Mini 854 - Dice Mafia (Over)

[mathcam]

Why are people splitting their votes? If you could split your day one vote in a regular game to give 1/4 of a vote to four different people, would you?

And lol @ le chat.

[mathcam]

The way the dice landed today is actually pretty interesting. On a usual day with 6 players, it takes 4 to lynch. With the current dice rolls, it is still the case that any 4 players can lynch, but 3 players can also lynch

if

none of those 3 are Le Chat or Nacho. I'm not sure yet how that affects anything, but it's interesting.

Also interesting is thinking about how the endgame differs. There's probably only one scum, and we won't have any idea when we're in LyLo. In fact, scum won't know we're in LyLo either, since no one knows what the vote distributions will be on the following day. Actually, the endgame seems like it could be pretty interesting. Just to share an observation, by the way the numbers work, there can never be a king, i.e., no player can control more than half the votes. There can be an unlynchable player if, when down to 3 players, that player has two votes and the other players have one vote each. But in that case, you'd just go to night and wake up with a new distribution, and that player would get lynched eventually.

And to clarify my stance, I think vote-splitting is probably okay in this opening stage where I can see being nervous about sticking 4 votes on someone (1/3 of a lynch is a good deal more than the 1/4 lynch we'd normally have), but I think that once you have an honest suspicion, it probably makes sense to put your votes where your mouth is.

Cam

[mathcam]

Vote: Nachomamma8, Excedrin, lewarcher82, Rosso Carne

[mathcam]

Looks like scumhunting's gotta be done the old-fashioned way.

Emp

, I know we're not blitzing through the day here, but copious vote counts would be appreciated. I think Rosso's currently leading at 4.

I can't tell if I'm excited or dismayed that this game could plausibly come down to a dice roll (e.g., 1 scum vs. 1 town, just who gets more votes). Nah, I'm pretty sure I'm excited.

Cam

[mathcam]

Heh, that was one of the main reasons I signed up for this game. I love nightless games.

Interesting that exactly one person got no votes.

Cam

[mathcam]

Yeah, well, we still have two members AWOL (Nacho and Rosso), and now Le Chat's away for a couple of days. We can barely get a lynch, let alone have a stimulating discussion, with three of us here.

Maybe we could get some prods/replacements, Emp?

Cam

[mathcam]

For some reason, I find that mod question pretty scummy. Kind of feels like you know the answer and are trying to gain some pro-town points by feigning ignorance.

Also, interesting that you claim that you're going to hold onto your votes, and then cast all of them anyway. It's as if he wrote the first half of the post, got distracted coming up with his "feigning ignorance" plan above, and then wrote the second half of this post having forgot what the first half said.

It's a lot of thoughts to put in someone's head, but it's by far the most compelling lead so far.

Unvote: Everyone, Vote x 4: Nachomamma

.

Cam

[mathcam]

Note quite the game-buster I was hoping for from Rosso...

[mathcam]

I don't get that last question for archer, excedrin. What are you seeing?

[mathcam]

Wow! Even though we lost a town, I have to say it's pretty exciting to be on day 2 on page 3.

I need to brainstorm for a bit.

Cam

[mathcam]

And thanks, Rosso!

[mathcam]

Emp: There should be a 1 after lewarcher. And it's Excedrin, not Excridin.

Let's take the worst-case scenario here -- Rosso and Lew are scum together. They have the voting majority, and could lynch someone whenever they want. In fact, they can take their time, since the other three of us can't do anything without at least of them. But of course, it's possible that they get screwed tomorrow with low votes, and so they can't just jump out and claim victory. All in all, this is pretty improbable, though.

I know I haven't played as much with Rosso as the rest of you probably have, but I'm feeling a little pro-Rosso at the moment. I guess by his reputation and/or title, I can presume he does this a lot, but it doesn't seem like a very likely hammah for a scum to pull.

Cam

[mathcam]

Welcome to day 2, looking forward to your post.

Also Rosso's.

Cam

[mathcam]

Yoohoo! Rosso! Rosso?

[mathcam]

The lewarcher wagon is solid -- le chat's post in particular is pretty convincing. I have nothing to add.

More interesting:

I would probably HAMMAH! now, but Im just not so sure.

Hmm. This is in pretty stark contrast to the hammer yesterday. When combined with the day 1 hammer (which Rosso can get away with because of his rep, but still is quite handy for scum), gives me an

FOS: Rosso.

As of now, lewarcher and Rosso are my top candidates. I'll

Vote: Rosso

for balance.

Cam

[mathcam]

Why is almost no one playing this game?

I think I'm leaning toward Lewarcher. Check this: Yesterday he makes this big deal about how he doesn't want to put the wagon in a Rosso-hammerable position. Then he does it anyway -- we all agree this is scummy. Seems clear that he in fact

wants

to take advantage of the fact that Rosso will hammer.

Now what happens on day 2? He puts le Chat in a hammerable position as soon as he gets the opportunity. My guess is that he's hoping Rosso will blindly hammer anyone he can, and use this to off Le Chat.

Unvote, Vote: Lewarcher

.

Cam

[mathcam]

I wish I found someone other than lewarcher or Rosso scummy (since one of the two msut be involved in any lynch), but I'm pretty sure one of those two is scum.

Still pretty happy with lewarcher. He's hamming up his own death even though only a very few posts earlier, Rosso seems to have effectively ruled out a lewarcher lynch.

Rosso -- what can I say? And if you're not lynching anyone but me, why didn't you vote me?

Cam

[mathcam]

@Excedrin dude sorry I am on V/LA... about your questions:

1) I do not know about Mathcam: I hate the way LeChat is lurking, and I am convinced Rosso is town (I know I am, and if he were mafia in this situation he would have hammered me), so mathcam's post FoSing and voting Rosso is *possible* scum. I may hammer, if no new idea occurs to me.

Sucking up to the only person who can lynch you, eh? I think that argument is completely specious -- even with his "always hammer" meta, surely a scum Rosso would get some flack if he quickly hammered two townies in a row. And you may hammer who?

2) Tbh, I have played mafia for 3 years. I have played human mafia, I have played FB mafia and I have played epicmafia.com, where I missed a bronze trophy for 60 points (darn, now I deleted my account anyway) and I had 68% wins and a mafia-stalker stat of 9W - 1L, so I guess I can be a pretty dangerous scum.

Man, everything you say just reeks of scum to me. This one says to me "Hey look, I can't be scum. Scum wouldn't be so honest about dangerous they can be as scum." Maybe even a bit of "Sure look scummy, but that just means I'm town! Let me tell you, if I were actually scum, you would have noooo idea...."

Cam

[mathcam]

Unless someone comes up with a compelling case, I'd rather not vote for anyone other than the two I've mentioned. No lynch is a good idea, but it comes down to whether or not archer and Rosso decide to collectively off someone.

Cam

[mathcam]

To re-distribute votes. Though you're fortunate enough to be on the receiving end ofthis particular distribution, you have to admit the current vote set-up is a little precarious for the town.

Cam

[mathcam]

I'd rather lynch an absent Rosso than an active lewarcher. If deadline nears, I'm jumping ship to Rosso. This is pathetic.

Cam

[mathcam]

I see plenty of reasons not to hammer. Two quick hammers of townies in a row would certainly bring suspicion on himself the following day. If Rosso is our scum, then his only job in this game is to stay alive for 4 or 5 days in a row. While he can take advantage of his meta for doing it once, his meta can't cover all of them. But honestly, I still buy that argument a little bit -- that's why you're the number one choice instead of him.

Cam

[mathcam]

Yeah, no one's saying you could both be scum.

But I pointed out in a previous post why Rosso wouldn't necessarily hammer if he's scum. To add to that, you have to actually be here to hammer. Interesting that you view the continuing lack of hammer as further support of Rosso's innocence.

EmpKing

: Can we replace Rosso? I think he's had more than enough time to post, and this isn't his first bout of inactivity.

Cam

[mathcam]

Here ya go:

Yesterday he makes this big deal about how he doesn't want to put the wagon in a Rosso-hammerable position. Then he does it anyway -- we all agree this is scummy. Seems clear that he in fact

wants

to take advantage of the fact that Rosso will hammer.

Now what happens on day 2? He puts le Chat in a hammerable position as soon as he gets the opportunity. My guess is that he's hoping Rosso will blindly hammer anyone he can, and use this to off Le Chat.

I've since made several other arguments which you should re-read as well, but that's the big one.

I don't understand this post at all. In the posts preceding it, you demonstrate that you are well aware of the town option to no lynch. Why would deadline approaching make you want to vote for Rosso more exactly?

Does the passage of time somehow make Rosso more scummy or something?

Fair point. No, but passage of time does increase frustration with non-participating members. I also hadn't been too careful with the rules -- I've since gone back and read the deadline rules, but at the time, I figured that If we were going to have the deadline decide the lynch instead of a town consensus, we should eliminate a non-player rather than an active member.

Incidentally, thank for replacing.

Cam

[mathcam]

The case is pathetically thin. I'll have you notice that I did not even take into consideration the option of lynching you on day 2, even though Rosso declared he was ready to hammer you. How do you explain that?

You see pathetically thin, I see the best we've got. We're only a few pages in, and this is a much more solid case than I've seen in 90% of day 1's. And note that you didn't

post

any consideration of lynching me today, but that's a long way from what you claim. It's not like you had the option to hammer and chose not to -- you never even had the option.

You cannot build a case on the fact that I changed my mind, let Rosso hammer and was unlucky. What is the problem with Rosso? Is he subnormal? Cannot he help hammering on day 1? He shouldn't have hammered: he is as guilty as I am.

You, in turn, cannot tell me what I can or cannot build a case on. And this isn't as simple as "changing one's mind." It's a complete 180 on a substantial topic in the game with what seems like very reason (i.e., no compelling arguments one way or the other, posted by you or anyone else) to explain the change. Plus, changing one's mind is one thing -- changing one's mind to a stance that is advantageous to scum (twice putting someone in a hammerable position by someone who is apparently famous for laying down the hammer) is another.

Cam

[mathcam]

I'd like to hear more from excedrin and le chat. I might be losing a little confidence in my lewarcher attack. The frustration feels a little genuine (though this might be scum frustrated at thinking he hasn't done anything scummy just as much as it could be town frustrated at the same thing).

Cam

[mathcam]

Hm, he seems to have three votes now. If he had one vote earlier, that's interesting.

In any case, this is much better distribution. Any three people can achieve a lynch, though several sets of two can achieve it as well. Also, I have more votes.

I'm willing to bet that all of us have an at least semi-confirmable role that somehow affects the dice rolls. I'm not sure if any of them are inherently town or inherently scum, though.

Cam

[mathcam]

[mathcam]

I don't think I have a problem with a mass claim. The obvious potential benefit is that the scum (I really think there's just one -- I don't see how people can think that there would be 2 scum out of 6 people...maybe someone can elaborate?) might have to go early, and not have a role that resembles anything like town roles. The corresponding obvious potential detriment is that scum either already has a role similar to town roles, or goes near the end and can fake it well enough. In this case, we've gained nothing and just revealed everyone's role -- though, if all of our roles are just dice manipulation, having everyone's role out in the public might not actually be that detrimental. To summarize, I'm not sure I see a compelling reason one way or the other -- I think for now I'm with excedrin that we should wait until a probable LyLo.

If we do massclaim, we should probably randomly decide on an order. I don't particularly care about going first except for (from my point of view) the loss of potentially having the scum trip up with a bad claim. Sanjay, why don't you want to go first?

All in all, I'm finding Sanjay much more town than Rosso -- that last post in particular.

Cam

[mathcam]

Was mathcam's original reason for suspecting Nachomama8 a good one?

Actually, I'm curious to hear your take on this.

And I vote yes.

Cam

[mathcam]

I think you're still a little quick to dismiss scum pairings (although this is an odd statement coming from someone who has dismissed

all

scum pairings ). If I were scum with Excedrin, we could only win if we were so sure about the game mechanics that outing ourself as the scum by insta-killing would result in a 100% guaranteed victory. Given the undisclosed roles in the game, especially those that might manipulate votes/rolls, I don't see how we would be sure of something like that.

Cam

[mathcam]

You seem pretty sure scum win when they equal one half of the town, huh?

That is a fantastic catch. That sure doesn't seem to follow from the rules -- it's certainly possible that even with 1 mafia and 1 town left, the town could get lucky and be able to outvote the mafia. Unless, of course, lewarcher has specific information about the mafia win condition.

I'm pretty ready to put my votes back on lewarcher.

Cam

[mathcam]

You didn't though. What's the deal?

I don't see anything wrong with a declaration of intent without an actual vote, especially since my vote is potentially one vote (Excedrin's) away from a hammer. I'm not ready for the day to be in any danger of ending until we hear from Le Chat.

Cam

[mathcam]

Eh, losing patience again. If we lynch lewarcher and we haven't won yet, we need some replacements.

Vote: Lewarcher, Lewarcher, Lewarcher.

I guess it's basically up to Excedrin at this point. (Or, Lewarcher, you could try to find someone else to start a case up against...)

Cam

[mathcam]

What is wrong in the sentence "For what is worth, me neither"?

Nothing. Why do you ask?

I am honestly pissed: nightless games are totally based on sympathy and pseudo-psychology. I will go for my feelings: it should be either Le Chat (who is kinda disappeared) or Cam, Rosso's original FoS.

Then why are you pissed? I feel like you're scum, and am voting you because of it.

Since Le Chat is lurking, which is no good strategy for a scum in this kind of game, and since Math is pretending to consider other hypothesis but every day he ends up voting me, I

vote: Mathcam; Mathcam

.

I'm not pretending. Lurking is annoying, but it's not scummy. I'm in another game with Le Chat and he's vanished there as well. If we want to delay the game and wait for a replacement or another round of prods, we can do that, but the game has been so inactive at points that I just want to get on with it. And I feel like my case on you is actually relatively solid. You've been hypocritical, and have been caught implying you have knowledge about the mafia setup that townies wouldn't know.

And your defense? To paraphrase, "Your'e right. I should be lynched." And then you get pissed that I want to lynch you.

Lynching Le Chat is crazy. There's as much chance that he's randomly scum as the next guy, but surely you'd agree that we can do better than a random lynch here. What about the lewarcher wagon don't you find compelling?

Cam

[mathcam]

I am not sure if I can see what is happening here.

Hm, maybe you're right. The last few posts have been odd. I'm going to

Unvote: Lewarcher

x3. Not that this is really preventing a lynch since lewarcher can hammer, but hopefully reduces the pressure on lewarcher so that we can figure out what's going on here first.

Excedrin: That's all you have to say after your absence?

Sanjay: You've been pretty good at explaining your actions as you do them. Why no comment on Le Chat?

Cam

[mathcam]

Not that my little vote matters any.

It put Chat in hammer-range, so it's not irrelevant...

mathcam, why unvote lewarcher82? Do you think he is less scummy now?

Not at all. In fact, his recent posts have only convinced me further. My only hiccup was you and excedrin piling on 4 quick votes on Le Chat. I was briefly worried about a Sanjay/Excedrin scum pair taking advantage of lewarcher's overdefensiveness to get a quick hammer on Le Chat to end the game. I've since convinced myself that was silly.

Worried about self hammer?

Huh? No, worried about Le Chat hammer.

[mathcam]

That's true. What do you think about Sanjay's unvote after I wagoned?

Well, there was a plausible explanation afterwards, but the whole unexplained vote and unexplained unvote thing was odd, very odd. (especially post 175)

Ah, I get it. I was confused by "unvote lewarcher -> lewarcher can hammer" like your vote prevented him from self-hammering.

Yeah, that was awkwardly phrased. I unvoted lewarcher to reduce pressure on him, so he wouldn't feel like he had to hammer to le chat immediately in order to save himself.

It looks like we need a Le Chat replacement.

Cam

[mathcam]

I can't help but feel that this was inadvertently punishment for being the only person to stay active the entire game. I should've lurked with the rest of you. Sigh.