Mini 560: Methodical Mafia 2 -- GAME OVER

[Mr Stoofer]

Current ballots

:

Adele

--

[col]

andersonw

--

[col]

Ectomancer

--

[col]

Max

andersonw
Ectomancer
springlullaby
Thesp
VanDamien
opie
Shy Guy
Sarcastro
Adele
Nocmen
Yosarian2

[col]

Nocmen

Adele
andersonw
Ectomancer
Max
opie
Sarcastro
Shy Guy
springlullaby
Thesp
VanDamien
Yosarian2

[col]

opie

--

[col]

Sarcastro

--

[col]

Shy Guy

--

[col]

springlullaby

--

[col]

Thesp

--

[col]

VanDamian

--

[col]

Yosarian2

--

[opie]

Nocmen, this response of yours doesn't make much sense to me. I don't think Sarcasto had a problem with you asking questions, I think it was the particular question you asked. And when are you not allowed to ask questions? I'm not sure what you are getting at. Also what claim is he doubting? That Max thinks andersonw is clearly scum? I think he presumed that Max's list was random, and that his comment of andersonw being clearly scum is a bit tongue in cheek. Why are you taking is so seriously at this point?

[Sarcastro]

Also, max, why do you think andersonw is clearly scum?

I'm sorry, but are you seriously asking Max to explain why he said someone was "clearly scum" in the

first post of the game

?

Yes, I am asking questions a lot this game because I can. Why would you doubt this claim?

I don't get it. Are you joking? Because you sound like you're serious, and I don't understand how you can ask a serious question about a random vote(list) in the first post of the game. What possible reason could Max give for thinking Anderson is scum? "I'm scum and I know that Anderson is as well?"

[Sarcastro]

Mod

, once everyone has voted, will you give us lists of the order in which people would be lynched based on current votes?

[Mr Stoofer]

Mod

, once everyone has voted, will you give us lists of the order in which people would be lynched based on current votes?

Once everyone has voted, I will simulate one or two days so you can see how the process works. I will not simulate the entire game -- it'll take too long -- but anyone else should feel free to do so.

[Ectomancer]

Also, max, why do you think andersonw is clearly scum?

I'm sorry, but are you seriously asking Max to explain why he said someone was "clearly scum" in the

first post of the game

?

Yes, I am asking questions a lot this game because I can. Why would you doubt this claim?

I don't get it. Are you joking? Because you sound like you're serious, and I don't understand how you can ask a serious question about a random vote(list) in the first post of the game. What possible reason could Max give for thinking Anderson is scum? "I'm scum and I know that Anderson is as well?"

Allow Max to defend himself. Also cease your attempt to squelch information. I am interested in Max's response. In a game where you attempt to determine guilt from innocence based upon the interactions of other players, understanding that 2 players have a history, and an inkling iof what that history may be is useful information to have when making an sssessment. I view Nocmen's question as a valid attempt to move beyond the random stage.
What is your relationship to Max, Sarcastro?

[Nocmen]

Sarcasto: I was asking why you wouldn't doubt my claim towards how it may be suspicious of Max calling andersonw scum.

Though yet again, why are you so quick to jump on a defense towards Max? And why would you want to see the order people would be lynched so soon? I like surprises.

Opie: I take everything seriously. This game is serious buisness. Do you think this game is a joke?

Ecto: Why do you think that me asking Max a simple question would link people together so much?

[Shy Guy]

Hi guys. I am not new at mafia. I am usually very quiet, even with many things going on or even if I am being found suspicious. This might be the longest post you see from me, and I am being aberrant because I think I have some good ideas about the game that we can work with.

1) I know that typically in mafia, looking for mafia is the best way, because once one is dead you can trace back interactions with other players. But in this game, we never find out if we were right until too late, and the mafia can't kill off people we get right as being town. Also, we don't care if mafia are lynched 5,6,7 as opposed to 1,2,3, as long as they all get lynched. So, maybe starting by looking for who are most likely to be town, and putting them at the bottom of the list, is better.

2) Also, this way this works, I think that maybe we want to eventually agree on a "town list" and have everyone use that, putting people at the top who won't. If we all just have random lists, at first glance, it seems like it would be easier for the scum to manipulate the process.

What do you guys think?

And I am new here, does anyone want to be friends ?

[opie]

I think Shy Guy has a good idea about how we go about this game. But we must still go about looking for scum, because if we don't do that, then the most pro-town players won't evidence themselves.

And Nocmen, I do take this game seriously, but apparently not as seriously as you.

[Nocmen]

Hi guys. I am not new at mafia. I am usually very quiet, even with many things going on or even if I am being found suspicious. This might be the longest post you see from me, and I am being aberrant because I think I have some good ideas about the game that we can work with.

1) I know that typically in mafia, looking for mafia is the best way, because once one is dead you can trace back interactions with other players. But in this game, we never find out if we were right until too late, and the mafia can't kill off people we get right as being town. Also, we don't care if mafia are lynched 5,6,7 as opposed to 1,2,3, as long as they all get lynched. So, maybe starting by looking for who are most likely to be town, and putting them at the bottom of the list, is better.

2) Also, this way this works, I think that maybe we want to eventually agree on a "town list" and have everyone use that, putting people at the top who won't. If we all just have random lists, at first glance, it seems like it would be easier for the scum to manipulate the process.

What do you guys think?

And I am new here, does anyone want to be friends ?

Well, first of all, I hope this is not the longest post we see from you, unless that means you will be posting quite frequently, and won't have much to respond to all at once.

However, how does your playstyle of being quiet go with how it won't help your cause if you are not being pressured? Then again, it won't matter to much in this game, becasue you won't be lynched right away until the game is already over.

For your points:
1. I agree with what you say as true, it doesn't matter as long as the Mafia is all lynched before we are. However, if one scum is thought to be generally town, and most people put them near the bottom of their lists, if they are even the bottom, they will win. Also, the later the mafia are lynched, the more chance they have of being able to have their votes stack and could have them in a larger order than the votes from the town.

2. I am fine with going along with a town list, however as I said right above this, there could be the chance that a scum gets near the bottom of the lists, he could easily outlive and win for the mafia.

opie: What do you think about how serious I take this game?

[Yosarian2]

Shy guy, your normal playstyle may be to be "very quiet", but that just won't cut it this game. All we'll have to go in is what people say today, and that's it. So if you are quiet, then you should and will tend to be fairly high on most people's list of suspects. This is not a game that will reward lurking, methinks.

As for your points, sure, figuring out some people who are especally pro-town would be very helpful, and if we're right it could win the game for us. Any thoughts on how to do that?

[Ectomancer]

Ecto: Why do you think that me asking Max a simple question would link people together so much?

You didn't ask a simple question, you asked him for his reason for singling out andersonw as scum. Either he made the comment randomly (unlikely in my estimation), or he did it for a reason. A reason implies history and the explanation of it would allow me to take that into consideration when analyzing interactions between the two of them. I have different interactions with people I know in real life on this site, as opposed to people I only "know" from playing games here, or don't know at all. Battlemage is (or used to be) a good example. I've played so many games with him, that I don't react at all the same way as someone who hasn't. Earwig is another. I know him in real life, and so know him very well. What some find scummy in him , I find to be Earwig being normal.

Knowing about the relationships between players allows you to make better judgements.

If you do not believe this, why then

would

you ask Max about his comment on andersonw? If you were asking because you were trying to determine whether his comment was suspicious, what are you wanting to get from his response that would allow you to make that determination?

[Nocmen]

Thank you for your response. I understand though is that many players can see other players playstyles after being with them for a bit.

However, if I just went and called someone clearly scum, I would probably be criticized for it. Max did this, and it was somewhat justified in the fact that it was the first post in the random stage of the game. I did not like all of this random crap, so I wanted to see what Max gives as his reason for putting him on the top of the list, regardless of how stupid it really is.

I feel that every answer to my questions allows me to make the best judgements, especially on how their answers reflect on their posting in the game, and how that may or may not change later on.

[Sarcastro]

Allow Max to defend himself. Also cease your attempt to squelch information. I am interested in Max's response. In a game where you attempt to determine guilt from innocence based upon the interactions of other players, understanding that 2 players have a history, and an inkling iof what that history may be is useful information to have when making an sssessment. I view Nocmen's question as a valid attempt to move beyond the random stage.
What is your relationship to Max, Sarcastro?

Sweet Zombie Jesus, am I the only sane person here?

What possible answer could Max give?

It was the

first post of the game

. It is

impossible

for him to have

any

logical reason for voting for Anderson unless he (Max) is scum, which he

obviously

wouldn't admit.

All I did was incredulously ask if Nocmen was asking as absurd a question as it seemed he was - I certainly didn't think people would start arguing that it wasn't an absurd question. I don't see what it has to do with squelching information or personal histories, either. And I especially don't see how you can see a nonsensical question as moving us beyond the random voting stage.

Nocmen, your question still makes no sense. Why does it matter what reason Max gives, when it necessarily must be a reason that has no bearing on the game?

[Shy Guy]

Yosarian2, I try and have lots of content in my posts without dithering and speak only when I have something good to say, if possible. Are you saying you would construe that as suspicious lurking? The answer to your second question will likely vary for each of us, just as it would had you asked how we are to go about looking for mafia.

Opie, why must we go about finding scum? Why not go about finding town? Why would town players evidence themselves in one activity and not the other?

[Yosarian2]

Yosarian2, I try and have lots of content in my posts without dithering and speak only when I have something good to say, if possible. Are you saying you would construe that as suspicious lurking? The answer to your second question will likely vary for each of us, just as it would had you asked how we are to go about looking for mafia.

Well, that depends on how often you "have something good to say", heh. If you don't post content at least once every few days, then yeah, I would generally consider that as suspicious lurking.

I just wanted to mention that, because I was a bit worried that line in first post might have been something of a pre-emtive defence to allow you to lurk later in the game, if that makes sense.

Opie, why must we go about finding scum? Why not go about finding town? Why would town players evidence themselves in one activity and not the other?

Well...discussing who you think is pro-town is useful, and in this game especally it's certanly something I want to hear about. That being said, quite often, the reactions you get when person A accuses person B of being scum, person B defends himself, and other people react to that situation, are often more explosive and informative then the reactions you might get if person A said "person B is giving me a bit of a pro-town vibe".

[Sarcastro]

Sarc is giving me a bit of a pro-town vibe.

[Yosarian2]

Sarc is giving me a bit of a pro-town vibe.

Liar!

[VanDamien]

Also, this way this works, I think that maybe we want to eventually agree on a "town list" and have everyone use that, putting people at the top who won't. If we all just have random lists, at first glance, it seems like it would be easier for the scum to manipulate the process.

I've been playing with the idea that instead of a "town list", we should be able to come up with a plan where everyone's lists are different, but in some sort of pattern that guarantees a town win. Maybe the set-up isn't breakable like that, I'm not sure as I haven't put any serious number-crunching into it yet.

[Max]

I was simply making a random vote I moved a few players, but from the first post of the game what else am I meant to do? I was also trying out spelling all the names right. first post of the game always starts with a random vote. To be honest I think that it's probably going to waste town an early lynch at the beginning, and if you want my opinion it's fairly scummy to ask questions against people in the first page of the game when the PIQ is the very first one.

[Mr Stoofer]

Oman replaces Adele

[opie]

Shy Guy, my point is that we need to focus on finding scum, that way, pro-town players will surface. If we ignore finding scum, I'm not sure how you propose we find the more pro-town players.

Van Damien, I think I understand what you are saying but I have no idea how that would work.

[Nocmen]

I was simply making a random vote I moved a few players, but from the first post of the game what else am I meant to do? I was also trying out spelling all the names right. first post of the game always starts with a random vote. To be honest I think that it's probably going to waste town an early lynch at the beginning, and if you want my opinion it's fairly scummy to ask questions against people in the first page of the game when the PIQ is the very first one.

So you are questioning my strategy of asking all the questions I would have during the course of the game straight away?

[Sarcastro]

Personally, I'm questioning your strategy of blatant distancing.

[Nocmen]

Personally, I'm questioning your strategy of blatant distancing.

Good for you. I don't see it as distancing.

Also, VD's idea: It may be possible, It would take some serious number crunching, but theres just something I don't trust regarding how it could all work out in the end that could make us certainly predict what would occur.