Newbie 803 - Game Over.

[Head_Honcho]

no dude it sounds like you have been paying attention. Anyway, if you think it's me then that's one thing, but I was thinking we could skip all that and just compete for my favor.

[Head_Honcho]

HEY JAMMER

[Col.Cathart]

Ugh... Don't tell me, I'm digging this thread for interesting things to ask Jammer, only to have another replacement, who cannot answer them... -_-

[jammer]

Posting to make clear I'm not gone, I'll be back on posting reletively soonly.

[jammer]

There did not even happen that much in the time I was semi-gone. -.- Let get a few reactions.
For some reason I do not really feel like coming in after I did not post much. Hope that changes soon.

Because of above, and lack of any other suspects. Vino is confirmed townie. HH is playing very well, and aside from sudden D1 hammer, and Lupo's behavior, I have no suspicions ATM. Jammer was trying to lynch Porkens, but so do me for a long time, because I didn't believe him as well. Apart from that, he played really well. The only thing that bugs me was that strange unvote, when HV reached 3rd vote. Possible bussing? Maybe...

How was I ¨bussing¨ HV if I did not even vote him?

Unfortunately, lynching the first one seems impossible now, but I'm gonna try anyway. I wanted to hammer Porkens several times already, but HH's and Vito's explanations made me change my mind. It's actually a bit weird, that two other players did it, instead of Porkens himself ~^

Still not sure what to make out of it. Maybe trying to let Porkens lynched by other players, and vote a partner to look more clean by not being on the Porkens wagon and preparing a HV-bus for the day after.

Jammer played extremely well on day 1, for some reason not so well on day 2. Almost non-existent on day 3. If Ein is not a mafia, then probably he is.

.....
.....

And so

vote: Einlanzers

Hopefully, this is the end.

Well, that NK was pretty obvious.

*Sigh* I really thought, it was Ein... Oh well, back to re-reading the thread.

You sound more sure he was scum after he flipped town. Also, why did you feel like mentioning me before, if you where pretty sure about Ein?

[Col.Cathart]

How was I ¨bussing¨ HV if I did not even vote him?

You unvoted Porkens. According to the rules, HV would be lynched anyway at the deadline, even if no one would hammer him, because he had 3 votes, while Porkens had 2.

Still not sure what to make out of it. Maybe trying to let Porkens lynched by other players, and vote a partner to look more clean by not being on the Porkens wagon and preparing a HV-bus for the day after.

Overly complicated plan, and completely unnecessary, because neither me or HV was in danger of lynch. Why pull that kind of gambit, if we could enter the lylo stage with full power, and little to none heat over our heads? IMO this theory doesn't make any sense. If you don't know what to make of it, then don't make anything, because the truth is simple - HV was IMO scummy, so I voted. I'm still quite amazed, how quickly this wagon went ahead, though...

You sound more sure he was scum after he flipped town.

Weird word catching. Because of no other good candidates, I was almost sure, he was a scum. Hence the sentence right at the beginning of D4.

Also, why did you feel like mentioning me before, if you where pretty sure about Ein?

This is mafia. If you're not a cop with a report, you cannot be 100% sure. Never. If you don't have a backup suspect, then you're playing this game wrong IMO.

And btw, this is from the day 1:

Yes, jammer (which is why I voted for him)

He seems to want to take the lead of the investigation a bit too much, and really actively questions other players to shift the attention away from himself.

I like 'leading'. I like playing the game.
(I have a strange habit of push a lynch on players who ask, why are you leading, who cleared you?) Feels like the chainsaw attack, link I had to check myself whatever it meant.
Chainsaw attack

Everything was fine during D1. K, I can understand, you told us about limited Internet access during later part of D3 and early D4. But what happened during D2 and early D3? You had a short argument with Porkens, but that's it in terms of your major thread activity. What happened? You don't like 'leading' anymore?

[Zorblag]

Vote Count 4.1

The numbers by the voters indicate the order in which the vote was cast. If two or more players are tied for the most votes to lynch at the deadline the tiebreaker will be the player who has the earliest active vote.

Not voting: Col.Cathart, Head_Honcho, jammer

With 3 alive it takes 2 to lynch. Currently no one would be lynched at Deadline. Deadline is 7:00 PM EDT/3:00 PM PDT on Wednesday, September 2nd.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[jammer]

You unvoted Porkens. According to the rules, HV would be lynched anyway at the deadline, even if no one would hammer him, because he had 3 votes, while Porkens had 2.

I did not vote him, nor did I put a case on him. Bussing? You need some other argument. I could put a vote straight back at porkens at any time.

Also, doesn´t matter but anyway, I wanted to unvote but when I posted I recall spending to much time rereading some posts and Porkens already voted.

Overly complicated plan, and completely unnecessary, because neither me or HV was in danger of lynch. Why pull that kind of gambit, if we could enter the lylo stage with full power, and little to none heat over our heads? IMO this theory doesn't make any sense. If you don't know what to make of it, then don't make anything, because the truth is simple - HV was IMO scummy, so I voted. I'm still quite amazed, how quickly this wagon went ahead, though...

Yea, that was the point a little, the speed. I can see you wouldn´t think you bring him into lynch danger with it. And see you voting the partner and call in later situations back I voted him back then.

This is mafia. If you're not a cop with a report, you cannot be 100% sure. Never. If you don't have a backup suspect, then you're playing this game wrong IMO.

I do not know why talking about next suspect while you just hammered the earlier one, makes sense. If you suspect me enough to put me as imidiate next day lynch. I would have liked it if you brought up a case against me Day 3.

Everything was fine during D1. K, I can understand, you told us about limited Internet access during later part of D3 and early D4. But what happened during D2 and early D3? You had a short argument with Porkens, but that's it in terms of your major thread activity. What happened? You don't like 'leading' anymore?

[/quote]
Need to check dates for what part of D3 I had limited access. For D2? How was my posting a lack a activity? I did not lead enough? Well, I was not prodded, that is one thing.
Can you post what lacked D2, then I can respond on that.

[Col.Cathart]

I did not vote him, nor did I put a case on him. Bussing? You need some other argument. I could put a vote straight back at porkens at any time.

So what, you could have put back this vote at Porkens? Every vote can be changed every second, depending on someone's humor. It doesn't matter what you could do, but what you DID. And you just changed the deadline lynch target, 1 day before the deadline. That's far more bussy behavior, than my vote on HV IMO.

Yea, that was the point a little, the speed. I can see you wouldn´t think you bring him into lynch danger with it. And see you voting the partner and call in later situations back I voted him back then.

Why take any risk, if you can not risk anything at all? Especially considering, I had a far better target for scum vote right under my nose. I could lynch a COP, and probably go away with it, as my accusation was more or less the same as 3 other players, including you. I said it once, and I'll say it again - scum must've been nuts, to do something like that.

I do not know why talking about next suspect while you just hammered the earlier one, makes sense. If you suspect me enough to put me as imidiate next day lynch. I would have liked it if you brought up a case against me Day 3.

What immediate? Do you know what 'probably' means?

...

*Sigh* let's try from another angle - my scum suspicions at the end of day 3: Ein - 90% Jammer - 7% HH - 3%. Conclusion - I'm ALMOST sure, Ein is a mobster. If not (because there's still a possibility), then I think Jammer might be the one. Ein still had almost 13 times more percent than you, so I hammered him. Clear and visible enough?

Yep, that's my mistake, I should have question you more before I dropped a hammer, but so what? You where my backup suspect then so I was reading over and over your posts, and now, you're my main suspect, and that's why I'm questioning you right now. More experience for me, I should not tunnel vision, so be assured, I'll question HH as well, because there are still some weird plays on his part.

SO in short - I should put a case on you then. I didn't - time to repair the mistake.

Need to check dates for what part of D3 I had limited access. For D2? How was my posting a lack a activity? I did not lead enough?

Well, I was not prodded, that is one thing.

Can you post what lacked D2, then I can respond on that.

bolded part: cheap trick, and completely missing the point.

What lacked? Just look at your day 1. You were creating, and leading almost every discussion, asking lots of questions etc.

Day 2. Yep, you're still out there, but now you're only doing 1-2 line posts with a single question, that rarely pushed any situation anywhere. That's leading? More like a keeping the flame, rather than starting it. Not a leader thing at all, more like a puppet master attempt, and my previous experience tells me, that's a thing, the scum just LOVES to do, because you're staying out of trouble AND keeping a heat on innocent person at the same time.

Then we have Porkens claim. Kay, sure it's a normal thing not to believe it, I questioned it as well, but where I just kept asking Porkens for some arguments to backup his claim (I didn't get them, so I tried to threat him for them, but it didn't work as well...), you just went in and voted immediately. Weird at best, very scummy at worst. Your argument with Porkens was the only part, when you went back for a while to your former self from Day 1. And then you once again went into the shadows.

And to stop you from going away from the topic once again - I'm not suspecting you, for the fact, you kept low profile during D2. Everyone have a different playstyle. See imkingdavid from my previous game (newbie 802) for an example of talkative person who asks lots and lots of question, and see me. I cannot stand talking all the time, so I'm observer, who gets active, when something catches his attention.

So playstyle is different matter for every player. But it gets really suspicious when someone is changing his playstyle during the game. You were a talkative person, who even admitted, that it IS your playstyle, and yet you slowly transformed into an observer during day 2 and following. Why the change? You stopped liking being a leader?

It's late already, so answers for your questions in next post, and questions to HH will have to wait for tomorrow.

[jammer]

So what, you could have put back this vote at Porkens? Every vote can be changed every second, depending on someone's humor. It doesn't matter what you could do, but what you DID. And you just changed the deadline lynch target, 1 day before the deadline. That's far more bussy behavior, than my vote on HV IMO.

If the intention was what you meant. Then I can redirect you that I was actually about to post that before I saw porkens vote, as I said.
Also I would say bussy behaviour describes, you must be able to say later, I helped lynching scum! And I can not really say that...

Why take any risk, if you can not risk anything at all? Especially considering, I had a far better target for scum vote right under my nose. I could lynch a COP, and probably go away with it, as my accusation was more or less the same as 3 other players, including you. I said it once, and I'll say it again - scum must've been nuts, to do something like that.

When you posted the vote, it did not really seem like you thought HV would be lynched, how is it now that of a big risk?

Need to check dates for what part of D3 I had limited access. For D2? How was my posting a lack a activity? I did not lead enough?

Well, I was not prodded, that is one thing.

Can you post what lacked D2, then I can respond on that.

bolded part: cheap trick, and completely missing the point.

How is it cheap to point that out? You even admitted with the prod you thought you had another day? Reaks to tactical lurking.

And to stop you from going away from the topic once again - I'm not suspecting you, for the fact, you kept low profile during D2. Everyone have a different playstyle. See imkingdavid from my previous game (newbie 802) for an example of talkative person who asks lots and lots of question, and see me. I cannot stand talking all the time, so I'm observer, who gets active, when something catches his attention.

=lurker
It might be handy to read that game for me.

So playstyle is different matter for every player. But it gets really suspicious when someone is changing his playstyle during the game. You were a talkative person, who even admitted, that it IS your playstyle, and yet you slowly transformed into an observer during day 2 and following. Why the change? You stopped liking being a leader?

I talk whenever I like to talk. Once there is ´fire´, why start a new one.

Also, I followed the lynch on Santos D1, I did not come close leading that. -.-
1) Changing playstyle in game is not scummy.
2) I don´t think I changed my playstyle. :S

[Col.Cathart]

When you posted the vote, it did not really seem like you thought HV would be lynched, how is it now that of a big risk?

IMO every vote on your scum partner is some kind of risk, because... well, there's a chance to lose your scum partner. Pretty obvious, isn't it?

How is it cheap to point that out? You even admitted with the prod you thought you had another day? Reaks to tactical lurking.

I had a hectic time with my work, as I posted earlier. That's why I didn't notice it was my 3rd day of not voting, because I didn't have time to read everything, post time marks especially.

And that's a cheap trick because that was a 'Hey look, he got prodded - he's MAFIA!' and probable attempt to piss me off. At least, that's how I interpret it.

And to stop you from going away from the topic once again - I'm not suspecting you, for the fact, you kept low profile during D2. Everyone have a different playstyle. See imkingdavid from my previous game (newbie 802) for an example of talkative person who asks lots and lots of question, and see me. I cannot stand talking all the time, so I'm observer, who gets active, when something catches his attention.

=lurker
It might be handy to read that game for me.

Uhm... No. Posting something, without anything important to say is more (active) lurking than not posting anything.

I talk whenever I like to talk. Once there is ´fire´, why start a new one.

Because the first fire might be the false one? If I didn't brought HV active lurkiness, he would probably be still alive. And remember, I did that when Porkens was the main topic of discussion.

Also, I followed the lynch on Santos D1, I did not come close leading that. -.-

Missing the point once again. You know exactly what I meant by 'leading' the day 1, because you even answered positively, when you were discussing it with Lupo on day 1. Do not try to deny it, because you're contradicting your previous words.

1) Changing playstyle in game is not scummy.

Yes it is. If you are town, you don't need to change your tactic, because your goal is still the same - find a scum. When you are a scum, you have to change tactic, depending on situation you are faced with - your scum partner as a lynch target, heat on a random innocent player, attempt to fish out the power roles, etc. etc.

Not to mention, that fighter who prefers weaker but quicker punches, don't change his fighting style, to slow powerful punches JUST BECAUSE.

2) I don´t think I changed my playstyle. :S

Yes, you did. I already posted, why I think that, and if you want me to stop thinking that way - prove it.

HH - What do you think so far about our discussion?

[jammer]

And that's a cheap trick because that was a 'Hey look, he got prodded - he's MAFIA!' and probable attempt to piss me off. At least, that's how I interpret it.

No, I got annoyed becouse I though you attacked my activity. So I responded with yours.

=lurker
It might be handy to read that game for me.

Uhm... No. Posting something, without anything important to say is more (active) lurking than not posting anything.

Posting something without saying anything is active lurking. Reading/observing the game and not posting is lurking.

Because the first fire might be the false one? If I didn't brought HV active lurkiness, he would probably be still alive. And remember, I did that when Porkens was the main topic of discussion.

Meh, well if the fire is good. I had no problems with Porkens being voted that day. :S

Yes it is. If you are town, you don't need to change your tactic, because your goal is still the same - find a scum. When you are a scum, you have to change tactic, depending on situation you are faced with - your scum partner as a lynch target, heat on a random innocent player, attempt to fish out the power roles, etc. etc.

As mafia you do not have any interest into lynching mafia, but like to lynch whoever. This argument gets off topic. But if you talk about consistace, there is no real difference, might even be mafia is more consistant.

2) I don´t think I changed my playstyle. :S

Yes, you did. I already posted, why I think that, and if you want me to stop thinking that way - prove it.

I get back on that, but heck a point of relative characters posting level.

[Col.Cathart]

And...

That's it for now, because we just hit the point where everything I could write after Jammers last post is a typical case of 'Your Mileage May Vary'.

Honcho, your move?

[Head_Honcho]

Hurk, I could see either of you as scum just as well as the other. However, upon reading back I am somewhat more convinced by Jammer's play. I do think the unvote right before HV was lynched was super sketchy though.

I'm curious, Cathart, how come you didn't call out HV for his scummy play earlier?

[Col.Cathart]

In all honesty - simple blindness. I went for Porkens and forgot about others, which was a mistake. When you and Vino convinced me, he may be innocent, I looked for another suspect, and HV with his active lurking was a perfect candidate. Since I didn't want to make that mistake again, from that point I'm always looking for at least 2 suspects.

Pretty much this game is one big trial and error for me.

[Head_Honcho]

Come on guys, no sense dragging this out, talk or vote. Jammer could I get a little more explanation as to why you unvoted right at the end of day two?

Or are we all waiting for me to vote?

Cathart, you clearly thought Ein was scummy even when you voted HV, in fact he was second on your list. Why would you vote for HV when Ein already had a vote? Especially when you said in your vote post that you considered a lynch on Ein or HV 'impossible' at that point? If that was your concern, why would you put HV at L-3 instead of putting Ein at L-2?

[Col.Cathart]

Honcho - This question was already asked during D3, and I already answered it.

In short: when my vote happened, Ein was still yet to answer questions about inconsistence. I don't like to vote someone, before he'll say everything, that might defend him. HV on the other hand, after accusation about active lurking gave us one liner, which wasn't even an answer = he don't want to answer = he don't have anything more to say = I can vote already.

And you know what? This is getting ridiculous. It's obvious from this point of view, that Jammer will vote for me, and I'll vote for him. If Honcho is a scum, then our discussion is pointless anyway, and if he isn't, then none of our votes is dangerous.

So be it...

vote: Jammer

Honcho, if you're a scum, Good Game, and coup de grace this game please. If you're not, and if Jammer will vote back, please don't vote immediately. This way I'll know at least, I'm correct with my point.

[jammer]

Come on guys, no sense dragging this out, talk or vote. Jammer could I get a little more explanation as to why you unvoted right at the end of day two?

I am one day not posting, and it is dragging out?

Well, I think I already explained. Stupid as it might sound, Vino joined the game, and was against a Porkens lynch. You and Vino clearly being against the lynch made me think. Not both of you could be scum.
The longer the day was becoming, I was more&more looking at you as his partner and took the defence with a grain of salt. e.g you both voted me, and you where blatenly defending his actions. In retrospect that was a stupid assumption.

And you know what? This is getting ridiculous. It's obvious from this point of view, that Jammer will vote for me, and I'll vote for him. If Honcho is a scum, then our discussion is pointless anyway, and if he isn't, then none of our votes is dangerous.

Um, can you explain what happened with the questions you wanted to ask to HH? I though it was 3% vs. 6%?
You state you (purely) vote me becouse I will likely vote you(or you me)in the end.
Wait, what?

[Head_Honcho]

I've gotta go with

vote: jammer

gj if you're scum cathart

[Zorblag]

Vote Count 4.2

The numbers by the voters indicate the order in which the vote was cast. If two or more players are tied for the most votes to lynch at the deadline the tiebreaker will be the player who has the earliest active vote.

jammer: 1: Col.Cathart(1), Head_Honcho (2)

Not voting: jammer

With 3 alive it takes 2 to lynch.

jammer, mafia goon

, is lynched.

Town wins.

I'll have some comments shortly. I encourage everyone to post their thoughts respectfully.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[Head_Honcho]

oh thank goodness. Jammer you played really well and twas a pleasure, but I could not get over some day two weirdness, and in addition your defenses today seemed more... Academic than sincere. The scum in general actually did pretty well, HV always seemed a little bit iffy, but you guys were good about not really connecting yourself too eachother or explicitly distancing either.

Good job @ Porkens for not getting lynched day two.

All in all it was a pretty fun game with some decent activity at certain points. So thanks all, and thanks Zorblag for the invite.

[Head_Honcho]

EBWOP: to not too!

[Vino]

Told you it was jammer.

[Einlanzers]

GG everyone. And good scum-hunting CC.

[Zorblag]

So the game seemed to be a pretty decent one for the most part to me. Here are a couple thoughts about the newer players that I hope will be helpful.

Einlanzers, you started out looking really scummy in my opinion. Somewhere midway through day one I think you saw this and you made a huge improvement in your play. That stopped you from getting lynched then but unfortunately for you I think that it probably wasn't enough to stop you from getting lynched later as you were. In any case, you made big improvements just through the play in this game. Keep at it and continue to get a feel for what is expected would be my advice.

jammer, you seemed to be overly worried about the game after Hurleys_Van got lynched. I was pretty pleased with your scum play. There's a chance that you got too defensive towards the end rather than trying to push a case on others but you seem to have a good feel for what's going down.

Hurleys_Van, it's mostly a matter of participation for you so far as I could tell. You need to be involved with the game or you're going to get lynched for inactivity like you were as long as the town is on the ball. Past that your play was fine so far as I saw.

Col.Cathart, your play seemed pretty decent to me. You did make the call when you needed to at the end and you made it correctly. Clearly you had a couple calls wrong along the way so do watch out for that but you seem to have a good basis to work from here.

Porkens, I know you're not new and we've talked about your play very briefly. The looking scummy as a cop strategy isn't ideal I don't think but it got the job done well enough here for the town to win.

Town on the whole did distract eachother some but in the end they cut through what they needed to and made mislynches that helped narrow down who they were looking for in scum. The best lynch I saw was Hurleys_Van for lurking but I think that lurkers get too much leeway so I'm biased.

Thank you all for playing and best of luck in your future games!

Night actions were pretty obvious I would think. Porkens investigated Chiarosicada night one (innocent) and then Eilanzers night two (innocent). Scum killed VP Baltar, Porkens and then Vino.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh