Mini 912 - Little Golden Mafia (OVER)

[MacavityLock]

/hi i'm here

[MacavityLock]

Vote: DedicatedScribe

. This is not a random vote.

[MacavityLock]

Macavity, I want more info.

I voted due to your play up to that point, nothing else. If everything you've been doing so far has been to get out of the RVs, why did you random vote twice?

As for Phlight, I plan to hold that player to the same bar of consistency that I do every player. If that makes the game any harder for them, well, that's what they signed up for. That of course is offset by the benefit of two minds being better than one.

[MacavityLock]

My apologies, this game has been really dense for page 3, and I really haven't dug in deep. I should have time to do some in depth reading of this game tomorrow.

[MacavityLock]

Sorry again. Work backed up a bit.

Unvote

for the moment, given claim. In your role PM, is your mason partner confirmed as townie?

These all evidence of my purpose.

I immediately bandwagoned onto any random vote I could. Would scum do this?

Again, what was the purpose of doing this twice? Doesn't it dilute your supposed bandwagoning goal? I'm generally fine with bandwagoning early, but I don't understand the subsequent switch.

[MacavityLock]

Sorry for not posting anything here. I just don't see how we can move forward without a more complete claim from DS, specifically bookname claim and whether or not the mason partner is confirmed. Until we get that, from either DS or a replacement, I don't think it's worthwhile to distract.

[MacavityLock]

No need for prods, I'm right here.

My mason partner and I know each other to be town.

OK, that's what I needed to hear.

Vote: Panzer

Lynch him. If we mislynch, at least his mason partner can be confirmed and help us in lylo. It's a good scumclaim.

Without DS's (now SC's) confirmation above, this is absolutely wrong. If DS-mason got lynched, the buddy would not be confirmed. No matter if the mason buddy is confirmed or not, he could eventually just say he was, but that wouldn't give us a confirmed town. Lynching DS/SC without that info would have been anti-town, whether DS/SC is scum or not.

P.S. Welcome SC! I'm pretty sure the only 2 games I've been in with you have been with you as scum. Clearly this is a trend...

[MacavityLock]

So you think SC is scum or town, your last sentence confuses me :S

It was a joke. Next time, I'll append

FakeFoS: SC

.

[MacavityLock]

I too am interested to hear Phlight explain the "this is pretty much a guilty on ToD" hypoclaim shenanigans.

Ok... Stranger is alive... Quid?

Does this surprise you? Why? What does "Quid" mean here?

[MacavityLock]

And it confuses me because mason is a pr. It's weird for scum to leave a pr alive.

Something's off about this. Are all PRs created equal?

Phlight, why didn't you make this case on ToD along with, or even instead of, your hypoclaim? The way I'm seeing it right now, the whole hypoclaim thing was a way of pushing a ToD lynch in the laziest manner possible.

[MacavityLock]

Sorry, I guess I should have been more clear. I refuse to hypoclaim, due to the variety of information that scum could glean from it.

The hypoclaim you provided in conjunction with your vote could easily be read as an outright guilty on ToD, and you clearly knew it. The case only came

after

it was revealed that BaB was tracker and your hypoclaim+vote was BS. Turning the laziness attack on me doesn't answer for this.

Fine, I haven't been as active in this game as I'd like, due to being busy. However, I'm in it, and I'm committed.

[MacavityLock]

I'm more interested in your opinions on my case, other than your disapproval of when I posted it.

Actually, I think your case isn't bad, and just based on Day 1, I think ToD probably would have been my top suspect. But I also think that your case is "tainted" by the fact that you tried to shortcut your way to his lynch with the hypoclaim-guilty.

You really do need to answer what you were trying to get from the hypo-claim. How do you know we even have a cop in this game? And as far as I can tell, hypo-ing on the other two roles doesn't help clear people, does it? I guess it can confirm claims later on, but it's really hairy. The more I think about it, the more it looks like a lot of rolefishing.

Phlight, it's time for you to claim.

----

Usually, hiders die if they try to hid behind scum, right?

I'd say that my order of likelihood for the two deaths is: Hiding behind BaB, hiding behind scum, 2 scumgroups, vig. The only reason hiding behind BaB is at the top is book names. Seems to make sense that the shy little kitten would hide behind the curious one, right? I really don't think we can draw any conclusions though. Too many legitimate possibilities.

[MacavityLock]

You should massclaim tomorrow (preferably crypto, since RBT's ruleset doesn't disallow that).

Explain crypto-massclaim?

[MacavityLock]

OK, no hiding shenanigans means that we've either got a 2nd scumgroup or a vig.

Well, I guess this is MacavityLock's first game with me as town, isn't it? xD

Hey look, you're right! (Read as: Hey look, SC's confirmed town!)

[MacavityLock]

We're obviously in LYLO. Additionally, no scum group may have more than 2 in it. (Otherwise, game would be over in their win, right?) So, options:
1) 2 maf, 1 SK, 3 town
2) 2 maf, 1 town vig, 3 other town
3) 2 maf A, 2 maf B, 2 town
4) 2 SKs, 4 town

I guess option 4 wouldn't be LYLO, but it's... umm... ridiculous. Am I missing anything? I'm up for a massclaim.

In other news,

SC is pretty much confirmed town

ML's a ninja.

Sig'ed :}

[MacavityLock]

I was going to suggest that SC directs the claim, but I'm fine with popcorn as well. (Don't particularly like dice massclaim.)

[MacavityLock]

Sam the Firehouse Cat, vanilla.

OK all, I've seen this situation before. Unless the mafia is ridiculously over-powered, we're in 2 maf, 1 SK, 3 town. Here's the interesting bit: We can't lynch the SK today, or the maf will win (2 maf, 2 town tomorrow -> maf win). So, SK, it's time to claim that you're the SK. We won't lynch you, I promise!

[MacavityLock]

TNM's claim virtually ensures that he is, in fact, not mafia, so we can't lynch him today.

While I too see TNM-SK as completely plausible, I don't see how you're getting this. Why is he almost certainly not maf?

[MacavityLock]

Macavity, it seems quite clear that he isn't. Why would he, if he were mafia, throw this gambit towards the end? All the eliminations have been townies, therefore, if he were mafia, he wouldn't need to throw out this kind of play. Add to that the fact that the set-up means there must be a SK or vig (though extremely unlikely both), his claim of vig (versus all others as VT or mason(SC) ) basically confirms him SK/vig. I expected both mafia to claim VT as well. I find it odd that you put this in question after you had laid out the scenarios quite smartly and you seemed on top of the game a few days ago?

I really don't follow. Why wouldn't he throw the gambit? How do you know he has no reason to?

Re: peanut having suggested "run over" as maf-kill. I didn't want to say anything until after massclaim, but why would you think this? How do you know what kill flavor fits for maf vs scum in this kind of theme?

----

...I had some really good reason thought up earlier, and now I can't think of what it was. Something to the effect of "I don't think mafia would claim vig and pick those two targets, especially given that peanutman's already suggested that "run over" is the mafia kill flavor. They'll just draw the SK kill if they do that - it seems like the risk outweighs the reward."

Isn't that true the opposite way? That is, SK claiming vig would draw the maf night kill? I'm not sure I see any sort of certainty here.

Actually, now that I think about it, a SK would be

less

likely to make this claim, due to drawing the night kill. One dead maf doesn't end the game for them, while one dead SK does end the game for him. This would be less of a problem if he was NK-immune. I'm more comfortable ruling out NK-vulnerable SK than maf for TNM.

----

TNM, you explained your kunkstar kill, but not your dramonic. Why did you think dramonic was scummy?

[MacavityLock]

I thought I had explained the reasoning for it, but mafia would have no incentive to play that gambit. For one, having claimed with still two people to go, he is hoping no one else will claim Vig or SK (huge risk). Secondly, he would be drawing unnecessary attention on himself. Finally, his claim and explanation is much more consistent as Vig or SK than as maf.

Why is a SK any more likely to do this than a maf? Wouldn't that be just as much of a gambit for SK as for maf?

I clearly don't have any way of knowing which killing flavour matches with who. However, I can still make an educated guess. The fact that the SK role has, by definition, the world silent in it (silent --> put to sleep) and that the mafia is generally a more violent group (i.e. run over), I shared with everyone what I thought of when reading the night results.

Uh... SK usually stands for Serial Killer. Where are you getting "silent" from?

ML, could you explain what you mean by not wanting to say anything until after the massclaim? Had you thought it was odd when I first mentioned it but didn't want to say anything then? Or you just caught it during a read-through before the mass-claim and hold onto it until now? Basically, why wait until now to say this? Did you need a handy accusation in case I questionned you (ad-hom attack)?

I absolutely noticed it when you mentioned it, but once a massclaim is the next order of business, I try to stop voicing suspicions, cases, everything until the massclaim is done. This is to keep as much info out of the hands of scum as possible. (For example, I bring out a case on a scum. The scum then realizes that a specific role claim will explain away said case.)

Also, where are you getting ad hominem out of that at all? Have you questioned me yet?

[MacavityLock]

lobster, that's a pretty awful analysis. First of all, having known nothing about my character/book, I found these two quotes about Sam the Firehouse Cat via Google: "Sweet little story about a heroic cat that saves two other cats from a fire." and "Sam lived in the firehouse and would go down the pole." (On a lighter note, this mafiascum thread is now the 10th highest Google result for the phrase Sam the Firehouse Cat, at least to me. Awesome.) As far as I can tell, Sam doesn't drive the firetruck. That would just be silly.

Secondly, why wouldn't I have fake-claimed to something that has no connection to transportation? I easily had the opportunity to do so, as I was last to claim.

Thirdly, once I saw all claims, I checked them all via Google search myself. Why didn't you check, re: Big Bird?

Fourthly, where are you getting Good Humor Man from?

Lastly, if you think peanut fake-claimed, why not vote him over me?

This is pretty horrendous analysis, especially since it is solely based on name claims, which are notoriously unhelpful in finding scum. If this is your entire promised analysis, I'm pretty tempted to vote you.

This is not to say I don't owe this game something. It's been pretty busy for me, as I've been in the process of a move. I don't feel I can rule anyone out as scum right now, and I probably need to really dig in to figure things out.

[MacavityLock]

Prodded, sorry. I still have open questions to peanut from my 274 and to lobster from my 282.

I'm working on a re-read now.

[MacavityLock]

So, no activity in 36 hours since I last posted, huh?

Here are my not very well formatted notes from my re-read:

TNM

In post 90, TNM jumps heavily on DS, who is SC-town.
In 155, TNM jumps off DS/SC onto Panzer right away before SC talks about mason-townie confirmation.
In 195 and 201, TNM follows Phlight's hypo onto ToD, then immediately jumps off when BaB Tracker flips.
TNM's 208 is pure appeasement.

ToD

In 91, ToD also jumps heavily on DS/SC-town.
In 95, ToD tries to out other mason.
In 111, it looks like ToD is assuming that there are definitely masons in the game and does not consider that DS might be lying about a mason claim.
In 145,

Phlight: Pretty much the only way I can see the masons being our only PRs (if this game's balanced) is if there are only 2 scum. If we assume 3 scum (and I haven't seen a good reason not to), we basically have to have another PR for balance.

More assumption of masons, plus first instance of anyone bringing up 2 maf, which is really interesting in light of what we know now.
In 169, we have the ToD Panzer-vote that was L-1, while claiming it as L-2. Still unsure as to whether or not this was just a mistake.
In 287 and 289, ToD makes a couple of horrible arguments against peanut:

I agree completely with a massclaim.

Overeager. While I could have cared less if we massclaimed, I figured I could guess the roles left alive on my own (2 mafia, SK, mason, 2 VTs
would have been my bet). The eagerness in peanut's post sounds like he's looking for useful PRs to kill.

That being said, no one throw a vote yet!!! With 3 to lynch, a misplaced vote could end the game with the 2 maf pilling on.

Yeah. We know. There's no reason to say it unless you're trying to look town.

Hold on. Is there a possibility to have a regular 3-member mafia team with a townie who has a PR that would break this situation (i.e. can't be lynched, or townie with 2 votes)? Would that work with the balance? I bring this up because I've never seen a 2-member mafia team in a mini game, it seems from the outset rather unbalanced.

That's not a possibility, and your suggestion of it is disingenuous, counterproductive, and scummy.

I don't see any of these as scumtells. Why is a setup the 3 member maf with a town vote manip PR "not a possibility"? This seems a strong reaction. Why is the suggestion of the setup scummy?

Peanut

In 143, peanut seems to distract from the mason discussion to vote Panzer.
In 150, peanut blows up at TNM's no point post, a massive overreaction.
Peanut's focus on kill flavor begins in 226, and continues in 246, which is when I first really picked up on it.
In 288,

I agree that my comment that you bolded wasn't fair, I couldn't make that argument.

Why include it in your original post if you can't make the argument?

Lobster

In 168, Lobster doesn't comment on Panzer's 133 while staying away from his lynch. At this point, 133 was a main point in the Panzer discussion, while lobster avoids that entirely and focuses on 77 and the "pressure until he claims" stuff. Selective deafness is scummy.
I already pointed out the awfulness of 279.
lobster is a definite lurker.

----

The thing I noticed most about TNM is his quickly changing his mind, quite often throughout the game. I definitely read his play as scum, and I agree that SK is pretty likely.

I'm still pretty torn about the other 3. All have legitimate points against them. The way ToD and peanut have been going, it doesn't seem like they'd be a scum team, so I think I'm leaning towards a ToD-lobster team.

[MacavityLock]

"Overeager" is sort of a subset of "trying to look town," which is the only subtle tell I can consistently catch scum with (scum being really obvious doesn't count).

Actually, it's a subset of "WIFOM", which you're apparently very good at.

Because in all probability (as I explained in 289), we would have figured out its existence by the start of D3: we would have seen a doublevoter or a voteless player by this point (and been able to infer the existence of a vote thief because someone would have looked like a doublevoter or a voteless player). BPs can still be lynched, unlynchable townies can still be NK'd... if you have any other ideas, I'm all ears.

Oh, I don't think it's likely either. But the certainty with which you said it is what caught my eye.

Why is the suggestion of the setup scummy?

It's counterproductive and, if we take it seriously, demoralizing: It suggests that if we mislynch, we will lose the game immediately. That's only true if we lynch the SK - if we lynch anyone else, there will be a N3.

Not sure I see how that's scummy. We've got to treat it as LYLO at this point, right? We probably have N3, but that still might lead to town loss without any recourse. So, I'm not sure how the setup spec changes anything.

----

The thing I noticed most about TNM is his quickly changing his mind, quite often throughout the game. I definitely read his play as scum, and I agree that SK is pretty likely.

I thought you were saying before it was just as likely I was scum as SK, changed your mind after nobody took the bait?

Actually, I changed my mind after my re-read, where you definitely look like you don't care who gets lynched at all, i.e. playing solo, i.e. SK. I'm not ruling out maf entirely, but SK definitely seems more likely.

[MacavityLock]

So you're saying me being that certain is a bad thing, but you don't show why? Am I missing something?

Talking about the setup, specifically about number of scum in the game, as a certainty suggests that you might know more about the setup than a townie, a vanilla for that matter, would.

Counterproductive is scummy because it distracts from actual scumhunting.
Demoralizing is scummy because it demotivates the town and makes them think it's going to be really hard to win, so why bother trying? (This particular version also makes us paranoid, because we think more players are trying to get us lynched because they know it'll help them win.)

Really don't see it, especially the demoralizing part. We're trying to find maf here, no matter what.

No votes have been placed.

With 6 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

[MacavityLock]

It's 4 to lynch, right? So, a quicklynch probably can't happen right now, can it?

[MacavityLock]

Welcome Doc! I approve of your avatar. Fullclaim, role and book, your next post please.

[MacavityLock]

And that's Strike 1 for Doc. If I asked you for a fullclaim, then either a) there was a reason for it, and you need to claim, or b) there was no reason for it, in which case I will get rightfully attacked by everyone else for requesting a claim prior to when it's necessary.

Fullclaim please.

[MacavityLock]

Yeah, that's Strike 2. That's the second time your player slot has used name claims as the sole basis for deciding scum. Do better analysis.

[MacavityLock]

Sam the firehouse cat is the only book title to mention a building.

BWAH HA HA! I live in a building!

[MacavityLock]

1) Macavity, striking people is scummy to me, it seems like an excuse to vote someone after three (which could be fairly trivial) reasons instead of building a case on someone. The way you said "and that's strike 1" implied that strike 2 and 3 were not far off, no matter what Doc said.

Well, lobster was already pinging my scum-dar, and my point with the "Strike 1" was that in his 1st substantive post Doc didn't help himself at all. And his next post, which was book name analysis, was almost as bad as lobster's. I didn't/don't have a plan to definitely vote him if/when he does 3 little things wrong. I probably made my points poorly, sorry about that.

No votes have been placed.

6 alive takes 4 to lynch.

[MacavityLock]

Macavity's scummy claim demand from 314 is a good start, without having to go look anywhere. Not "Everyone else has claimed your turn" or similar, just "claim".

If anyone thought it was scummy, they probably would have said so by this point. We have done a massclaim. Therefore, I was hoping, if you were scum, to catch a contradiction between lobster's claim and yours. The fact that I didn't is no big deal, but if there was a contradiction, you'd be scum. Seems like pretty good upside to me.

Big Bird struck me as wrong as soon as I saw it. (and I knew that it is an lgb as one of my kids has it.)

Proof that you're grasping at straws. The theme of this game is Little Golden. Anything more, and you're trying to outguess the mod.

[MacavityLock]

http://www.goldenbook.com/article.php?s ... enBookList

117-123 - Big Bird books.
266. Country Mouse and the City Mouse, The - Two of our characters (masons) from the same book.
272 - Curious Little Kitten Around the House, The - A townie is a character from the book.
609. Little Red Hen,The
817-825 - Poky Little Puppy books. Note that it is correctly spelled "Poky", but in this game, it's Pokey. I'm guessing this is a mod mistake.
739, 922-923 - Saggy Baggy Elephant books.
925. Sam the Firehouse Cat.
946 - Shy Little Kitten,The
947 - Shy Little Kittens' Secret Place,The
954. Sleepy Book,The
991-993 - Tawny Scrawny Lion books.

I found no books including the title "Little Duck", though I would imagine he's a character in some book.

I see some characters with multiple books, a book with multiple characters, characters not specifically named in books, and characters whose names are the sole title of a book. Also, a misspelled character name. What's the pattern such that I'm scum?

[MacavityLock]

Why didn't you address SC at all in the above post?

Voting someone solely for their nameclaim, when that nameclaim doesn't violate the stated theme of the game, in LYLO no less, is not a townie position to take.

Vote: DocPotter

[MacavityLock]

I'll have more post-game notes later, but for right now let me just say: SC, please don't shoot yourself in the head!

[MacavityLock]

So, our kill methods were tied to our true book names. The ones we used in thread were fakeclaims

as provided by the mod

. I really don't think RBT was trying to make us stand out in any way, so I have no idea how both you a lobster ended up fixated on that and

correct

that we were both maf.

[MacavityLock]

OK, so now that both games are over, I can finally say it. I was in a hugely awkward situation in that I was in 2 games simultaneously that included me, WNH, and peanut. In this one, peanut and I were scum together, against WNH town. In the other, WNH and I were scum together, against peanut town. You have

no idea

how awkward that was, but I think we all managed to keep the games separate.

The town did not do much to help themselves this game. Panzer, you had no need to self-hammer. You easily could have worked your way out of that, I think. Phate & Light-kun, I really don't understand why you went for the mass hypo-claim. I'm not really sure how much that helps town. Of course, the fact that Tracker flipped late did not help. lobster and DocP, I really don't think that name analysis is the way to go in most games, especially given that most mods do provide good fakeclaims.

BaB, I want to apologize for NK-ing you night 1. Tactically, it was the right move, and in all honesty I'd do it again, but that kind of behavior doesn't encourage people to replace in. I hope that it doesn't make you think twice about replacing into games.

TNM, you absolutely should have NK-ed me last night. As you said, since peanut-ToD was an unlikely pairing, I would have to be scum with one of them. TNM, did you have perks as an SK? I was pretty convinced that you likely were NK-immune, which could have put us in a really awkward position depending on how things turned out.

Thanks to peanut, for being a solid teammate. I think we managed to avoid looking too partner-y, until the end, at which point it didn't matter all that much. Do people want to see the QT? peanut, do you mind?

Also, thanks to RBT for modding a good game. I don't have any problems with the provided fakeclaims :}

[MacavityLock]

The thing I noticed most about TNM is his quickly changing his mind, quite often throughout the game. I definitely read his play as scum, and I agree that SK is pretty likely.

I thought you were saying before it was just as likely I was scum as SK, changed your mind after nobody took the bait?

By the way, you totally caught me