Mini 854 - Dice Mafia (Over)

[lewarcher82]

I don't think that an anti-town behaviour can be detected in this game, dude Ridiculous is to think that I do. I operate on the fact that I know I am not scum, and therefore I try to understand what Rosso had in his mind. So I am not proving anything, of course. It is up to you guys to judge if I am or I am not lying.

I am sick of people speaking of unconsistence whenever one changes his mind, and I do not see how avoiding to change my mind could help me in a nightless game, in which I can only find clues if I intensively interact with other players.

[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

[Sanjay]

lewarcher82, explain why you changed your mind.

[lewarcher82]

Of course we do not see the same, it is because I know that I am not mafia and curiously I am the only one here who seems to realize that this is potential lylo.

Also, it is true, I had no opportunity to hammer, but I did not want to anyway. I did not even try to discuss with Rosso the option.

As for the reason why I changed my mind about Nacho, it is all in post #49. He was "the best we had got". It doesn't really work, does it. Anyway, you have 4 votes to lynch me, don't you? Then go ahead and let's hope I am wrong and this is not lylo.

[Sanjay]

No, why did you change your mind about putting Nacho in a position where Rosso could end the day?

[lewarcher82]

Here is my explanation for my Day 1 behaviour.

1) Nacho asked a scummy question in post #30. At this point I FoSed him, but still didn't want to see him hammered too quick.
2) Asked for a justification for post #30, he said something like "I didn't really mean anything". This looked definitely scummy enough for me to vote him. Moreover, I thought that Excedrin (post 46) was defending him, and I thought they was mafia-buddies. As I already said like 3 times, I was and I am convinced that there are 2 mafias, not only one.

This is all. If it is not enough just hammer me, but the 2 among you guys who are actually town are failing in logic and they hyperinterpreting my situation: I sure hope that I am wrong about the 2 mafias. If I am right and you hammer, we loose, but I can do anything else to avoid it, except answering any further specific question.

[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

[Empking]

[0/1] le Chat (2) Lewarcher82, Lewarcher82
[0/1] Excedrin (0)
[0/2]lewarcher82 (3): Excedrin, Le Chat, Mathcam
[0/1]mathcam (0)
[2]Rosso Carne (0)

4 to lynch.

[Excedrin]

Well. We know that if there's 2 scum, then it's not Sanjay and anyone else since Sanjay could hammer either le Chat or lewarcher82.

Also, it's possible but unlikely that it's lewarcher82 and anyone else since nobody's even trying to get a le Chat, mathcam, Sanjay, Excedrin lynch (lewarcher82 + X just needs to attract one more vote given how votes are distributed).

So if there's 2 scum, it's probably 2 of the single voters. From my perspective, that would make mathcam and le Chat scum. That seems unlikely. I doubt that there's 2 scum.

I think that Rosso Carne may have been hinting that nobody looked at mathcam's reasons for lynching Nachomamma8 and that he thought mathcam was scum for trying to push a lewarcher82 lynch on day 2 since it's probably the easiest lynch. So, I have a slight suspicion of mathcam.

lewarcher82 has claimed some experience at playing mafia, but his defense has been basically, "I'm town, I know my role it is town" and his suspicion seems to be based on gut entirely. I think that insisting that there's likely 2 scum is scummy since it looks like he's trying to prevent people from lynching him.

I'd suggest that, if any of that seems reasonable to Sanjay, a possible way to break this standstill (aside from nolynch) would be for lewarcher82 to claim (he's at L-Sanjay). Then if his claim looks at all reasonable, possibly look at mathcam.

mod: I unvoted earlier

[lewarcher82]

ok, I answer in three points:

1) I have experience playign mafia, but this is my first nightless game. Quite different from anything I did before.
2) I do not see how a claim would help, but I will do it anyway.
3) Here is my claim: I am a town-aligned weighted dice, my vote is always (Number of players)/2 rounded down.

was it any help?

[Sanjay]

lewarcher82's defense has been just ridiculous. As far as I can understand, the two basic points of lewarcher82's argument are:

1) I am town and therefore cannot be scum.
2) It is illogical to be suspicious of me because the case is so thin.

The first one is kind of useless and the second one is kind of off-putting, especially considering we are on page 6 and we can't get big fat cases at this point.

But I don't know whether this case is town-ridiculous or scum-ridiculous. I tend to agree with mathcam that the frustration seems genuine.

lewarcher82: do you have any games you can show us where you defended yourself like this as town? Why is your defense so ridiculous?

As much as I would like to hammer someone while I have the double vote, I don't really want to hammer lewarcher82 today. Today is probably going to end in a no-lynch.

As for a claim, though, I wouldn't terribly mind one. With no nightkill, claiming becomes a lot less risky for town. If there is some kind of mafia powerrole it could end up having anti-town affects, but if there isn't it seems like it could only help.

[Sanjay]

Oh, I didn't notice lewarcher had already posted.

We can't test the "town-aligned" part of lewarcher's claim, but we can test the "weighted dice" part of it pretty easily by no lynching and seeing if he gets a double vote again.

[Sanjay]

It does seem like kind of a ridiculous role for mafia to have though.

[Sanjay]

Excedrin, why do you think mathcam and le Chat would be the two scum and not me?

[Excedrin]

lewarcher82, asking you to claim was more for Sanjay (if Sanjay wanted). But, now that you have, it doesn't seem like a role that would be scum aligned.

Also, it's a (semi) mod confirmed role.

this post and the next one say:

lewarcher82

Dice Roll

:

Original Roll String:

1d4

1 4-Sided Dice Results:

1

...
lewarcher82: 4
...
[4]lewarcher82: 0

Sanjay, if you were scum you could hammer le Chat or lewarcher82 and win (assuming that 2 town and 2 mafia results in mafia win).

[Sanjay]

I thought you were assuming the two scum were unaligned.

[lewarcher82]

No, I cannot post sample of games where I defended myself in a "riduculous" way. I am doing it now becaus this is a 6 player nighltss game, and even if page 6 is too early to have big fat cases, this is and remains a damned early potential lylo.

[Excedrin]

I thought you were assuming the two scum were unaligned.

I don't think there's 2 scum, maybe I should. But, I was describing why I disagreed with lewarcher82's idea that it's currently lylo, which only makes sense with 2 aligned scum.

If there's unaligned scum I'm not sure how the setup would work since apparently neither has a kill, they'd each have to get the other one lynched if it got to final 3 or it'd be a draw? I suppose it depends on hypothetical unaligned scum win condition(s).

[Empking]

Day 3

Le Chat

Original Roll String: 1d3 (STATIC)

1 3-Sided Dice: (3) = 3

Excridin

Original Roll String: 1d3 (STATIC)

1 3-Sided Dice: (3) = 3

Lewarcher

Original Roll String: 1d3 (STATIC)

1 3-Sided Dice: (2) = 2

Rosso

Original Roll String: 1d3 (STATIC)

1 3-Sided Dice: (1) = 1

Mathcam

Original Roll String: 1d3 (STATIC)

1 3-Sided Dice: (3) = 3

[Empking]

[1/1] le Chat (0)
[3/3] Excedrin (0)
[2/2]lewarcher82 (0):
[3/3]mathcam (0)
[1]Sanjay (0)

6 to lynch.

[lewarcher82]

I guess that, at least, you should now be all convinced that I did not lie about the amount of my votes

[Excedrin]

At first glance it looks like a better distribution of votes, but one of Excedrin or mathcam is required to lynch anyone.

le Chat rolled 3 and only has 1 vote... that's kinda weird, he also rolled 3 on day 1 and had 2 votes, but Nachomamma8 was a vote increaser. On day 2 le Chat had 1 vote again despite rolling 2.

So, le Chat seems to be stuck with 1 vote regardless of die roll. I'm not sure if we can use that to figure out align, but it's interesting. There might be final 3 implications (as in, we can't have him alive in final 3 since he might not be able to lynch, but I guess it would just go to next day) but I haven't thought about it much.

[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

[lewarcher82]

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

Cam, post #143 is the dice result; post #144 are the actual votes. LeChat has 1 vote, not 3.

[mathcam]