Open 28 - Quack Mafia. OVER! But who won? before 466

[curiouskarmadog]

Because there could be an infinite number of reasons he asked for a replacement. Maybe he didn't like the mod, maybe he didn't like one of the other players, maybe he just decided he didn't like that game type. Sure, the metagaming could be right, but most of the time metagaming turns out to be little more than conjecture.

didnt like the mod? why did he sign up for the game?
didint like a player? why did he confirm?
type of game? wouldnt you want to check to see if the games are similar?

Everything in day 1 is conjecture...

at any rate, I just want other people to look into it and make up their own mind. I can see yours is already made up with out looking into it...

[ControlledBurn]

Because there could be an infinite number of reasons he asked for a replacement. Maybe he didn't like the mod, maybe he didn't like one of the other players, maybe he just decided he didn't like that game type. Sure, the metagaming could be right, but most of the time metagaming turns out to be little more than conjecture.

didnt like the mod? why did he sign up for the game?
didint like a player? why did he confirm?
type of game? wouldnt you want to check to see if the games are similar?

Everything in day 1 is conjecture...

at any rate, I just want other people to look into it and make up their own mind. I can see yours is already made up with out looking into it...

Well, I dunno about those games, but I know this game didn't have a mod until after I signed up for it. As for the rest, I couldn't tell you, I'm not the player, and these are all random guesses. As I said, I don't care for meta-gaming, 99% of the metagaming I've seen has gotten townies killed for bad, bad reasoning.

[curiouskarmadog]

Started thinking about this character today and something didn’t strike me right. He has voted for me because I have the safest claim for a scum, and I have already explained why I didn’t do a night action..however

lol - is it fair to ask if anyone else targeted FeRnAnDo last night?

isn’t this a fairly safe claim as well, we cant really check this? Seems to me that this too would be an easy mafia claim. He also was quite speedy getting this information right out there too.

vote: Dral

Looks like I am one of the quacks. I am now a cop who kills innocents.

4 posts and 5 hours later (not giving anyone time to reply) he posts this. 1.) voting yourself never helps the town at this point, 2.) without having any input from anyone else, he knows he killed Fern. 3.) think he is pulling the “poor me” card

which Mert bites the bait,

Unvote

Dral, you shouldn't self vote as there could have been reasons why you're not a Quack. For example, both scum and a Quack could have targetted your target, negating your functioning Doc powers.

Moreover, while I love a good wagon, I'm not keen to end this day just yet.

I post my post about not wanting to vote anyone for fear of killing them and 6 minutes later Dral posts..

unvote:Dral
vote: Mert

I guess my apparent scumminess was over looked then.

I then post.

unvote:Dral
vote: Mert

any reasons?

to find out why he felt Mert who just unvoted him needed a vote. He came back with “OMGUS vote”, which again does not make any since.

Side note: might not mean anything but worth a note…

6 posts later, Mert votes me for underneath quoting.

Then we have

avoid night choices? are you frigging serious!?
Our best chance at finding the scum is to use the confirmed quacks to target people. A quack is like a Vig-Cop combo.

Not exactly. I could end up killing any real doctor. Plus, if someone lives, they aren't 100% scum (they could have been protected). I guess with some coordination we could use it as a second lynch. Like give me a target and tell everyone else not to target them. But probably way too difficult to get everyone to agree to that.

OK what? He defends not making a night choice. AGAIN, he defend not making a night choice. Then he wants to target someone else and use it as second lynch? Supposedly you are a Quack..you can only kill the town….Why would you want to kill townies?

Should anyone else who protected Fernando last night claim?

For pure selfish reasons (so I know if I am a quack), I would like people to tell if they did. But, I have no idea what the best strategy is.

Now he admits he does not know what the best strategy is? Yeah, I bet you don’t.

I think we should tell all targets. It should be fairly easy to catch the scums in a lie. We can't wait for a few days because, as people die, it will be easier to lie.

just want to comment on the logic here…how is it easier to lie with fewer people?

Also side: might not be anything..Mert mentions she protected me last night (later Indy says he protected me as well). Also Mert asks Indy why he protected me..which I find interesting….did Mert ask anyone else why they protected someone, will have to go back and check later..another side note…7 pages into the game, Mert still has her vote on me for undereneath posting…interesting, arent we passed random voting now?

Now..Dral

unvote: Mert
vote: curiouskarmadog

Someone who doesn't target anyone does us no good. We gain no information. It is also the safest claim for a scum. We can't catch a scum in a lie if they claim they didn't target anyone. On the plus side, we lose no info by lynching him today.

votes for me...NOW he knows strategy and how mafia plays? What? BTW, this is a weak argument and I am surprised the town did not jump all over it. You cant lose info by lynching me? WE ARE TRYING TO GET INFORMATION. This smells of scum.

This crippled with my meta gaming posts from before screams scum…

I encourage everyone reread the thread thus far….find something I missed…do some meta gaming. I would love some of the more experienced players to comment, as I am still pretty new to mafia....do I have a right to think Dral's play thus far a scummy?

Also FoS Mert

…not liking the interaction between her and Dral.

[Mert]

CKD, I'm about to go to bed so I will respond to you more fully tomorrow, but for now I'd just like to point something out to you:

Mert

Mafia Scum



Gender:

<--- THIS

Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: London, England

But yeah, as for your posts about me, I'll reply tomorrow when I get online.

[AmeliaLi]

.....
3.) think he is pulling the “poor me” card

which Mert bites the bait,

Unvote

Dral, you shouldn't self vote as there could have been reasons why you're not a Quack. For example, both scum and a Quack could have targetted your target, negating your functioning Doc powers.

Moreover, while I love a good wagon, I'm not keen to end this day just yet.

I post my post about not wanting to vote anyone for fear of killing them and 6 minutes later Dral posts..

unvote:Dral
vote: Mert

I guess my apparent scumminess was over looked then.

I then post.

unvote:Dral
vote: Mert

any reasons?

to find out why he felt Mert who just unvoted him needed a vote. He came back with “OMGUS vote”, which again does not make any since.

Side note: might not mean anything but worth a note…

I agree with your little side note there CKD, but my question is... Someone unvotes you, then you vote them with an OMGUS vote... Where the

HELL

is the logic in that????????

[Hjallti]

Nice research CuriousKarmaDog! Clearly Dral is playing it bad. The question remains whether it is bad-town or bad-scum.

I don't think the argument of quiting other games should be used. Even if you can pin it down to: you left the others and not this one because it is more interesting you could explain this via the theme... if you played more regular games you might be interested in this theme and what happens much more than in a regular, apart from the fact whether you are scum.

Other arguments convince me certainly of bad play and I am enclined to say scum.

Fos: Dral

[Battle Mage]

you must have had some bad experienced then. In my experience metagaming can be a very useful tool. Don't get me wrong, it is usually of more value to the individual than to the town itself, but the fact is, metagaming can, as a rule, give significant insight into who might be scum. Indeed in this case, i do consider the action suspicious, but not to the extent of requiring a vote. It has been noted however.

Because there could be an infinite number of reasons he asked for a replacement. Maybe he didn't like the mod, maybe he didn't like one of the other players, maybe he just decided he didn't like that game type. Sure, the metagaming could be right, but most of the time metagaming turns out to be little more than conjecture.

didnt like the mod? why did he sign up for the game?
didint like a player? why did he confirm?
type of game? wouldnt you want to check to see if the games are similar?

Everything in day 1 is conjecture...

at any rate, I just want other people to look into it and make up their own mind. I can see yours is already made up with out looking into it...

Well, I dunno about those games, but I know this game didn't have a mod until after I signed up for it. As for the rest, I couldn't tell you, I'm not the player, and these are all random guesses. As I said, I don't care for meta-gaming, 99% of the metagaming I've seen has gotten townies killed for bad, bad reasoning.

[Hjallti]

Battle Mage, is the 'you' in your previous post me?
In that case I think you missed my point, since I didn't use emotion in it.
I just argued that even if metagaming might lead us to the conclusion that Dral finds this game interesting over another game, that this is not a scumtell since this game is not really comparable to regular games.
I already thought this set up was more appealing, because of the possibilities of nice puzzle logic, regardless my line up, when I sign up, so before I even knew my line up.

Therefor I can conceive that even if Dral admits he prefers this game over another it is not a scumtell.

[Battle Mage]

lol no. I was talking to ControlledBum, hence i quoted him, and not you.

Battle Mage, is the 'you' in your previous post me?
In that case I think you missed my point, since I didn't use emotion in it.
I just argued that even if metagaming might lead us to the conclusion that Dral finds this game interesting over another game, that this is not a scumtell since this game is not really comparable to regular games.
I already thought this set up was more appealing, because of the possibilities of nice puzzle logic, regardless my line up, when I sign up, so before I even knew my line up.

Therefor I can conceive that even if Dral admits he prefers this game over another it is not a scumtell.

[Aimee]

Vote Count!

Battle Mage - 2 (JordanA24, Indy)
curiouskarmadog - 2 (Mert, Dral)
Dral - 2 (JDodge, curiouskarmadog)

Hjallti - 1 (Battle Mage)
JDodge - 1(AmeliaLi)

Not Voting - 3 (ControlledBurn, Hjallti, theopor_COD)

6 to lynch.

[Hjallti]

Sorry I even didn't notice the quote because it was underneath... stupid me... Anyway I made my point more precise...

We might try to setup the choices for next night in advance thus gaining the most information like you would do if you play MasterMind, going for a combination that gives more information. But I don't see at forehand a way to direct this. Any thoughts?

I automatically come to another question: Should we not claim before the night has come whom we will take, or makes this the task of scum easier?

Remember: We are trying to find scum (and we might need to deduce quack meanwhile, but it is only a tool and finding scum is the goal), while scum is trying to eliminate us before we find them.

By the way, like in most mini's I guess nolynch is not an option today.

[theopor_COD]

Sorry for a lack of posting my broadband at home is currently broke, awaiting BT repair. Hope to have it fixed by Friday.

[AmeliaLi]

Unvote

Hjallti: I'm not sure if we should claim or not. There are pros and cons for both. I currently leaning to not sharing it just yet. Too many people and we have yet to truly put votes on

one

person.

Though I agree with what CKD wrote about Dral.

FOS: Dral

[JordanA24]

We might try to setup the choices for next night in advance thus gaining the most information like you would do if you play MasterMind, going for a combination that gives more information. But I don't see at forehand a way to direct this. Any thoughts?

I was thinking about we do a list of the players that is then randomized by the player we think the most pro-town (a scum would probably just pick the order to suit the scum), and we have to target the person below us on the list. The only problem is that we would be set to lose possibly 3 pro-town players (remember mafiates aren't affected by quack "protections"), but the chance of having at least one quack target a scum is about 90% (according to my rough and hasty calculations which I'm not sure are correct, can someone check this please).

I'm not sure that the potential 3 town dead are worth knowing who the quacks are. Anyway, what do you guys think of this?

[Dral]

lol - is it fair to ask if anyone else targeted FeRnAnDo last night?

isn’t this a fairly safe claim as well, we cant really check this? Seems to me that this too would be an easy mafia claim. He also was quite speedy getting this information right out there too.

Not safe at all. In fact, it would be pretty bad strategy. I am now 100% confirmed quack or scum. If we discover 3 quacks, I am confirmed scum. If I was scum, this would be real bad. Claiming no target is by far the safest claim for scum to make.

I post my post about not wanting to vote anyone for fear of killing them and 6 minutes later Dral posts..

unvote:Dral
vote: Mert

I guess my apparent scumminess was over looked then.

I then post.

unvote:Dral
vote: Mert

any reasons?

to find out why he felt Mert who just unvoted him needed a vote. He came back with “OMGUS vote”, which again does not make any since.

OMGUS=Oh My God, You Suck
Mert and I were involved in another game where we were at odds for much of it. I meant the OMGUS in the literal sense when I made the vote.

avoid night choices? are you frigging serious!?
Our best chance at finding the scum is to use the confirmed quacks to target people. A quack is like a Vig-Cop combo.

Not exactly. I could end up killing any real doctor. Plus, if someone lives, they aren't 100% scum (they could have been protected). I guess with some coordination we could use it as a second lynch. Like give me a target and tell everyone else not to target them. But probably way too difficult to get everyone to agree to that.

OK what? He defends not making a night choice. AGAIN, he defend not making a night choice. Then he wants to target someone else and use it as second lynch? Supposedly you are a Quack..you can only kill the town….Why would you want to kill townies?

Strategy for a KNOWN quack (me) and an unknown quack (you) are completely different. You think nobody should protect until we know who the quacks are? That would be a pretty exciting game. The best way to find out if you are a quack is by making night choices.

I think we should tell all targets. It should be fairly easy to catch the scums in a lie. We can't wait for a few days because, as people die, it will be easier to lie.

just want to comment on the logic here…how is it easier to lie with fewer people?

Kind of irrelevant now that the decision was made. But the longer we waited the more people that would die. When someone died, we would never know who they targeted on earlier nights. It would be easier for the scum to "fill-in" the gaps. Thus, yes it wold have been easier to lie with less people left.

Someone who doesn't target anyone does us no good. We gain no information. It is also the safest claim for a scum. We can't catch a scum in a lie if they claim they didn't target anyone. On the plus side, we lose no info by lynching him today.

votes for me...NOW he knows strategy and how mafia plays? What? BTW, this is a weak argument and I am surprised the town did not jump all over it. You cant lose info by lynching me? WE ARE TRYING TO GET INFORMATION. This smells of scum.

In future days, we are going to look back and see who targeted who on what nights. For example, on day 4 an individual will have made 4 choices. For you we will have less information. We will only have 3 choices. Thus, we lose less info by lynching you.

[Dral]

The reason I use 'think we may assume' is because I am pretty new here and it seems it is a general rule that the mod gives away the thruthful line up of player on his death. I would expect that with a 'quack doctor' this would be told at the death scene. Maybe the

mod

can answer the question:

Would you reveal of a death player that (s)he is quack or not?

I already asked that. lol
apparently the mod is checking it out with some other people before she can be sure.

Mod

: We really need an answer to this. I had assumed that when a person died their real role would be revelaed. Is this not true? This could affect the strategy we use.

[Dral]

you must have had some bad experienced then. In my experience metagaming can be a very useful tool. Don't get me wrong, it is usually of more value to the individual than to the town itself, but the fact is, metagaming can, as a rule, give significant insight into who might be scum. Indeed in this case, i do consider the action suspicious, but not to the extent of requiring a vote. It has been noted however.

If you guys really want to metagame on me, read my games. I was always pretty high on everyones scum list. I was town in all of them. Must be the way I post or something.

[curiouskarmadog]

Dral, I think everyone one of your replies has bad logic in it...I do not even know where to start..

at any rate, I do not have time at the moment break it down, hoping the others will see your post for what it is.

[Mert]

As I stated, this is my first Quack game.

I'm pretty sure this is almost everyone's first game of Quack Mafia. It's certainly the first I've ever heard of this setup - I'm not sure such a game has ever been played on Scum before and, if it has, these games are not exactly a dime a dozen. I don't put any stock at all in your constant "but this is my first Quack game" posts because it's my first too - the difference is, I'm trying to work out how we can use the setup to our advantage as best as possible whereas you're hiding behind your lack of experience with the setup.

I did not pick anyone because I thought there were 6 quacks and 3 doctors..I have never played a quack game before, and did not like the odds of killing a townsperson.

Can you also clarify

why

you thought there were six Quacks? This is an Open game and, as such, all roles and the setup are posted in the public domain. When I was deciding on who to protect last night, I looked at the setup in the OP to try and make sure I wasn't making any false assumptions. Why would you not have done the same?

if anybody does any metagaming, they will find a current game that Dral was too busy to play in (that started before this one) and had to be replaced. I think he stayed in this game because he is mafia which is far more interesting than being a vanilla townie..I am sure if I dig a little more I will find more games.

Dral, care to comment on why you had to be replaced in other games, but want to play this one?

As for the Dral got replaced elsewhere idea, it could simply be that he joined a few more than he perhaps should have done and realised he'd need to drop out of one. Besides, your argument that Scum is more interesting is Townie could just as easily work that Doctor is more interesting than Townie. And what do we know about all the protown players in this game?

Seriously, poor line of attack on Dral. As it happens, I think he's probably town right now.

CKD, I'm already voting for you - I put it there originally just to see how you / others would react. Now you've reacted and I think you're scum. Vote stays.

[curiouskarmadog]

I'm pretty sure this is almost everyone's first game of Quack Mafia. It's certainly the first I've ever heard of this setup - I'm not sure such a game has ever been played on Scum before and, if it has, these games are not exactly a dime a dozen. I don't put any stock at all in your constant "but this is my first Quack game" posts because it's my first too - the difference is, I'm trying to work out how we can use the setup to our advantage as best as possible whereas you're hiding behind your lack of experience with the setup.

I have not been hiding behind anything. I was asked why I did not protect anyone last night. 2 reasons..1.) I simply misread the setup, I thought there was 6 quacks and did not like those odds of killing a townie. 2.) I am new to mafia in general (so I do not know how many quack games there are) and did not know what to do my first night.

As for the Dral got replaced elsewhere idea, it could simply be that he joined a few more than he perhaps should have done and realised he'd need to drop out of one. Besides, your argument that Scum is more interesting is Townie could just as easily work that Doctor is more interesting than Townie. And what do we know about all the protown players in this game?

OK, well this has gone far more than "interesting". You do know that there is more to my Dral case other than that, right? Now you are defending him. Time for you to answer some questions.

Why do you feel Dral is town? (maybe quoting some posts for us to go back and read)

You think thus far, Dral has demonstrated sound logic?

Do you believe that Dral is a Quack?

Why did you ask Indy why he protected me, but did not ask anyone else, why they protected their targets?

[curiouskarmadog]

Not safe at all. In fact, it would be pretty bad strategy. I am now 100% confirmed quack or scum. If we discover 3 quacks, I am confirmed scum. If I was scum, this would be real bad. Claiming no target is by far the safest claim for scum to make..

so what you are saying is you are 100% town or scum? How is that not an easy claim in Day 1? With mafia putting out false info, there is no way tell who is Quack or Mafia. I told everyone the truth, I didnt target anyone because I misread the set up and didnt like the odds.

Strategy for a KNOWN quack (me) and an unknown quack (you) are completely different. You think nobody should protect until we know who the quacks are? That would be a pretty exciting game. The best way to find out if you are a quack is by making night choices..

again, who are you trying to convince? YOU ARE NOT A KNOWN quack, you just finished saying you could be a quack or scum. I never said, I think no one should protect until we know who the quacks are (quote please). Now you are blatantly lying…Jesus, and Mert thinks you are town???

[AmeliaLi]

Note: I'm going to be camping int he middle of nowhere, thus no computer. (I leave thursday). I'll catch up either sunday night or monday morning

[Dral]

Not safe at all. In fact, it would be pretty bad strategy. I am now 100% confirmed quack or scum. If we discover 3 quacks, I am confirmed scum. If I was scum, this would be real bad. Claiming no target is by far the safest claim for scum to make..

so what you are saying is you are 100% town or scum? How is that not an easy claim in Day 1? With mafia putting out false info, there is no way tell who is Quack or Mafia. I told everyone the truth, I didnt target anyone because I misread the set up and didnt like the odds.

The scum would never want to give the town a way to determine that they are scum. By claiming that I targeted Fernando, my claim will eventually be proven. If three other quacks show up, I would be proven scum. Now, I always assumed that we would know when a quack dies. If we aren't told this, the game got way harder.

Strategy for a KNOWN quack (me) and an unknown quack (you) are completely different. You think nobody should protect until we know who the quacks are? That would be a pretty exciting game. The best way to find out if you are a quack is by making night choices..

again, who are you trying to convince? YOU ARE NOT A KNOWN quack, you just finished saying you could be a quack or scum. I never said, I think no one should protect until we know who the quacks are (quote please). Now you are blatantly lying…Jesus, and Mert thinks you are town???

lying? you just said in your last post - "I thought there was 6 quacks and did not like those odds of killing a townie"
The odds are just as bad for everyone else. I assume you meant no one should protect then. We would never find the quacks. The odds wouldn't improve much. At least last night, we only lost one townie and we found one quack.

[Dral]

EBWOP: Actually, after reading my quote above. I never said that you said that. I was asking a question. So I wasn't "blatantly lying".

[Indy]

I can't help but just be confused by Mert's question,

"So your strategy was to try and target someone you believed would be targetted so you could test your role?"

Just seems like an odd out of the park question. It was first round... how would anyone know who might be targeted? What made you choose Curious? What made anyone choose anyone first round, it was like a stab in the dark trying to turn suspicion to me. With that,

Unvote
Vote: Mert