Kingmaker II-Game Over

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

My opinion is that bandwagoning in general in Kingmaker games are quite ineffective.

In your specific case, it probly helps the person who is being bandwagoned to survive.

I'm glad you can cite one example to try to refute my point, and attempt to ignore the context entirely of my comment then accuse me of backtracking.

Cuz context CLEARLY doesn't matter at all(Sarcasm Warning)

[Glork]

My opinion is that bandwagoning in general in Kingmaker games are quite ineffective.

I cited an example in which that was not the case. Given that there's only been one Kingmaker game played thus far, that's the only precedence we have to use. None of the other lynches were bandwagon-inspired. But TSS explicitly said later in the game that he thought RA was a townie and lynched him at the people's discretion. So yes, bandwagoning has been shown to influence Kings' decisions.

In your specific case, it probly helps the person who is being bandwagoned to survive.

I'd like to know how you think this comment is founded in the least. I'm questioning the Birdwagon because I disagree with the basis on which it is founded. If I agree with the reasoning behind a wagon, I'd naturally support it fully. Your attempts to label me as anarchistic and against-the-grain have been noted.

I'm glad you can cite one example to try to refute my point, and attempt to ignore the context entirely of my comment then accuse me of backtracking.

Cuz context CLEARLY doesn't matter at all(Sarcasm Warning)

Again, that's the *ONLY* example we have to go on. So yes, I'm using ONE example because there is only ONE similar example (meaning that of an early-game wagon against a player based on circumstantial evidence) to look at.

As far as the "context" of your comment goes, I have to ask.
What fucking context?

cuz bandwagoning is so tech in a kingmaker game.

*eye roll*

[Glork]

...erm, I quoted the wrong post. I meant to quote my own (right before it). Anyway, my point is... the "context" to which you refer is me saying that I feel as if scum would be on Bird's wagon one way or another. You argued that bandwagoning in a Kingmaker game is fruitless. I gave a counterexample, and you tried to say that bandwagoning

when Glork is king

is pointless because you believe I have a tendency to buck the system for its own sake.


So... what "context" am I missing?

[BrianMcQueso]

Sorry guys, I was away for the weekend. I'll be getting on prods and replacements. If you guys feel the need for a vote count, I'll get to that, too.

[BrianMcQueso]

Der Hammer

replaces Vaughn, upon Vaughn's request. Welcome!

[MrBuddyLee]

Glork, I have a little more respect for the average scummer than you apparently. I was a little more concerned with the contents of my posts indicting bird than I was in covering my ass with a vote. This is why I also support MoS's decision not to vote in this game: if people, particularly kings, are too lazy to read posts and instead rely on vote counts, they deserve to lose.

As for the bandwagon issue, I think it's utterly ridiculous to suggest that a series of valueless, unsupported votes gives a king any more legitimate reason to execute in this game, which is all that matters. If he executes for an illegitimate reason, then he's probably scum. So "bandwagoning" isn't the least bit dangerous. Unsupported voting, however, is, because it leaves room for fudging reasons later.

Glork off to a terrible start as king today, and the question is... why?

[Glork]

Glork, I have a little more respect for the average scummer than you apparently. I was a little more concerned with the contents of my posts indicting bird than I was in covering my ass with a vote. This is why I also support MoS's decision not to vote in this game: if people, particularly kings, are too lazy to read posts and instead rely on vote counts, they deserve to lose.

Are you retarded? Votes are not meant to be the sole measure of one's actions, and I never, ever

EVER

you to insinuate that again. I'm genuinely insulted that you would accuse me of being so naive and lazy that I wouldn't read the thread, and that I would rely solely on voting records. I read every goddamned word of every game. I read them carefully, and I read them over and over again, from different perspectives. Remember that the one time that I've ever run an extensive voting-record analysis was in Mafia 49, when I was scum. Why aren't voting histories effective as the sole judgement of a player's scumminess? Because the votes themselves are easy to fabricate, manipulate, or misrepresent (again, as I did in M49).

However, votes -- even in this game -- are an indication of the officialness of one's suspicions. Inconsistencies between one's voting record and one's additional attacks, debates, questions, or stances can be important scumtells. I noted a major discrepancy between the fact that you were willing to propose and defend your theory without making your stance official (until I asked you to explicitly tell me what you thought). Yes, I like having people vote or FoS, so that they make their opinions official and easier to spot. But I also pay attention to what people are saying on background. I pay attention to the stances they take that are not so obvious. To me, voting records aren't important for what they show about a person's suspicions. They're important for what they hide. And I feel that any good scumhunter should recognize that fact.

As for the bandwagon issue, I think it's utterly ridiculous to suggest that a series of valueless, unsupported votes gives a king any more legitimate reason to execute in this game, which is all that matters. If he executes for an illegitimate reason, then he's probably scum. So "bandwagoning" isn't the least bit dangerous. Unsupported voting, however, is, because it leaves room for fudging reasons later.

Well, at least we agree on some things. Valueless/Unsupported votes do not give a Kingmaker a reason to execute. However, that says nothing about falsely presented (or supported) reasons for execution. Consider the case of RandomActs. I don't remember the details, but I do recall that Alexander (my mason buddy in the game) was one of the leading people attacking RandomActs. He made some good points, RandomActs acted a little scummy, and people started agreeing with Alexander. They voted for RandomActs, bandwagoning his reasons, which were geunine in scumhunting intent. So what happens? All of a sudden, a majority of the players want RandomActs dead. And they want him dead for a legitimate reason. Baseless, bad bandwagoning does *NOT* make a good execution excuse. But founded bandwagoning not only allows for an execution "excuse," it can force a King's hand, even against his own personal suspicions or desires.

As debated in the original Kingmaker, a King who goes against the majority of the town's wishes has to have a damned good reason not to make an execution. When TSS executed RA, he did so in part because RA tried a gambit that failed, and in part because so many players were clamoring for his execution. Later in the game, TSS admitted that he actually thought RA was town, but that he made the execution anyway. He picked up a lot of flak for that decision. Nevertheless, TSS found himself in a lose-lose situation. If he presents a reason not to execute RA (who many players seemed to find genuinely scummy), he will be suspected. If he goes along with the ride and mis-executes, he will be suspected for hiding behind other people's reasoning. That is, in part, why this kind of wagon is so dangerous. TSS chose the latter path (going along with the execution) and eventually got executed for it. I'm choosing the former path and picking up flak.

Glork off to a terrible start as king today, and the question is... why?

A terrible start, eh? Because I disagree with you? Because I find different people suspicious for different reasons? Because I don't think that Bird is scum? You make an awfully bold and objective claim based on, well... nothing.

[Glork]

EBWODP: Last sentence should read "subjective"... not "objective."

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

What context? The context of you being King, this being Day 2, you not being TSS.



I actually meant that comment about you being not susceptible to crowd pressure as a compliment, I think I've already made it fairly clear that I am of a similar grain.

[petroleumjelly]

Vote: Pooky

.

I just reread your posts in isolation, and I am catching a few things I'm not liking. Please explain:

1.)

like one thing I don't get, is that if we wanted a confirmed innocent to make the choice everytime, wouldn't we just have the KingMaker claim and direct the king? even if they kill the KMer, it's not like we're going to lose anything since we'd just get a new one.

And if scum counterclaim KMer, all we'd have to do is get the KMer a list of 2 people to appoint as King/Backup and the CounterClaimer a list of 2 other people to appoint and when the next day dawns we'll know which side was lying and be able to execuete accordingly.

It's not like we can run out of Kingmakers!

...and...

Pj

just pass the buck to me.

i'll get things done

Just not liking these when put together. Pooks presents a plan that I don't agree with (outing the Kingmaker as a confirmed innocent to make decisions), then later suggests I should trust him to execute correctly (even though he he had already made a giant defense of how I am "the most qualified to catch scum"). I'm not seeing how these can all be consistent with each other.

2.) Your attack on Twomz for "saying nothing" seemed disproportionate to whatever offense he may have committed. Also, could you elaborate on this quote in particular:

No need to hide the fact that you're brave enough to stand up to King PJ and his attackdog Glork and not willing to knuckle under to their unreasonable demands.

How much of this was sarcasm? I seriously have a hard time reading sarcasm. Do you really think my demands on D1 were "unreasonable", or that Glork is my "attackdog"? This quote actually reminds me of mathcam-scum in Invitational #5, who called somebody a "lapdog du jour" or something along those lines in order to connect two people together.

3.) Although I can't say I didn't appreciate your blatant defense of me, you certainly must know it sparked many memories from Goofball Mafia, where you essentially called me town by a "guilty investigation". I am thinking this is because you know I have a semi-Achilles Heel when it comes to town reciprocity (i.e. I often find people who call me town to be more town than I would normally consider them, even though I have tried to beat that inclination down).

4.) Today, Pooky has seemed too sarcastic and defeatist for my liking.

I got tired of people not listening to me and went to pout in the corner.

What exactly do you want me to respond to?

cuz bandwagoning is so tech in a kingmaker game.

*eye roll*

Cuz context CLEARLY doesn't matter at all(Sarcasm Warning)

Pooks, m'dear, I am starting to think you're scum. Who do you think is scum and why?

Also, I think I will note that I do not really find Twomz all that scummy. His play seems rather consistent with what I know to be his play. His bandwagoning does not really concern me that much, especially after having played a seperate large game with Twomz to the end where we were both town (No Use For a Title). I may not have seen Twomz as scum very often, but I think I can read him fairly well, and I am thinking he is town so far.

[Glork]

...wait, I'm confused. So you're saying that when you said "because bandwagoning in a kingmaker game is tech" (spoken sarcastically, obviously), you were implying "bandwagoning in a kingmaker game when Glork is king is tech" (also spoken sarcastically)?


Because if that's what you were trying to say, the "context" was not made clear at all until after I questioned your claim.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

Which Kingmaker game did you think I was refering to? When did you think I was refering to?

If you honestly think I was referring to Kingmaker I on Day 1 when TSS was King, then I have no need to continue this line of argument.

I will address PJ after i read his post.

[Glork]

I thought you were referring to Kingmaker games in general. I thought you were effectively saying "Bandwagoning in any kingmaker game is completely pointless"... hence your use of the phrase "a kingmaker game." The way you worded it, it was nothing more than a general blanket statement. I thought you were implying that any bandwagon in any kingmaker game, on any given day, with any given king, against any given player was pointless.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

My Responses are in Italics.

Vote: Pooky

.

I just reread your posts in isolation, and I am catching a few things I'm not liking. Please explain:

1.)

like one thing I don't get, is that if we wanted a confirmed innocent to make the choice everytime, wouldn't we just have the KingMaker claim and direct the king? even if they kill the KMer, it's not like we're going to lose anything since we'd just get a new one.

And if scum counterclaim KMer, all we'd have to do is get the KMer a list of 2 people to appoint as King/Backup and the CounterClaimer a list of 2 other people to appoint and when the next day dawns we'll know which side was lying and be able to execuete accordingly.

It's not like we can run out of Kingmakers!

...and...

Pj

just pass the buck to me.

i'll get things done

Just not liking these when put together. Pooks presents a plan that I don't agree with (outing the Kingmaker as a confirmed innocent to make decisions), then later suggests I should trust him to execute correctly (even though he he had already made a giant defense of how I am "the most qualified to catch scum"). I'm not seeing how these can all be consistent with each other.

The KMer is clearly a confirmed innocent, by having him choose the target, IMO we are having a better shot of hitting scum, we've got no chance of scum influencing a bandwagon(which glork clearly thinks is something we have to contend with but I think is garbage, and yes specifically in this case definitely garbage), and definitely won't be controlled by a scumking avoiding other targets, IMO having a confirmed innocent choose our execeution is better than any random King, tho we do lose the information from what the King would've chosen. As qualified as you are to catch scum darling, you do generally have a weaker early game, you are quite overly methodic and dull, I woulda been waving the sword around in a far more hilarious way to get reactions out of people, did I actually want to execeute some1 on day 1? No, what I wanted was to use threat of execeution more aggressively to provoke reactions. Why would me choosing the execuetion for the day be imo equivalent to KMer choosing? Cuz I know I'm innocent so in my information set I am a confirmed innocent, that's why I would be qualified to make such a decision.

2.) Your attack on Twomz for "saying nothing" seemed disproportionate to whatever offense he may have committed. Also, could you elaborate on this quote in particular:

I wasn't attacking Twomz, I was trying to shame him and the rest of the say nothing useful crowd into saying something useful, when you don't have a giant sword to wave around and threaten people, gentle ribbing and humour might get it done, gotta use the cards your dealt

No need to hide the fact that you're brave enough to stand up to King PJ and his attackdog Glork and not willing to knuckle under to their unreasonable demands.

How much of this was sarcasm? I seriously have a hard time reading sarcasm. Do you really think my demands on D1 were "unreasonable", or that Glork is my "attackdog"? This quote actually reminds me of mathcam-scum in Invitational #5, who called somebody a "lapdog du jour" or something along those lines in order to connect two people together.

Again, more attempts to shame/humor them into saying something

3.) Although I can't say I didn't appreciate your blatant defense of me, you certainly must know it sparked many memories from Goofball Mafia, where you essentially called me town by a "guilty investigation". I am thinking this is because you know I have a semi-Achilles Heel when it comes to town reciprocity (i.e. I often find people who call me town to be more town than I would normally consider them, even though I have tried to beat that inclination down).

You know I love you, it's kind of like my relation with Ibby, Tali, and several others, I'm kinda stupid like that

4.) Today, Pooky has seemed too sarcastic and defeatist for my liking.

I got tired of people not listening to me and went to pout in the corner.

What exactly do you want me to respond to?

cuz bandwagoning is so tech in a kingmaker game.

*eye roll*

Cuz context CLEARLY doesn't matter at all(Sarcasm Warning)

Defeatist attitude? did you even read that post about how if me/fritz were made king we'd win the game in 3 seconds flat?

Pooks, m'dear, I am starting to think you're scum. Who do you think is scum and why?

Also, I think I will note that I do not really find Twomz all that scummy. His play seems rather consistent with what I know to be his play. His bandwagoning does not really concern me that much, especially after having played a seperate large game with Twomz to the end where we were both town (No Use For a Title). I may not have seen Twomz as scum very often, but I think I can read him fairly well, and I am thinking he is town so far.

Bird, I think I've made it quite clear why.

[MrBuddyLee]

votes -- even in this game -- are an indication of the officialness of one's suspicions. Inconsistencies between one's voting record and one's additional attacks, debates, questions, or stances can be important scumtells.

So, for the record, you think I may have been trying to obfuscate my position on bird. That blows my mind. I wouldn't think in a million years anyone could find my comments anything but clearly accusatory. I think your judgment is exquisitely poor if you actually think that, and since I know in general your judgment is not that poor, I suspect foul motives.

[Glork]

Vote: Yosarian2

I think I picked up on something when skimming over his posts. I'll return to it later (probably late tomorrow afternoon), but I'm painfully short on time tonight.


Also, Pooky, I'd like to ask one point of clarification. You criticize PJ's early-game play in your reply to him just now, saying that he's "overly methodic and dull." Please explain how this is consistent of your defense of PJKing on D1, as presented in Post 211. You championed his strategies then, saying that he never quit, that he kept looking into things and keeping tabs on everybody, that "the wheels never stop turning" with him. Why defend his methods yesterday, while calling them ineffective today?


Also, do you suspect anybody else at this point? Who? Why? Are you trying not to name any other names because you're afraid you'll give us information when I execute you and you turn out to be a dirty scumbag assassin man?

[Glork]

votes -- even in this game -- are an indication of the officialness of one's suspicions. Inconsistencies between one's voting record and one's additional attacks, debates, questions, or stances can be important scumtells.

So, for the record, you think I may have been trying to obfuscate my position on bird. That blows my mind. I wouldn't think in a million years anyone could find my comments anything but clearly accusatory. I think your judgment is exquisitely poor if you actually think that, and since I know in general your judgment is not that poor, I suspect foul motives.

I think that you were presenting a theory as a possibility, but failing to support it fully so that, if things went awry, you could claim nonresponsibility and say "Hey, I was just making a proposition."

So... yes, I do think that your posts could have been proposing a theory, letting others take off with it, then backing down as non-accusatory. I certainly thought that they were accusatory -- but your lack of a vote worried me, since it left me thinking, "Man, it seems like he's going to back down from this once it gets moving and claim that he didn't actually believe it, or that he was joking."

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

Ok Glork,

Your points against me are just downright ridiculous on so many levels, I will attempt to address why,

1) So you assumed that I was talking not about this game that we are playing but some hypoethetical any other game with any other king.
a)It's a dumb assumption to make(that Pooks is talking about any given game in this current game, we're not exactly having this convo in mafia discussion or the chatroom, we're having, why is there a need to make this assumption?)
b)It's kinda pointless of an assumption to make, this isn't any given game, this is THIS game, the only game that matters is THIS game, whether my statement applied to any other game is debateable but also pointless because it has no relevance to this game.
c) Even if Pooks did mean such a thing, and even IF there was a point to refute him and make the record clear, you've failed to do that, you've cited one day out of 8 in Kingmaker I, not only is the context different, but the game setup is different, the king is different, and even IF those factors were ignored and we could make such a comparison, 1 out of 8 isn't exactly a shining example(i haven't read KMI that carefully so you can correct me if i'm wrong about bandwagon power).

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

I didn't criticize his play, I fully support his play. I have a different style, It's not necesarily strictly superior, in my opinion there's a benefit to have more than one method at work at any time.

[Glork]

Yosarian: What inspired your change in opinion regarding Phoebus between Post 376 and Post 423?

[Glork]

Ok Glork,

Your points against me are just downright ridiculous on so many levels, I will attempt to address why,

1) So you assumed that I was talking not about this game that we are playing but some hypoethetical any other game with any other king.
a)It's a dumb assumption to make(that Pooks is talking about any given game in this current game, we're not exactly having this convo in mafia discussion or the chatroom, we're having, why is there a need to make this assumption?)

I did not

assume

that you were talking about any Kingmamker game. I came to that conclusion based on the

wording of your post

. Look at what you said: "bandwagoning is tech in a kingmaker game." Please, explain to me how that implies that you are talking about this specific situation. Because I really can't see it. At all.

b)It's kinda pointless of an assumption to make, this isn't any given game, this is THIS game, the only game that matters is THIS game, whether my statement applied to any other game is debateable but also pointless because it has no relevance to this game.

That's completely and utterly untrue. In different games, one can still glean similarities between the two games. It's called metagaming. There's a reason that scumtells exist, that people take actions based on meta-reasoning. There's a reason that people use precedence as a comparison factor. Why? Because it's inherently relevant. Yes, this game is different from the last one in several ways. Yes, this specific situation is different than the one TSS was in. But your claim that "the only game matters this THIS game" -- your claim that a "statement applied to any other game...has no relevance to this game" -- is absolutely ludicrous. People will still pay attention to a significant bandwagon. The king will still have to weigh the voices of his townspeople, one way or another (assuming, of course, that he is competent).

c) Even if Pooks did mean such a thing, and even IF there was a point to refute him and make the record clear, you've failed to do that, you've cited one day out of 8 in Kingmaker I, not only is the context different, but the game setup is different, the king is different, and even IF those factors were ignored and we could make such a comparison, 1 out of 8 isn't exactly a shining example(i haven't read KMI that carefully so you can correct me if i'm wrong about bandwagon power).

You want more examples? I'll give you more examples.

Day 2. I voted for Broomhead and Fritzler, and I FoS'd Twomz (here. However, when I made my first Execution list, I included N_Lich (here). N_Lich wasn't even on my suspicion list. But I included him on my execution list because several of the players thought he was scum and wanted him dead. People suspected N_Lich. Glork puts N_Lich on the execution list, much to his chagrin.

Day 3. Broomhead puts TSS on "The List" for being the frontrunner in the town's eyes, despite not having commented much on TSS himself. In fact, Broomhead never really gave his thoughts at all -- he went based solely on the Town's wishes and ultimately executed TSS.

Day 4. Glorky is King once again! This time around, I pretty much led the charge myself. I thought I had a pretty good idea of who was scum at that point (and wouldn't you know it... I pegged 3 of the 4 remaining scumbags that very day). This is a case in which wagoning did not impact the King's decision very much. I stuck to my guns (despite LML's request to have me glork Thok), and I executed PJ.

Day 5. Rosso Carne, replacing LML, fingered/eyed Thok, Shamrock, VitaminR, and Yosarian2 (found here). He later retracted them from Thok and VitR. EK, Vaugh, and Fuldu picked up the most votes. Rosso eventualy executed EK as scum.

Day 6. Vaughn picks up the most votes, but Thok executes Shamrock. Obviously, a bad decision.

Day 7. Vaughn picked up the most votes and was executed by his scumbuddy VikingFan. Voting influence was *VERY* important here. VF had to bus Vaughn or else it was pretty obvious that both would go down in flames.

Day 8. After much discussion, everyone pretty much agrees to take the "safe route" and execute VikingFan, the claimed Hero. Turns out VF was scum, and the town won.


So... what the townspeople say had an influence on the King's decision more often than not. In at least half of the days (D1, D2, D3, D7), the King seriously considered executing someone that he did not immediately suspect.




Is that good enough for you, Pooky?

[MrBuddyLee]

So... yes, I do think that your posts could have been proposing a theory, letting others take off with it, then backing down as non-accusatory. I certainly thought that they were accusatory -- but your lack of a vote worried me, since it left me thinking, "Man, it seems like he's going to back down from this once it gets moving and claim that he didn't actually believe it, or that he was joking."

Sadly, it'll be impossible to prove this, but I think all my followup posts on the bird issue were pretty clear about the strength of my opinion. The original one was the only one that lacked conviction and purely posited a theory, from what I recall.

[StallingChamp]

Vote: StallingChamp

, for his one post of substance, which was unfortunately lost to the crash. In it, he complimented PJ on a good decision, while admitting a bit later that he has no idea why exactly Rosso was under so much scrutiny. Due to the circumstances, I can't prove that he really said that, but I suggest at least keeping an eye on him.

I will try to make more posts of substance in the future. As for your other point, I said I think that under the circumstances PJ made a good decision, but later said that I did not understand the Rosso execution at all.

I don't have time for more now, expect more in the next few days.

[spectrumvoid]

On MBL and Glork: I'm not getting MBL's case on Glork at all. It's ridiculous to expect a vote to be as important as it is in an ordinary game. However, votes are still important because they confirm a person's stand on someone. Votes should also preferably come with some kind of explanation. Note the case on Phoebus early yesterday, where he voted without explaining. With that said, I don't think MBL is right to assume that Glork sees only votes. I don't think I have a long playing history with Glork, but from some of his other games, I read him as a pretty analytical player. Also, there's no evidence to prove MBL's accusation in this game. I also think MBL is wrong to not take note of discrepancies, it could be a scum slip.

On Pooky: Hm... I thought it was obvious exactly what game Pooky was talking about. This IS the game we're playing after all.

[cardb0ardb0x]

I still don't really like the style of pj's execution yesterday, i.e. executing the one person that found him scummiest. However, for some reason I don't really get as much of a scum vibe from that that I would think. It's probably just due to the amount of thought he seemed to put into the executuoin. I don't like dead rikimaru's lurkerness, but the few thiings he's said seem to be pretty productive, while ubertimmy's don't. Aaand I suppose since someone brought up Fritzler, it's fairly apparent that he's just clinging onto a character theme- i.e. vote crashtextdummie ARR ARR ARR CAPTIAL LETTERS. This is neither helpful nor, um, productive. I really wanted to use a neither/nor sentence there. If he does this in every game, it's probably a good strategy for *him.*

To anyone who's been in these players' games, do they always do this...?