Mini 1826: The Purge - Game Over

[Persivul]

I'm still mystified how all the Town other than myself didn't understand that keeping Masons secret was absolutely pointless after Night 1.

Me too.

In the first run of this I had a cop and a doc, no masons. With barricading, doc seemed unnecessary, so I changed it to two masons. I figured the masons could shoot together, thereby overcoming a barricaded goon. I was therefore a little surprised that the masons barricaded N1. But, I figured they wanted to live to claim later, thereby giving conftowns. Made sense...but then they didn't claim.

[PeregrineV]

You are able to draw incorrect conclusions from the smallest thing. I figured the fact that we did not hard claim would make it seem obvious. If you check me iso, and believed me to be mason, then Shadow was my obvious mason buddy.

Then that leaves you in the same place as us, is pisskop faking mason as town, or as scum?

But it didn't really matter.

No. That's crappy play. It was incumbent on you to be as clear as possible in the situation because playing herp-a-derp cloak and dagger games resulted in Shaddow getting stranded. Clarity on Day 2 was of utmost importance.

Why?

Play out how the game would have gone if shadow was confirmed mason by Pers.

[MagnaofIllusion]

Because he was town willing to take a kill a for a mason, leaving the real mason alive.

Who cares? The scum winning play at that stage is not "must kill the Masons". It is "Kill one more Town player than Town kills scum players" and it doesn't matter whether they are Masons or Citizens.

Again - you played in an obfuscating manner when the game-state specifically called for you not to. 100% of the reason I was so dead set on stranding Shaddow was that I absolutely knew he wasn't the Strongman. I had toyed with hammering Lane at one point but couldn't justify doing so given I couldn't be sure he wasn't the Strongman as I knew Shaddow was not.

Shaddow claiming Masons eliminates that element from coloring my reads and play.

[PeregrineV]

I'm still mystified how all the Town other than myself didn't understand that keeping Masons secret was absolutely pointless after Night 1.

Me too.

In the first run of this I had a cop and a doc, no masons. With barricading, doc seemed unnecessary, so I changed it to two masons. I figured the masons could shoot together, thereby overcoming a barricaded goon. I was therefore a little surprised that the masons barricaded N1. But, I figured they wanted to live to claim later, thereby giving conftowns. Made sense...but then they didn't claim.

If we had shot, pretty sure we would have both shot town, and then MoI would have killed Shadow anyway. There probably wouldn't have been a day2.

And confirming ourselves tells scum where to shoot.

[Infinity 324]

Lane gets stranded --> masons shoot me, MoI shoots lane, scum kill the masons.

Possible town win

[Infinity 324]

But me and lane should've cced masons and that would've fucked things up

But we didn't

[PeregrineV]

Lane gets stranded --> masons shoot me, MoI shoots lane, scum kill the masons.

Possible town win

Why would MoI shoot lane?

If we ask him to, like me and pisskop asked him to not vote shaddow, he wouldn't do it.

And besides, we don't know MoI isn't scum anyway, so we can't make a plan based on that.

[Infinity 324]

Talking about what would've happened in this game.

I thought MoI scumread lane, and said he would shoot any one of his scumreads that was stranded.

Anyway in a different case it might have been good to gambit, but not when the masons would be possible lynchbait.

[lane0168]

I'm not sure how you can defend the play of not claiming masons. It got a mason stranded. Shadow was basically the only player that I thought we could get a strand on. If shadow was known mason that would've been impossible. I'm not sure how you can describe it as anything other than terrible.

[PeregrineV]

X_X
I'm going to pretend this game never happened
Also I need to stop quickly writing off players like reelo as insane town

I did the same.

[PeregrineV]

Any suggestions on the setup? Would you play it again?

It's obviously swingy, but I didn't expect 6 town deaths N1!

I ran this on another (non-mafia) site, and it was a huge town win. The scum team wasn't doing very good and they stranded scum the first three nights. That town was more conservative. A lot of the barricaded.

If a town player has a strong scumread for whatever reason they think, and they have a gun, they will shoot.

the game went pretty much as I expected.

Still fun though, and would always play again!!

[lane0168]

So in the end, scum killed 4 people?

Town killed 6?

[PeregrineV]

You are able to draw incorrect conclusions from the smallest thing. I figured the fact that we did not hard claim would make it seem obvious. If you check me iso, and believed me to be mason, then Shadow was my obvious mason buddy.

Then that leaves you in the same place as us, is pisskop faking mason as town, or as scum?

But it didn't really matter.

No. That's crappy play. It was incumbent on you to be as clear as possible in the situation because playing herp-a-derp cloak and dagger games resulted in Shaddow getting stranded. Clarity on Day 2 was of utmost importance.

I disagree. I said there should be no voting.

Later, when you believe me and pisskop to be masons, and said "Vote lane", you did not, and scum piled on and hammered town.

[PeregrineV]

I'm still mystified how all the Town other than myself didn't understand that keeping Masons secret was absolutely pointless after Night 1.

Me too.

In the first run of this I had a cop and a doc, no masons. With barricading, doc seemed unnecessary, so I changed it to two masons. I figured the masons could shoot together, thereby overcoming a barricaded goon. I was therefore a little surprised that the masons barricaded N1. But, I figured they wanted to live to claim later, thereby giving conftowns. Made sense...but then they didn't claim.

I know town would shoot itself. And narrow the pool.

Was hoping scum would lose one.

Instead, lots of town died, no scum died, and the lack of lynch became more of s detriment.

[PeregrineV]

So in the end, scum killed 4 people?

Town killed 6?

At least we took one of you with us!



good game though

[MagnaofIllusion]

I disagree. I said there should be no voting.

Later, when you believe me and pisskop to be masons, and said "Vote lane", you did not, and scum piled on and hammered town.

You can disagree all you wish but that doesn't make you correct. You seem to be missing the point where you had given no reason to vote Lane over Shaddow given I knew Shaddow couldn't be the Strongman and Lane stood at worst a 1/3rd shot of being so. From my perspective I'm not taking at lowest a 33% chance of stranding the Strongman when I have a known 0% chance of stranding the Strongman in my scum reads.

Had you just claimed as was smart Shaddow would never have been in my scum-reads to begin with ...

[Persivul]

the lack of lynch became more of s detriment

Yeah, after the N1 town bloodbath the lack of a lynch concerned me.

What does everyone think about the strand mechanic?
- keep it as is
- ditch it
- maybe have majority=lynch, plurality=strand
- start with strand, change to lynch at lylo
- something else?

[PeregrineV]

I disagree. I said there should be no voting.

Later, when you believe me and pisskop to be masons, and said "Vote lane", you did not, and scum piled on and hammered town.

You can disagree all you wish but that doesn't make you correct. You seem to be missing the point where you had given no reason to vote Lane over Shaddow given I knew Shaddow couldn't be the Strongman and Lane stood at worst a 1/3rd shot of being so. From my perspective I'm not taking at lowest a 33% chance of stranding the Strongman when I have a known 0% chance of stranding the Strongman in my scum reads.

The object of the game is not to just strand the not-strongman, but to also strand not-town.

Had you just claimed as was smart Shaddow would never have been in my scum-reads to begin with ...

Did you think I was a mason?

Did you think pisskop was a mason?

[MagnaofIllusion]

What does everyone think about the strand mechanic?
- keep it as is

I don't see any reason to change it at this stage. Maybe if you run 5 iterations and they all end up with scum wins then maybe. I'd like to see another iteration and how it plays out.

[MagnaofIllusion]

The object of the game is not to just strand the not-strongman, but to also strand not-town.

Yup. And your stupid decision not to clearly claim allowed just that.

[PeregrineV]

- maybe have majority=lynch, plurality=strand

This one is interesting. I'd say try that.

[MagnaofIllusion]

Did you think I was a mason?

Did you think pisskop was a mason?

Yes. It would have been stupid for you not to claim truthfully based on the game-state.

[lane0168]

Pv, why do you still think it was good to not claim mason? A mason was stranded. That proves it was a bad play. If shadow just claims mason like normal people claim mason, the strand would've been scum. What good came out of that plan?

You guys honestly fucked yourselves. Sorry moi you got a raw deal

[PeregrineV]

The object of the game is not to just strand the not-strongman, but to also strand not-town.

Yup. And your stupid decision not to clearly claim allowed just that.

Yes, we allowed YOU + the unknown-to-town scumteam to hammer by telling you NOT to vote him.

[lane0168]

The object of the game is not to just strand the not-strongman, but to also strand not-town.

Yup. And your stupid decision not to clearly claim allowed just that.

Yes, we allowed YOU + the unknown-to-town scumteam to hammer by telling you NOT to vote him.

Why do you think people should listen to you? Cause you're mason? That doesn't mean you're right. You know what he would've listened to? Even the scum would've listened if shadow was mason lol