Mini 436 - Game over - Mafia wins with no casualties!

[Albert B. Rampage]

Heyyy guys, welcome!!!

Mod edit
Votecount:
Albert B. Rampage 1 (Paradoxombie)
Poison Ivy 1 (StallingChamp)
Paradoxombie 2 (Miztef, vollkan)
StallingChamp 1 (Poison Ivy)

Not voting 7: Albert B. Rampage, DogMom, Tophat, VanDamien, Hurrikaty, ryan, DeathSauce

With 12 alive it takes 7 votes to lynch.

[Paradoxombie]

I claimed because I was no longer sure that it was scum that would hammer me. Also, I had no idea who to NK so I wanted more discussion.

So you played to be lynched, a strategy which is not just anti-town, it's anti-entire-****ing-game.

You really thought you'd be more usefull killing a couple of your suspects and yourself than to just play the game normally without even mentioning your role?

And why now have you changed you plan from letting yourself get lynched immediately to making it to day 2? Why didn't you try to get as far as possible in the begining?

Second. I far from have control of the game. If anyone has slight control of the game, it would be Miztef. Miztef has volunteered a plan which you stubbornly refuse for no reason at all.

Well I disagree, I think you are in control. You virtually addmitted you plan was to immediately get yourself lynched which would put you in total control of day 1, and additionally in control of two more kills. Practically everything that has happened this whole game has been directly caused by your actions.

A real townie would come up with a counter-plan, much like Miztef did. All you do is whine and whine and whine. I DONT WANT TO BE MANIPULATED BOOHOO

All a person can do in this game is talk and vote, and I've done both. My plan as of right now is to get you lynched.

Mitzefs plan wouldn't even work for the obvious reason that you can't force someone to hammer you and kill themselves. Why has no one pointed this out?

Additionally these comments are definitely inflammatory, and far from constructive

Talk is cheap, paradox. You have no evidence. You rely on your emotions. You sound like a 8-year-old afraid of being tricked out of his favorite toy.

Talk is the entire you game, my friend.

I may use emotion to convince people, but my arguments are based in fact or reasonable speculation

and again this seems awfully inflammatory

Please post a REAL theory that is grounded in fact. I will not put my vote on you until you have the time to analyze everything OBJECTIVELY, and think out a REAL solution.

maybe you should be less general. All I've done is try to convince others using your own posts, or suggest you may be lying and offer alternate possiblities to your "truth".

Your accusation is fantasy. The votes on you is reality. Now come up with something good, I want to see something SO GOOD that I will feel the urge, the NEED, to congratulate you for.

there is much suspicion for both of us, sir
and if you count VD's an equal # of votes

And I'm not looking for your approval.

Until then, your "I WILL NOT BE MANIPULATED!" stance will suffer severe criticism, so you better hurry up mate.

using the power of suggestion? People can make up their own minds
The only people you may predict would be your scumbuddies if there are any.
IGBMEOY


After that whole post you haven't done anything but make hollow attacks on me, several of which are fundammentally flawed.

If you make another post this empty and meaningless, I will not bother responding to it

[Albert B. Rampage]

Let me ask you a question. If I am not mafia, and you are not mafia, then who is mafia ?

[ryan]

Let me ask you a question. If I am not mafia, and you are not mafia, then who is mafia ?

If we knew that answer we'd win the game!

[Albert B. Rampage]

Hey what about you Ryan, you've done nothing but FoS me all game.

[Paradoxombie]

Let me ask you a question. If I am not mafia, and you are not mafia, then who is mafia ?

No idea, since most of the game so far is about you or me + there's still alot of lurkers. I have suspicions, but nothing really valid at all

[Albert B. Rampage]

Hopefully the newcomers will weigh in on this and give us some new information.

[VanDamien]

Lynching ABR day two is worse, not better. MUCH MUCH worse.

Let's theorize for a minute, shall we?

Say the balance right now is 9:3, which seems fairly possible in a game this size. We lynch someone today, we're either 8:3 or 9:2, then with a kill N1, we enter day 2 either 7:3 or 8:2, no follow along.

IF ABR is telling the truth, scum will not hammer in either case, and it's entirely possible he miskills with his extra kill, so with a truth telling ABR, a townie hammering, ABR mishitting with his "extra" kill, and scum NKing, they win, period, N2 if today is a mislynch of someone other than a truth telling ABR.

But, since he's lying, it doesn't matter, we neeed to lynch him today.

As to the playstyle thing, from what I've seen of ABR in other games I will not mention, his style here isn't much different from the others. Maybe he has received this brand new role in more than one game?

[Albert B. Rampage]

"On what do you base that assumption ?"

[VanDamien]

For one, for seeing your post 20 almost word for word elsewhere.

[Albert B. Rampage]

That is a lie. Also, referring to all the other game in which you are also suspecting me does nothing to add to your credibility.

We are both targeting each other in every game, it seems...

[vollkan]

Mitzefs plan wouldn't even work for the obvious reason that you can't force someone to hammer you and kill themselves. Why has no one pointed this out?

I thought of this earlier and it is a real problem. I mean, if someone refuses to hammer it probably means that they are not vanilla town; the trouble then is that there is no way to differentiate between power roles and scum. I mean, it really is no different to a regular lynching in that there is always the risk of killing a pro-town, but here the lynchee has to actually do it themself.

Hypothetically, if it were day 2 and someone had been declared the most suspicious, what would happen if they refused?

I will come back to that in a second, because VD's latest post brings something to light here. VD says 9:3 is most possible at the moment. If we lynch ABR today (and he is telling the truth) and 1 pro-town skilled along with a pro-town at night by ABR and a pro-town by scum, we run the risk of it being 5:3 tomorrow; losing (ignoring power role effects).

Lynching ABR tomorrow is also able to cause a loss but, there is an added complication, if it is day 2 and someone refuses. In that case, if we lynched the refuser, ABR would live. Here is a real problem with Miztef's plan, it all depends on someone voluntarily allowing themself to die and, obviously, we don't want to be forcing claims. Equally, however, if ABR is lying then this will cause him to be kept alive indefinitely because we won't lynch out of fear of the risk.

I am sure there is some complex probability argument to justify lynching ABR today or tomorrow, but I can't be bothered working it all out at this stage.

Miztef's plan has a flaw which needs to be resolved. The idea that it gives us a better idea is probably correct, but even so, its operation is unworkable.

Which means, I guess, that a Day 1 lynch of ABR is back on the cards for me, unless someone can prove a Day 2 lynch is safer in respect of probability of loss or, alternatively, explain how to resolve the Miztef problem.

[Albert B. Rampage]

The biggest advantage of not lynching me today is that there will be an investigation put things in perspective.

If cop claims he found someone guilty, that person is immediately lynched.
If cop finds someone innocent, that puts both cop and innocent aside, and makes it easier to find scum.

If I'm telling the truth and am found innocent, or someone else is found guilty or innocent, we will be in a much better position to find scum.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Also, even in the eventuality that VD and Para are right and I am scum, there are still two more. Why not try to lynch one of those two, VD, Para ? It seems you have narrowed down your vision to only me, and are not paying attention to the rest of the game.

Look at this post:

[/quote]
No idea, since most of the game so far is about you or me + there's still alot of lurkers. I have suspicions, but nothing really valid at all[/quote]

This guy is really useless. Either that, or he's scum.

[VanDamien]

That is a lie. Also, referring to all the other game in which you are also suspecting me does nothing to add to your credibility.

We are both targeting each other in every game, it seems...

Yes, we are in a lot of games together, but no, I was referring to one where we are not going after each other.

Regardless, this meta information is valid. Albert is not posting like he is here because of the role, but it seems to be his style, from what I've seen.

[Miztef]

The hammering flaw is easily resolvable imo: Force them, or lynch them. at L-1 a power role will claim anyway, so I see no difference in this situation. If the person is scum, There is no huge advantage to being lynched over being the hammerer.

If the scum hammer, they kill 1 Pro-town role, kill themself, and give the town a chance for another kill.

If the scum instead choose to be lynched, only they get killed.

I don't see them at an advantage by lynching themselves over hammering.

We know ABR should be killed at some point. I do not want him alive in the end game, and I don't think anyone else does, it's too much of a risk. The only way to guarentee his death then is by a lynch.

[Paradoxombie]

The hammering flaw is easily resolvable imo: Force them, or lynch them. at L-1 a power role will claim anyway, so I see no difference in this situation. If the person is scum, There is no huge advantage to being lynched over being the hammerer.

If the scum hammer, they kill 1 Pro-town role, kill themself, and give the town a chance for another kill.

If the scum instead choose to be lynched, only they get killed.

I don't see them at an advantage by lynching themselves over hammering.

Id think a scum would choose to be lynched so we have to waste another day lynching ABR, right? Therefore, in order for someone to hammer ABR they'd actually have to be pro-town and we'd be sacraficing them unintentionally.

As long as we actually suspect scum, ABR will live, it will be when we make a mistake that he is taken out.

there's the obvious risk of letting ABR go free indefinitely but also,

Even though a mislynch is a likely eventuality in every game,
it seems unethical to me use a plan that requires a Vanilla to die in order for ABR to ever get taken out.

therefore, I cannot support that plan

[Albert B. Rampage]

Well we won't have much of a ethical problem once your gone, are we ?

[vollkan]

ABR's cop point is another upside to Miztef's plan.

Miztef has explained the flaw's solution and I think it works in that case.

Para expressed some criticisms.

Id think a scum would choose to be lynched so we have to waste another day lynching ABR, right? Therefore, in order for someone to hammer ABR they'd actually have to be pro-town and we'd be sacraficing them unintentionally.

As long as we actually suspect scum, ABR will live, it will be when we make a mistake that he is taken out.

there's the obvious risk of letting ABR go free indefinitely but also,

Even though a mislynch is a likely eventuality in every game,
it seems unethical to me use a plan that requires a Vanilla to die in order for ABR to ever get taken out.

therefore, I cannot support that plan

As ABR said, an investigation will help us gain a better idea. Lynching ABR today without that knowledge is an unnecessary risk.

If a scum refuses and is lynched, then we have caught a scum; a good thing regardless of whether ABR continues to live. The only real problem is that only a vanilla will lynch. If ABR is lying, that doesn't matter. If ABR is telling the truth, it means we lose 2 pro-town and possibly a third if ABR stuffs up his NK. But, again, we face that same problem if ABR is lynched today as you seem to be advocating.

The only way to avoid the risk is not to lynch ABR at all which, as both you and Miztef agree upon, is undesirable. Thus, lynching ABR today is not the best choice since it means we lack potential knowledge we can have tomorrow.

[ryan]

Hey what about you Ryan, you've done nothing but FoS me all game.

You are right Albert I have only dropped the FoS on you this game.......until now.

Vote:Albert B. Rampage

Mitzef makes some solid points in post 265 and also points out how we the town can still keep our numbers after Day 1. I'm leaning toward Mitzef being a townie right now as he's been quite helpful in his observations. Paradoxombie has been pretty helpful in his insights as well, although Albert has made it kinda easy with his claim. I will be interested in what the newbies have to say about the game (newbies=new to this thread not the game) and if it's possible (just a hunch) could one of the newbies be scum? It would make this already interesting game VERY interesting.

I also don't like the fact of an unknown "role" in this game being claimed and while ABR could have just made a mistake claiming it, I think it was planned and thought through (probably with the other mafia) I'm confident in my vote after my millionth re-read through this hectic thread

[Albert B. Rampage]

I also don't like the fact of an unknown "role" in this game being claimed and while ABR could have just made a mistake claiming it,

I think it was planned and thought through (probably with the other mafia)

I'm confident in my vote after my millionth re-read through this hectic thread

This is highly suspicious, Ryan. I'm hoping the others will back me up on this one too. Honestly, I think Ryan is a safer vote now than Paradox.

It is impossible that I communicated with the other mafia. If I were to use pms, I would be modkilled.

Also, how could this have been planned ? If I am scum, I almost got lynched and nobody defended me. Even the lurkers would've probably lynched me if they were there before I claimed.

What do you guys think, Miztef, DeathSauce, Volkan, VanDamien ?

Ryan is flying high on the radar to me after that post, and its not because of the vote. This is not an OMGUS.

[ryan]

That's what I'm sayin though Albert, who can prove that the lurkers haven't been working with you by NOT posting anything. I mean you have two votes on you, if the rest of the town doesnt feel compelled to lynch you than I'll go with their wishes, as of right now I feel with your "role claim" and some of your other posts that you are scum.


OOC: Correct me if I'm wrong but can't the psychopath communicate with one mafia member, or am I WAY off there? I apologize if I am but I always thought that was the way it went. I played a game on another website where this was legal in the game.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Alright men, we have a case.

I'm starting to think Snichkin is just not participating and to be honest Paradoxombie and ABR are climbing my scum list so for now I will unvote and keep my options on those two open.

unvote

Abandoning a failed bandwagon. He was on VanDamien's wagon too, and didn't unvote until others have started unvoting.

Miztef: I'm wondering if ABR could be a cop, are you feelin that? Or just that he is a townie?

Fishing for a power role.

VanDamien: Are you saying if Albert has votes piled on him and needs one to lynch you'd do it? OR are you happier to so a "no lynch" on Day 1? I'm just worried if we don't lynch somebody Day 1, we might not learn anything newer BUT I guess if we lynch the wrong person than we're gonna lose two right off the bat.........Dang it Albert, you've got me all sorts of confused now.

A scum would naturally want to encourage the others to lynch me, while keeping his distance to not get NK'd.

Just a question to the four not voting (or haven't voted as of this post) Albert B. Rampage, darhken, Miztef, Tophat. Are you willing to keep a no vote OR do you have somebody picked out just looking for more evidence on who's scum?

A common ploy to help mafia figure out who to NK.

That's what I'm sayin though Albert, who can prove that the lurkers haven't been working with you by NOT posting anything. I mean you have two votes on you,

if the rest of the town doesnt feel compelled to lynch you than I'll go with their wishes

, as of right now I feel with your "role claim" and some of your other posts that you are scum.

Ok I understand the logic VD, very gutsy BUT also willing to prove yourself to the rest of us townies..............its a little gutsy early on but I do see your point now. I'll wait and see how the other townies feel before I do anything.

I'm starting to think Snichkin is just not participating and to be honest Paradoxombie and ABR are climbing my scum list so for now

I will unvote and keep my options on those two open

.

unvote

He's "keeping his options open" for a reason: he wants to be ready to roll on any wagon as soon as there are enough votes. Think of it; he's very active, has been on two failed bandwagons, wised up, decided to keep his options open until he has the most chance to hammer or put someone at -1.

It looks like Ryan is a scum, with Paradox as his partner, that is how I explain his recent vote.

[ryan]

Hold on a second, I haven't left any failed bandwagons. Snichkin wasn't active and I dropped off voting for him (he has since been replaced) Read what I said, I commented that I thought he just wasn't "participating" and I dropped off of him, check the timeline Albert. What townie wouldn't keep his options open as you wouldn't want to kill one of your own. You can look at any game I'm involved in Albert, I've always been active and trying to find as much information on everyone so I can make a smart vote and not just a "bandwagon" as you would suggest. Looks to me as though you are getting nervous that you'll be lynched and trying to form a bandwagon on me all of a sudden, which is, correct me if I'm wrong, something you JUST claimed me to be.

[Albert B. Rampage]

Facts don't lie.

You were on VanDamien's bandwagon, and was one of the last to unvote.

You were on Snitchkin's bandwagon, and was one of the last to unvote.

You fished for a power role.

You encouraged a player to lynch me and potentially screw the town.

You often encourage players to place a vote.

(eg: "Are you confident enough about your theory to put a vote)

All that, plus several cases of making up excuses where you claim you didn't know what you were talking about to make up for mistakes.

The rest of your strategies I have mentioned in the upper post are also consistent with the facts.