tools which you have employed to try and push wagons without providing any reasons why the specific target is actually scummy, Now you are just OMGUSing and still not trying to find scum.

@Sajin-
-It sounds like you then would prefer for no discussion at all until the daytalking period was over. Is this accurate?

-Actually, that was another mistake on my part. You are correct that Gorrad has speculated in this game. I was mixing this game up with another game.

-I agree that no reveal provides a more strategic game (although to clarify, do scouts reveal the enemy, and are pieces revealed on capture?). I find having more constraints such as multiple immobile bombs allows and requires much more strategy to play around. Allowing your own pieces to freely move over/through bombs removes the double edged nature of the bomb.

[Kast]

@Synx-
Strongly disagree. Players can both scum hunt and discuss setup. The two actions are not mutually exclusive, and we have plenty of counter-examples within this game alone that disprove your claim.

@EB-
You are wrong and continue to falsely attribute your own crap-logic argument to me. This is scummy.

KAST POSITION:
-Cops and docs do NOT necessarily target breadcrumbed PR.
-Mafia does NOT necessarily target breadcrumbed PR.
-Gorrad did not breadcrumb a PR.

EB POSITION:
-Cops and docs AUTOMATICALLY target breadcrumbed PR.
-Mafia AUTOMATICALLY targets breadcrumbed PR.
-Gorrad breadcrumbed a PR.
--If Gorrad is scum, then he will be targetted by cops and docs and will kill them because he is a bomb.
--If Gorrad is a townie, then he will be targetted by mafia but NOT by cops and docs.

EB's position is inconsistent and based on terrible assumptions that he agrees are terrible. He also appears to be incapable of comprehending that Kast showing that EB's argument is bad is not equivalent to Kast believing EB's bad argument.

Trying very very hard to make scum appear where it isn't is very scummy.

This describes exactly why I find you scummy. You keep trying to call things scummy that are not. In doing this, you make use of scummy tactics (crap-logic, inconsistency, out of context quoting).

I am amazed that in 10 posts I've managed to push multiple wagons then move to not trying to find scum at all. And yeah - my first couple posts were light on hard evidence; not really shocking for the first couple pages of a game, where the goal is largely just to get people talking. As for OMGUS, yes; but scum is where scum is, and so far you're the worst. Not a good time to hunt around for scum when it keeps arriving on my doorstep demanding a response.

Pushing a wagon does not equal trying to find scum. Pushing multiple wagons with no reasoning shows that you are just trying to push for anything that sticks and go with it. Very scummy.

Your justification for your vote fails to show any intent to find scum. A player who keeps demanding responses from you and calls you suspicious is not inherently doing anything scummy. You have failed to even attempt filling in that gap.

1) Also contained an example why it was a ridiculous assertion. Also common knowledge: I don't think there's a good purpose to arguing theory about why D1 cop or doc claims are foolish.

This is not what we are discussing. You are setting up a straw man when you claim this is what we are discussing.

-Agreed that we can scumhunt on D1 even when there is little evidence. Asking questions is good and pressing your suspects to answer questions is a great way to help determine if they are scum. You don't seem interested in doing that. You seem much more interested in getting people to not suspect you and getting people to look anywhere but you. When I didn't leave you alone after you backpedalled, you switched tactics and started OMGUSing. You still don't show interest in scumhunting.

[Kast]

this sort of claim

is sure to

draw a cop investigation or doctor protection

You assume it will happen. This is a bogus assumption.

Inconsistently, you assume that a townie breadcrumbing a PR will ONLY draw mafia. If you assumed that it would draw a doctor protection, then it would be a good result for town. If any investigative PRs strongly believed your bogus assumption, then the best strategy for them is to claim D1; this is exactly the breaking strategy that resulted in switching newbie games to C9.

My point does not require that you used the word automatically. You state clearly that you think that would happen. If you want to get nitpicky, your wording is that cops and docs will target him without any uncertainty.

You don't say mafia would definitely target him as town, however you say he has made himself a target for them, provides no benefit at all to the town, and potentially creates confusion. The first of those effects inconsistently ignores your other claim that docs will target him. The second also ignores the benefit of a cop and doc targetting the same player; one guaranteed living confirmable townie. Certainly his claim resulted in confusion, so perhaps you have a point there, except that the primary source of that confusion is your own misunderstanding (or deliberate misrepresentation) of his claim.

-Good that you are interacting. How is singing praises for yourself helpful to the town?

Also, interacting with other players is not equivalent to scumhunting. If that is what you meant to imply, then try again please.

[Kast]

@Ort-
I think EB is less likely scum than AlmasterGM, but I am confidant enough in his scumminess that I think his lynch is acceptable for today.

@EB-
Again, you read out of context. You directly state that the purpose of breadcrumbing is to avoid becoming a target, but that Gorrad's action (which you claimed was breadcrumbing a PR) failed to do this. This is an indirect statement that Gorrad's action will draw mafia actions.

You say this is bad, which is inconsistent with your claim that docs will protect Gorrad if he breadcrumbs a PR.

I agree that it is not a sure thing that a doctor will protect Gorrad. You are continuing your straw man arguments when claiming that I think otherwise.

-I am not advocating that cops should claim D1. Your inconsistent claims that you made while attacking Gorrad include assumptions that advocate cops claiming on D1. I have called you on this and you are trying to confuse the issue.

-You made a crap logic case on Gorrad and when players called you on it you tried to backpedal and changed your story to appease the town. I called you on this and after your appeasement didn't work, you OMGUSed me.

You were not investigating Gorrad. Your new story, that you "investigate[d] Gorrad to see what would come out" is a classic scum defense for pursuing scummy, crap-logic driven cases.

@WLC-
-I try to respond to anything that I think needs a response. I've discussed other players as well as EB; EB is receiving more attention at the moment since he is responding in a very scummy manner.

[Kast]

Quick scan of things-
I read dramonic as incompetent town. He's running with AlmasterGM's scum-backed theory that bomb/flag/spy are mafia.

The sudden jumping of multiple people onto his wagon is probably an effort by mafia to keep EB from swinging.

UNVOTE, Vote: AlmasterGM

[Kast]

@EB-
If you were paying attention to the game you'd know AlmasterGM is my top suspect. And of course I'll avoid a wagon of a player I don't think is scum. You're reaching a lot.

If you + one other player on Dramonic's wagon are scum, then Almaster would clearly want to avoid also being on that wagon. Also interesting that AlmasterGM is egging people on to vote Dramonic, but he himself doesn't place a vote.

I'm unclear on Sajin atm. It's hard to get a clear read on Ort since he is playing the same as he has in other games I've played with him. From the vote history, I'd peg Synx. His earlier vote on EB was probably a weak bus that he abandoned when it looked like EB might actually be lynched.

@Dramonic-
You, Vaya, and AlmasterGM are the only ones who have expressed belief that this game would be numbered pieces vs non-numbered pieces. However, even if the majority of players agreed/suspected that were the case, it would not necessarily be true.

Also, I missed this earlier, but it's pretty lame saying the number of lines in your role PM. If that's not breaking the quoting rule, it's pushing it. If you are town, I don't think you're helping us very much and please be much more careful from here out (assuming you aren't mod killed).

[Kast]

if the numbers did play a role I doubt I'd be vanilla at 8 <<

WLC's point was that if there is a player with number 8 Colonel who is not you, then the player might choose to not counter-claim you.

-There are 12 unique pieces, however, the board game has different numbers of each piece. We could each have a unique role, we could have duplicate roles. Mafia (and masons) are in a better position to gauge that than regular townies.

assuming all ranks are represented, a mass claim WILL net 1 mafia: the engineer and bomb can't be on the same side.

This is not necessarily true. Unless you are admitting knowledge of either a bomb's or a miner's actual role, then this is just speculation on a possible role interaction. Possibly fishing. Possibly setting up a false dilemma if we do a mass claim.

-It doesn't look like we're anywhere near agreeing on a lynch candidate. I'd like to see more votes on AlmasterGM (EB, why did you vote AlmasterGM?).

[Kast]

AlmasterGM's last posts are pretty scummy.

He's making assumptions about game setup that a townie should not know and which have been pointed out as such. Probable scumslips; possibly fishing attempts.

He's condemning behavior which he engaged in to a more extreme degree than the people he is condemning (calling for dramonic's lynch without actually placing a vote is even worse than the players who joined the wagon then left).

[Kast]

-Strongly disliking how EB has been just jumping onto other player's ideas and trying to use other players to justify his vote.

-I'll be happy with either AlmasterGM or EB being lynched today. Based on the rules, nobody need compromise on their preferred lynch candidates to accommodate a lynch over no-lynch.

[Kast]

I think people started unvoting after I posted that he doesn't look at all like scum and that the latecomers look like scum, then a couple others voiced agreement.

The scum probably got scared to be caught on that wagon and no longer needed it as a wagon to protect EB.

[Kast]

I had another post that didn't make it through, and in general I'm having problems connecting to the forums for the past couple days now.

Anyone claiming to vote to avoid a no-lynch is just making excuses. Unless we vote for no lynch, it's not going to happen.

Despite AlmasterGM posting that he clearly understands this, he tried twisting my post into an advocation of no lynch instead of anyone below my top 2.

[Kast]

@Ortolan-
I am willing to vote either Almaster or EB.

I am mostly indifferent to others with the exception that I think some players are more likely to be town. However, I don't think anyone is so clearly town that I would be willing to change my vote to prevent that person from being lynched; so the exception makes no difference on my voting behavior.

If we were in a game where a strict majority was required for a successful lynch, things would be different, but as it is, I'm not going to be an extra body that scum can hide their votes behind. Which, incidentally, if Hoopla, Vaya, or Dramonic are town, is exactly what they are allowing by jumping on someone else's wagon for someone else's reasoning.

[Kast]

@EB-
You fail. I've identified scum and stopped town from mislynching already. Town won't listen and lynch the scum. Not much I can do about that.

Strongly disagree that jumping on random wagons with the express purpose of padding their numbers is productive or pro-town at all.

[Kast]

@Synx-
-Either you're not reading carefully, or you're giving reassurance against an extremely unlikely situation that is so meaningless that it's not worth saying.

-No lynch is impossible unless we actually vote no lynch, at which point you've already found your scum.

@Dramonic-
If he thinks you are scum, then he should say so and vote accordingly (which he is doing). Even if nobody else voted you, he has established vote history and shown his preference.

[Kast]

@Ort-
A bit off topic, but I think requiring strict majorities for a lynch hurts town much more than no strict majority required. In our other games together, the strict majority requirement allowed mafia to much more easily manipulate townies to join dumb wagons and engage in poor voting behavior that could later be used against those townies.

[Kast]

Bah...good luck town...

[Kast]

GG Charter. GG all. Congrats scum.

Post game, Charter explained that each role could not affect roles with a higher number (except the Spy). That was the missing element that balanced things.

The lurking for the win was unfortunate.

@Almaster-
One argument you could have tried was that Spy and Marshall are opposed pieces and so are probably on different teams. That seems stronger than the number pairs argument.

[Kast]

I think a 2-scout-cop who can investigate any number would have helped balance. That or a town role with setup information directly or indirectly pointing out the numbers rule.

[Kast]

@EB-
To be fair, the confirmation of Gorrad's question on D1 was a hint at the numbers rule.

[Kast]

I agree that a large theme on this would be pretty cool.