Mini 427 - Clue Mafia 2 - GAME OVER

[Battle Mage]

is Skruffs in this game? or whoever it was who knows these films inside out?
these games are linked pretty closely to the films, so it would be helpful to know what could be out there in this game.

BM

[DragonsofSummer]

unvote

Ectomancer makes a very good argument.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Prods issued for anyone who has not posted in a week.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Vote Count:

Ectomancer - (MrBuddyLee)
dahen - (Battle Mage)
chaotic_diablo - (Erg0)
BillyTwilight - (Ectomancer)

[BillyTwilight]

Got my prod for Clue 1; I'll reread and post here as quickly as possible, hopefully before the weekend is up.

[chaotic_diablo]

Then TCS' wagon builds some more until finally he asks to be able to claim. BT counterclaims and we lynch TCS. The thing is, TCS didn't even fight. His was the very next post after BT countered and he says "Damn" ie I'm scum. Now roleblocker can be proven, but he didn't offer that up (not that he could have, but he could have bought some time). I would say let's see if BT can prove his roleblocking ability, but he was very careful back then to say he had not claimed a role at all, only the name.

It also comes to mind that BT was the one who

hammered

TCS the instant BT called TCS a liar. TCS had no chance of countering anything whatsoever once the results roll in. If you're already lynched, then what's the point in trying to prove your claim? What exactly is he trying to fight for now that he knows he's dead?

Singing telegram girl. Roleblocker.

Liar.

unaccuse, Accuse: TCS

.

Jack asked if this was a bussing, BM asked the same question later but what happened then was that the soup came out. We got on to that discussion, and the question of Billy never was answered by anyone. On a side note, Billy was offered the soup and turned it down. Dahen later posted a breakdown of why scum would be more likely to turn down the soup than town would be. I couldn't refute his logic then, nor now.

I'll get to this once I feel like rereading.

Now later on BM does get an innocent investigation on BT, so he's ok right? No, he then tries to get BM lynched with this deal about a "fake claim". Now I admit that it is plausible what he is saying (which makes it even better for scum), but he really wants to lynch a claimed cop with 9 still alive and 1 scum down? I dont think so. He wants his cake (an innocent investigation) and wants to eat it too (lynch the cop and get 'confirmed' while doing it).

I haven't reread the issue for this part yet so I'll get back to it when I feel like to.

Now think back to TCS, why would he fold so easily? He knew that BT would come up innocent on the counterclaim and knew his role. When TCS claimed Billy's name role, Billy spotted the setup (TCS was going down) and took advantage of the situation for a little "confirmation" on Billy.
I think BT is the Godfather, whether he really is the Singing Telegram Girl or not.

TCS was hammered so he folded early. To prove my point, check this page
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &start=125
Right after I force TCS to claim, TCS claims only to be hammered in BT's next post.

Since Ectomancer reread the isue already, I'm kind of suspicious on how he could miss MBL's post.

Wow, that was a confident hammer. Two games in a row, I'm thinking Twilight is late for a hot date or somethin.

It's on the same page as the hammer.

[Ectomancer]

Whether his vote was the hammer or not and so TCS' lack of defense could be attributed to it is irrelevant, it was still a bussing setup and the collaboration angle still works. BT didnt want to put his vote on until TCS basically said lynch me by claiming BT's role.

Either way the today goes, Billy shouldn't get away with it.

[chaotic_diablo]

Whether his vote was the hammer or not and so TCS' lack of defense could be attributed to it is irrelevant, it was still a bussing setup and the collaboration angle still works. BT didnt want to put his vote on until TCS basically said lynch me by claiming BT's role.

Either way the today goes, Billy shouldn't get away with it.

Your argument is that BT was bussing TCS. What is this assumption based on? Why do you believe it was a bussing setup? Wasn't it because TCS gave in so easily? Why are you know telling us that it is irrelevant?

Then TCS' wagon builds some more until finally he asks to be able to claim. BT counterclaims and we lynch TCS.

The thing is, TCS didn't even fight. His was the very next post after BT countered and he says "Damn" ie I'm scum.

Now roleblocker can be proven, but he didn't offer that up (not that he could have, but he could have bought some time). I would say let's see if BT can prove his roleblocking ability, but he was very careful back then to say he had not claimed a role at all, only the name.

Now think back to TCS, why would he fold so easily?

He knew that BT would come up innocent on the counterclaim and knew his role. When TCS claimed Billy's name role, Billy spotted the setup (TCS was going down) and took advantage of the situation for a little "confirmation" on Billy.
I think BT is the Godfather, whether he really is the Singing Telegram Girl or not.

BT's hammer does indeed make a difference. Chronologically, BT hammered before his counterclaim. TCS had no chance to give a defense. He could not have bought time or fooled us for very long since the lynch results would only prove him to be scum.

[Ectomancer]

Bussing. Scum lynching scum. It's so later they can defend themselves as town for voting for scum, just as you are doing right now. Whether TCS had a chance to defend himself is a small part of the case. He claimed Billy's role. That's the communication that says "Go ahead and lynch me Billy, Im dead anyhow. Here's your reason for doing it."

Speaking of which, did Billy lose his keyboard? Or are you the appointed public defender?

[chaotic_diablo]

Bussing. Scum lynching scum. It's so later they can defend themselves as town for voting for scum, just as you are doing right now. Whether TCS had a chance to defend himself is a small part of the case. He claimed Billy's role. That's the communication that says "Go ahead and lynch me Billy, Im dead anyhow. Here's your reason for doing it."

What you're failing to understand is that you have an argument without the support. You said that TCS's claim was a scum sign. Prove it. Why should we believe you? Based on your previous arguments, you came to your conclusion because TCS gave in too easily. However, now you're saying that it's irrelevant.

Isn't TCS's lack of defense to BT's counterclaim when TCS could have bought time the exact reasoning you used to imply bussing? You left out that TCS was already dead before the counterclaim. You even went so far as to label the events in the wrong order.

BT counterclaims and we lynch TCS. The thing is, TCS didn't even fight. His was the very next post after BT countered and he says "Damn" ie I'm scum.

What really happened was that BT hammered and then counterclaimed a few posts later because people were discontent with his hammer.

Speaking of which, did Billy lose his keyboard? Or are you the appointed public defender?

I'm not Billy's appointed defender. I'm trying to explain the how your argument is faulty. Scum are more likely to create arguments based on crap than real arguments based on logic. It's our job to evaluate whether your argument is valid or not. I read back and saw that your argument is full of BS.

Why do you think TCS's claim is a scum sign?

[Ectomancer]

I didn't have the current vote count when I was reading. Sue me. It still doesn't matter if BT's vote was the hammer or not. It was a setup and call by TCS for BT to vote for him by simply claiming BT's role. BT's vote being the hammer, and me missing that doesn't make the argument full of BS.

I already explained how TCS claim was scum chat.

You sir are straw manning the overall argument. It certainly doesn't hinge on TCS having the opportunity to fight harder afterwards. In fact, since there was only 1 vote left to get on him, it makes even more sense for TCS to force the hammer on himself when he did by claiming BT's role. He had very little time to try to pull something positive out of his lynch.

Thank you for completely ignoring his attempt to lynch BM later. If you were doing such a bang up job of assessing the argument you might try addressing the entire argument. Twice you stated that you would "get back to this" after a re-read. How about finishing your re-read before nitpicking what is a minor point overall. That's a straw man and really is full of BS. How can you say you are trying to determine whether the argument is valid or not when you twice admitted that you didnt go back to read it?

[Battle Mage]

is Skruffs in this game? or whoever it was who knows these films inside out?
these games are linked pretty closely to the films, so it would be helpful to know what could be out there in this game.

BM

Hello?!

[Ectomancer]

It was already shown that Clue 3 was the one that matched the ending exactly. I seriously doubt that the other 2 would follow the movie exactly as well, however, if you like, I can check it out from the library and watch it again so i can remember exactly how ending 2 turned out.

[Erg0]

To answer BM's direct question: Skruffs is dead.

This discussion on BT is interesting, I do see Ectomancer's case as reasonable but I'm not convinced. One thing I find interesting is TCS asking BM for a name claim after he made his own claim. To me, this indicates that he was playing as if he intended to carry on with the game.

Post-hammer votes on scum are very poor form, btw. al_ko came up town, but I never like seeing people fingerprinting the lynch after it's decided. IGMEOY, Ecto.

Unvote

while I try to find a more coherent case and actually get a handle on things in this game.

[Ectomancer]

I'll try to explain my thoughts on TCS and BT in a more straightforward manner. C_d is right that as explained, and with BT giving the hammer, it would seem to weaken the case, but it boils down to the following:

TCS requested a chance to claim, then claimed a role other than his own.

The question follows, did he choose a specific role for a reason, or was he just hoping he could find a role not being used?

If a specific role, why that one?

I suppose in the end I'm not wrong, but what I have here is a WIFOM. Would TCS roleclaim his buddy's role for the townie confirming counterclaim and hammer vote? Or would he roleclaim a townie so that someone like me would come up with this specific case to lynch them?

Personally I give the latter much less likelyhood than the former, making the choices not quite equal and thereby not quite qualifying as WIFOM, but I am going to concede the point.

unvote

9 players left and 1 scum down. Still time to make mistakes. Still, also time to wait on this. Just don't give him a free ticket because of the counterclaim.

[Erg0]

I gots me a question for the folks who were pushing MBL's lynch: how do you feel about his lack of lynch day 2? c_d made the point that he may not be unlynchable, rather a power role may have block his lynch. Do you subscribe to this theory, or do you consider his lack of death confirmation of town status? If the former, why is nobody going back to that wagon?

[MrBuddyLee]

Lynching me again would be a waste. Either i'm unlynchable or someone is telling you guys you're wrong. If you really suspect me, express it and explain why.

[Erg0]

It's not so much that I suspect you, I'm just curious why the subject dropped so fast without a number of people giving their opinions on the situation. Just because one individual vetoes a lynch that doesn't make it wrong.

OTOH, any scum that were on the wagon more or less got a free pass because nobody has really looked at the wagon today. You said yourself that you though that the overzealous players on the wagon were scum. Anyone in particular stand out to you?

[dahen]

I liked Ecto's theory.
There is something funny with claiming to be another name in a game with limited possible names.

Scenario 1:
TCS had a plan to get BT-scum cleared by claiming his name (this is Ecto's theory).
Requirements:
1A: Believing TCS would be lynched anyway.
1B: Believing BT would counterclaim (he did, could well be planned)
1C: Believeing BT would feel more like town (probable, but if BT is GF, is that then necessary, since an investigation would clear him?)

Scenairo 2:
TCS had a plan to get Singing Telegram Girl accused by claiming that name (this is the opposite case in Ecto's theory).
Requirements:
2A: Believing TCS would be lynched anyway.
2B: Believing STG would counterclaim (could not be planned, but it would be likely)
2C: Believing somebody would come up with Ecto's theory (could be planned, meaning Ecto is scum, or unplanned)

Scenario 3:
TCS believed the claim would NOT make him lynched.
Requirements:
3A: Believing TCS would survive.
3B: Believing that claiming STG would be better for scum than claiming The Cop (this means that scum is afraid of town linking names to alignment).
3C: Believing that STG would be a safe claim. (This requires that there would be no STG in this game. In Clue 3, this is exactly the name that was missing, so it's possible and would explain why TCS chose this.

I need to check on the state of Clue 3 when TCS claimed STG in Clue 2. If he had reasons to believe that there would be no STG in clue 3 and therefore not in Clue 2, then it makes Scenario 3 quite possible.

I think Scenario 1 is the most likely case, even though, as C_D points out, Ecto is wrong regarding the timing.

[dahen]

The question follows, did he choose a specific role for a reason, or was he just hoping he could find a role not being used?

Ecto, why didn't you elaborate on the second part of your sentence? See my scenario 3 and comment, please.

[Ectomancer]

If 3C is accurate, then I would drop it. That's a point that I didn't recall and would be the more likely reason for "Why did TCS choose STG?", at least Occam's razor would say so.

[BillyTwilight]

Okay, I had some time tonight to get back into this game a little and wanted to answer this post myself. I'll try to actually have a look through and give my take on the other players later this week.

I wanted to get fresh eyes on this game, so I went back to page 1 and started reading, trying to determine who scum might be. We were building a TCS wagon when BT chimes in with some dirt tossed TCS way, but not vote or fos. I thought distancing, someone else thought the same thing.

I don't like TCS' post either. I despise MBL's post. MBL, how about you actually address the issues raised instead of misrepresenting what I have said. I am

not

showing a double standard. I attacked you in Clue 1 because you posted little in Day 1 then came out with a full attack against the most lynchable player on Day 2 while misrepresenting my arguments in that attack. I attacked you in this game because you were obviously active in the game as a whole, but posting nill in this thread. If you can't see that as suspicious play then... I don't know, I guess we won't see eye-to-eye very often.

FoS: Ecto

. TCS didn't "badger" a claim out of BM. In fact in the post before BM claimed TCS told BM that he was not asking for a claim. BM claimed in fear of a speedlynch when the only person (or persons, if you take MBL's version of events as truth) who have shown a propensity for speedlynching were

already

voting for him. BM's play was bad, plain and simple.

Still, something seems odd about TCS' current posting. I don't specifically agree with Jack, as I don't see TCS claiming that his pressure vote is a sign that he is town, but I don't like how TCS backed up my FoS of MBL so quickly. I think maybe he thinks that buddying up to me in this game after defending me in Clue 1 will make me think he is town here as well.

Then TCS' wagon builds some more until finally he asks to be able to claim. BT counterclaims and we lynch TCS. The thing is, TCS didn't even fight. His was the very next post after BT countered and he says "Damn" ie I'm scum. Now roleblocker can be proven, but he didn't offer that up (not that he could have, but he could have bought some time). I would say let's see if BT can prove his roleblocking ability, but he was very careful back then to say he had

not

claimed a role at all, only the name.
Jack asked if this was a bussing, BM asked the same question later but what happened then was that the soup came out. We got on to that discussion, and the question of Billy never was answered by anyone. On a side note, Billy was offered the soup and turned it down. Dahen later posted a breakdown of why scum would be more likely to turn down the soup than town would be. I couldn't refute his logic then, nor now.

For the most part, others have pointed out the flaw here. My vote on TCS was hammer, defending himself would do no good, etc. etc. As far as the soup goes, Dahen and I had different takes on it. I don't fault MBL or anyone (including myself) for not partaking in an unknown action in the game. A difference of opinion doesn't make me or anyone else scum. I'd like to point everyone to post post #199. I find it odd that you are retroactively trying to hold that my position in regards to the soup was somehow scummy when you held effectively the exact same position at the time.

Now later on BM does get an innocent investigation on BT, so he's ok right? No, he then tries to get BM lynched with this deal about a "fake claim". Now I admit that it is plausible what he is saying (which makes it even better for scum), but he really wants to lynch a claimed cop with 9 still alive and 1 scum down? I dont think so. He wants his cake (an innocent investigation) and wants to eat it too (lynch the cop and get 'confirmed' while doing it).

Big problems here. First, I initiated my attack against BM

before

he claimed that I was his not-guilty investigation. The "Now I admit that it is plausible what he is saying (which makes it even better for scum)" statement doesn't even make sense. If BM is lying then it's because he's either scum or an SK or some other anti-town role. Lynching him and discovering this would only make his "investigation" moot, meaning I'd be in hot water again. It would make no sense for me to attack a claimed Cop in the game if I was scum and

investigative immune

. More on the Godfather topic later.

Now think back to TCS, why would he fold so easily? He knew that BT would come up innocent on the counterclaim and knew his role. When TCS claimed Billy's name role, Billy spotted the setup (TCS was going down) and took advantage of the situation for a little "confirmation" on Billy.
I think BT is the Godfather, whether he really is the Singing Telegram Girl or not.

I don't know what TCS was thinking. However, claiming your scum partner's rolename is a bit telegraphing, even for TCS. As for the Godfather bit, there are some big holes in it. First off, I attacked BM off the bat, before he gave up his investigation target. In post #164, BM had claimed to have an innocent investigation. If I was a Godfather I certainly wouldn't have wanted to lynch BM until I knew for sure who the target was. I was taking a big risk that his lynch would backfire and get me lynched if I was scum, a risk I would absolutely have no reason to take as an investigative immune mafioso. Also, I wouldn't want to lynch him in the first place. I'd much rather let it play out and stay quiet about things until the endgame, since this is a closed setup and town has no way of knowing if there is even a Godfather in the game at all. I went after BM because I believed his claim was bogus, not as some way to "get myself more confirmed". At the time, him giving me up as his investigation made me think he was even more likely scum because it was a convenient way to try to get me off his back, and he subsequently forgot on several occasions that I was his innocent investigation.

Also, I firmly believe that there are 3 scum in the mafia, TCS being one of them. 2 player scum groups in a 12 player setup are unusual, unless it's a mountainous setup, which typically don't include cop or other town power roles. Given we already know there was an Inventor and BM has claimed cop in this game, I can't see a 2 player scum group unless there are two of them. We had 2 kills last night and no kills on night 1, so it's hard to say, but my gut feeling is we are dealing with 3 mafia and 1 SK or a vig. This might be swayed by the crazy nature of Clue 3, but I just don't think we have 2 2-person mafias in the game. Either way still points to TCS not setting up a buss in the fashion he did.

If there are 3 mafia member, then (according to Ecto) I am the Godfather and there is another member out there. If that is the case, WHY THE HELL WOULD TCS SET THE GF UP FOR THE HAMMER AND NOT THE OTHER PLAYER? He had to have known that the possibility of his partner hammering could give him some heat. If so, he'd be dumb not to "set-up" the lynch with the lesser valued player. If I was the GF, there is no way in hell I would have hammered him then, either. I might would have applied pressure and tried to get him lynched, maybe even hammered him myself farther down the line, but there is no way I'd have done it based solely on my name claim.

For a 2 mafia setup, the last part of that still applies. TCS would be taking WAY too large a risk that the hammer would come back to get me lynched, and the game would be over for us, and I certainly would have been a hell of a lot more discreet in hammering, maintaining pressure and waiting for the hammer to fall from someone else or even from myself when I could have gotten away with it without name claiming.

Lastly, TCS would have been taking an enormous risk that I

wouldn't

hammer him, and that he might actually have been able to talk himself out of a lynch. If at any point I had been night killed and/or lynched, TCS would have been immediately lynched upon my role reveal.

I think TCS took a calculated gamble. If he claimed something that no one was he might or might not have manage to avoid the lynch. That is true as well if he claimed his own name. If he thought that he was going to be lynched, then why not claim a name he wasn't - especially since it could cause that player trouble down the line.

The main rebuttal is that your argument hinges on several points, each one possible but all together unlikely.

1.) I am a Godfather or Battle Mage is lying.

2.) If I am a Godfather I decided to take an enormous risk and attempt to get BM lynched.

3.) TCS never thought that nameclaiming his partner's name and having them hammer would raise suspicion in the eyes of the rest of the players.

4.) TCS took the risk that I wouldn't hammer him, he would avoid the lynch and if I was ever killed he would be instalynched the next day.

5.) Depending on the number of players in the scum group, TCS was either giving over the Godfather instead of his fellow goon or was giving over the only other member in the scum group and thus his only chance of winning the game.

Taken all together you should see that this is just silly. It's much more likely that TCS thought he was doomed for a lynch and wanted to see if he could link himself to a townie by claiming a name and getting himself hammered.

As a last thought on TCS, it might simply be that he didn't want to claim The Cop. Ancalagon was The Cop in Clue 1, and died on night 1, on May 20th, 2007. TCS claimed in Clue 2 on May 24th, 2007, which means Ancalagon's death would have been fresh on his mind. There had been no deaths in Clue 3, so TCS would have no way of knowing if there was The Cop in Clue 3. If there was, he might have guessed that that player was town. TCS might have thought that MoS would be sneaky enough to have The Cop in all three games , but scum in only 1 of them. He might have feared that if The Cop from from Clue 3 thought the same thing, that player would hammer regardless of what alignment TCS claimed with the role. All TCS knew was that he was Colonel Mustard, Sk, in Clue 3, that town-The Cop had all ready appeared in Clue 1, and that if there was a town-The Cop in Clue 3, that player might just take it into his head that that was a good enough reason to hammer on day 1 in Clue 2. He might have thought it safer to simply claim what he thought was an unlikely role from the movie.

[chaotic_diablo]

I didn't have the current vote count when I was reading. Sue me. It still doesn't matter if BT's vote was the hammer or not. It was a setup and call by TCS for BT to vote for him by simply claiming BT's role. BT's vote being the hammer, and me missing that doesn't make the argument full of BS.

I already explained how TCS claim was scum chat.

You sir are straw manning the overall argument. It certainly doesn't hinge on TCS having the opportunity to fight harder afterwards. In fact, since there was only 1 vote left to get on him, it makes even more sense for TCS to force the hammer on himself when he did by claiming BT's role. He had very little time to try to pull something positive out of his lynch.

Thank you for completely ignoring his attempt to lynch BM later. If you were doing such a bang up job of assessing the argument you might try addressing the entire argument. Twice you stated that you would "get back to this" after a re-read. How about finishing your re-read before nitpicking what is a minor point overall. That's a straw man and really is full of BS. How can you say you are trying to determine whether the argument is valid or not when you twice admitted that you didnt go back to read it?

I took my time to reread the parts you mentioned. I'd expect that someone who made an argument based on an issue to look over all the posts related to the argument. If you did, you wouldn't have missed it.

BT being scum certainly doesn't hinge on the possibility that he could have bussed TCS.

I'm not ignoring your other argument. I have stated that I would reread it when I

felt like it.

It isn't a gurantee that I'll spend the extra effort to find the issue and properly discuss it with you.
To me, you have two different points. One is based on scum association, and the other is scum by individual actions. While I can see how BT could be scum and may be motivated to buss TCS, that only applies if BT is scum. You're supposed to make an argument to prove someone is scum, not the other way around. Therefore scum by association is an extremely weak case. It's an argument that's full of BS if it isn't properly supported.

[dahen]

If it's correct that BT went after BM before BM claimed that BT was his target, then that would speak against Ecto's theory. However, it's not impossible for a GF to act scummy on purpose to get an investigation and be cleared until town realizes that there is a GF, which could well be when it's too late for town.

There are several points in BT's post that I don't agree with. I'll state them in my next post.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Vote Count:

Ectomancer - (MrBuddyLee)
dahen - (Battle Mage)