Epignosis wrote:I just found out yesterday that Sam McDonald is still alive.
...Despite your best efforts?
Return to “Omertà Mafia [Day 6]”
Epignosis wrote:I just found out yesterday that Sam McDonald is still alive.
In fairness to you, I am a badass.Missing Person wrote:I honestly never had a scumread on you. I should've pushed based on LC's suspicion of you once I felt he was cleared. But it never came to mind for me, so that's 100% hindsight.
You played well, and I was concerned you might eventually turn your attentions to me.Missing Person wrote:I'm particularly proud that I found a way to improve this game.
-Didn't tunnel on Golden, was right not to.
-Managed to sort him and Long Con out before I went nuts on them.
-Caught MP07's forced response quick, responded late.
I definitely liked this format. If it's cool, I may run this at JTM sometime.
I was playing DnD with Epi one lynch, and just told him to kill DREAM in the lynch post :PHedgeowl wrote:Yes ^wss. It was good tactic on the your part to throw us off though. Also when they came in so fast, it had to be from an active player, but I didn't put DH in that role until too late.fingersplints wrote:I agree with this. I found it hard to keep track with the times changing, and missed a lot of votes. But I did enjoy the speed aspect of it at the same time.DharmaHelper wrote:That's what I would change. Standard end times for the day/night.
I was banking on the bullshit poll times fucking with at least one person :PTinyBubbles wrote:good intuition -_- i was out all day at my cousin's wedding, had no time to voteDharmaHelper wrote:At that point, I was confident we'd already won. I figured Tiny Bubbles wouldn't vote, and worst case scenario it would be 3-3. I didn't get the impression that Epi would want to stretch out the game by breaking the tie in the civs favor.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Epignosis, if you were to create another game like this, is there anything you would change? I'm curious how it all panned out from your point of view.
Linki: Yeah Golden, I was starting to come on to DH. I managed to let myself get distracted though. And of course, my vote was the clincher.
I tend to go into cruise control if I think I've won.
At that point, I was confident we'd already won. I figured Tiny Bubbles wouldn't vote, and worst case scenario it would be 3-3. I didn't get the impression that Epi would want to stretch out the game by breaking the tie in the civs favor.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Epignosis, if you were to create another game like this, is there anything you would change? I'm curious how it all panned out from your point of view.
Linki: Yeah Golden, I was starting to come on to DH. I managed to let myself get distracted though. And of course, my vote was the clincher.
Good intuition.Golden wrote:What I should have done, though... was take one vote on the chin and used one more post to respond to DH's allegation that it was 'last day fuckery' - which for me cemented the fact he was bad. I could have taken the vote, knowing DH had already voted for hedge, but I didn't think it through.
(I would have been all out for you tomorrow, DH, but I also have a feeling I would have been NKed if we'd successfully lynched splints).
Might have been a miscalculation on our part, but I think it would have been a scummier looking lynch if a civ had been lynched.Golden wrote:I should have known you guys bussed MP when it all came out of nowhere.Neverwhere wrote:I just wanted to win so badly just so I could laugh at you again Golden
Some people took that too literally.MovingPictures07 wrote:Shhhhhhhhhhh.
We did, but I also thought it could be LC :Pfingersplints wrote:I thought we killed llama because we thought it was him?
Had I addressed any of your points, it would have been too clear you were making good points.Hedgeowl wrote:Right? DH was great at ignoring everything I posted, but still sounding like he was the all confidant civ.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Ohmygod, Golden and Hedgie suddenly trust each other! Let's lynch 'em!
What you're saying makes sense, and I think we're six of one, half dozen of the other as far as this lynch goes. I felt a hedge vote was our best shot as I've been consistently seeing baddie hedge, so we'll see.Golden wrote:I think hedge is betting splints comes back bad and you lynch me tomorrow, based on her post, yes.
But honestly, if you see it from my point of view (knowing I'm civilian) and look at the vote train for MP - I think that primarily because unless MP was bussed it's the only correct answer.
The only other possibility is that either you, TB, or neverwhere is bad and:
MovingPictures07
5
TinyBubbles (3), Missing Person (4), DharmaHelper (6), Neverwhere (7), thellama73 (8)
36%
Neverwhere
0
No votes
thellama73
4
MovingPictures07 (5), Metalmarsh89 (9), Elohcin (12), Hedgeowl (14)
I mean, I guess Neverwhere could be bad, that's possible. TB and you don't seem that likely based on vote order.
I'd be fairly happy to go splints but since you have already gone hedge, I'm going to wait to see what others have to say.
2
So you think Hedge/Splints are just betting that we lynch one of them and take the other as a civ, which will clear the way for them to win?Golden wrote:That's actually a pretty good case on splints.
Dunno where you get your case on me from at all, except perhaps that we both voted for you and it's just a no u. If splints is bad for seeing my civ game, then I suppose everyone else is too.
But you've given me pause for thought, at least....
But here is what I think happened... you guys can win if you just get ONE civilian lynch.
So, get civ cred by taking out splints, and then you look better.
TB, Neverwhere and DH all voted for MP. I don't think there is any evidence he was bussed. I know I'm not bad. So to my mind, the three baddies are splints, MM, hedge.
1
It wouldn't have saved DreamTurnip Head wrote:In my defense I had no idea I was starting a bandwagon.
splintsy's vote looks bad, because it ensured that no one but DREAM will be lynched (excepting me posting too much and accruing extra votes) despite the fact that she does not see the case on DREAM.
DREAM if you vote for me it will be a tie because of my punishment votes!
linki: DH y u not vote for me to save DREAM
Well, as long as you're convinced the group that is most suspicious is the one without you in it, I'm not sure how anyone can possibly disagree with that logic.Hedgeowl wrote:Golden wrote:I'm not surprised to discover LC is good. He read that way to me. The paranoia in me goes 'was that kill DH, or to frame DH' - I feel sure it's one or the other.
I was reading Elo as civ for the first time ever . and then she didn't vote...
The thing that really stood out for me was how many missing votes there were on day 2. Really? These people voted (in this order)
ika
MP
MM
TH
Golden
Missing P
Neverwhere
Long Con
DH
Llama
That means no votes from:
DREAM
Elohcin
fingersplints
Hedgeowl
TinyBubbles
OK, thats less bad than I thought when I see it like that. But still, when someone is lynched with only 3 votes, 5 votes is a significant chunk. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of these were people who felt absolutely no compelling reason to vote. And that, at least, is one reason to feel sort of ok about TH (since I would find it hard to categorise ika's lynch as a save). But, I mean, with four baddies the results are far too easy to manipulate with so many people missing. I don't expect me can catch baddies unless we are all voting!
Hmm, and interesting, DH makes a big case on elo and LC being teammates. Proving LC is civilian by NKing him might be a good way to take heat off elo, so perhaps she is bad.
Well, I don't think it does, but I thought you might have painted it that way on day one. But you didn't. It's sort of in the past now anyway, I'm feeling better about you now.Missing Person wrote:I'm not seeing how this links you to LC, care to fill me in? It was more like, "I think one of you two are scum, I don't see a plausible scenario where both of you are." I think I said exactly that in perhaps my 3rd post of Day 1?Golden wrote:I still tend to think, though, that my 'filler' may have contributed to Missing Person linking me to LC, despite him wanting to claim the thing was useless. (Which is funny. Cos personally, I think that catching something going down like that is EXACTLY why that post is not useless.)
Also, I'm feeling pretty ok about Neverwhere right now.
I'm pretty anti these rainbow lists, but in a game with so few players and so few posts its a good way to get my thoughts across, so here goes. Lets call red 'top suspects', orange 'very wary', yellow 'I don't fully trust you', green 'I have no read', blue 'I trust you', (f**k indigo), and violet is golden, because I get to mess with the spectrum like that.
Look, it's an actual rainbow!
Elohcin
Hedgeowl
TH
MP
MM
Missing P
DREAM
splints
TinyBubbles
DH
Neverwhere
Llama
Golden
See you all in the morning, since now the poll closes after I wake
1
The Day 2 voters I think are the group where we would have at least 3 baddies. Although today's lynch will be telling for sure.
MP
MM
TH
Golden
Missing P
Neverwhere
DH
Llama
That means no votes from: (I think it likely that in this group we will fine more inactive civs, but maybe 1 baddie.)
DREAM
Elohcin
fingersplints
Hedgeowl
TinyBubbles
I also disagree that people with no compelling reason to vote are more likely bad. Civs have way less motivation than baddies to vote. A team creates social expectation of participation, is more organized, etc. than single civs or indies with no organization and penalty for missing a vote. Also, who have we lynched so far? low hanging fruit of inactive unhelpful civs, perfect baddie targets. Just sayin'
NO! YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BRING POSTS TO THE THREAD, NOT DESTROY IT! IT WAS SAID YOU WOULD LYNCH NON PARTICIPATORS, NOT JOIN THEM!Turnip Head wrote:Sorry guys, I have not taken this game seriously at all. Just pretend I'm on the sideline and that will helpfully narrow the field of people you need to be looking at in order to lynch a baddie today. I'm just here for the peace and quiet.
Once upon a time and long ago, I was chewed out big time for commenting like such on the Night Kills. Since then, I have been psychologically programmed to be wary of anybody offering commentary that the NK targets are "odd" "weird" or "interesting". Hedgeping.Hedgeowl wrote:I will say that the Nk targets are interesting. Someone is taking out the vets. I almost suspect Llama for his "omg my buddie died" schtick, but he and I have a horrible history of reading each other despite his HedgeBaddie nickname for me. But it makes me wonder who would be the ones to take out Roxy and LC? Roxy can read some people particularly well and I wonder who was so threatened by her.
I know that it is the latter, not the former. You see,"L"atter and "L"ast start with L. "F"ormer and "F"irst, start with F. I know this next bit is gonna sound a touch meta, but you made a whole meta post so I'm sure you'll appreciate this: I do not tend to NK people for going after me, to avoid this exact type of discussion. I am of the school of thought that I can handle a majority of the suspicion thrown at me by someone, and spirited in-thread defense over a long period of nights looks much better than a NK. Not to mention I was in the process of linking Eloh and LC together, as well as my vote for LC yesterday. Whomever it was that killed LC, if it was in fact even a frame job (Missing Persons has an alternate idea about why the kill took place), it was a poor one. Made by someone who does not understand my style.I'm not surprised to discover LC is good. He read that way to me. The paranoia in me goes 'was that kill DH, or to frame DH' - I feel sure it's one or the other.
"No compelling reason to vote", or no comepelling reason to take a stand by picking into a civ lynch. Could be any number of the non-voting crew are too afraid, in a game like this, to hitch their wagon to any one suspect or lynch. No voting record means less to analyze, easier to blend in. They've also got a team of voters, so one vote won't break their bank. Just some devil-advocating.Golden wrote:OK, thats less bad than I thought when I see it like that. But still, when someone is lynched with only 3 votes, 5 votes is a significant chunk. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of these were people who felt absolutely no compelling reason to vote. And that, at least, is one reason to feel sort of ok about TH (since I would find it hard to categorise ika's lynch as a save). But, I mean, with four baddies the results are far too easy to manipulate with so many people missing. I don't expect me can catch baddies unless we are all voting!
Yeah, that post pricked my ears way back up with MP. Way back in Day 1 he did one of the things I was watching for baddies to do, which was asking questions/directly engaging people with little or no posts left. His response to that was kind of "Doh, yeah oops.", but I let it go. Now the case against him grows, and I am happy to revisit that suspect.thellama73 wrote: MovingPictures07
In like of Ika's flip, less happy here too. This post reeks of insincerity.
Then again, stuff like this sketches me out. A low-flying player, popping up to basically stroke llama's ego and vote immediately for MP.... smells off, but maybe I'm reading too deeply into it. Eye on Bub's for now.TinyBubbles wrote:^i'm a good guy llama, also I'm gonna take your reading of MP on faith and vote him, I'm assuming you know his regular post style better I do. Sorry to everyone for not posting much BTW, just been busy and also am unsure what to contribute.
That's word for word what you said. You asked me if I was worried about being killed for saying I had thought of strategies to catch mafia.I didn't accuse you having a fear of being nightkilled
Very little evidence indeed. So, you've got some big ideas of how to catch Mafia, eh? But wait, what if the baddies kill you for saying that? Aren't you - - worried about that?
Ah I see. When I mentioned I had plans to catch mafia using the game's mechanics, you shat your pants and wanted to scare me into revealing those plans so you and your team could avoid doing the things I was watching out for? That's the only reason I can think of for you going from this:Interesting plan, but I don't suspect you for lack of plan. You could have thought of that plan after I accused you, I have no way of knowing. My original judgment - that you were just trying to seed cred for yourself by mentioning a plan - still stands. And you're my most likely vote today. I know that kind of stubbornness must be frustrating, but I'd just rather be stubborn and wrong, than to back down when I was right. I'm sure you understand.
To this:So, what is it about Omertà Mafia that gave you not only one, but *a few* new strategies to try and catch Mafia? It's a pretty basic game, with the one big difference... talking about 4 posts per page, of course. So, I'm really interested how this setup has given you this number of ideas.
I'll lay it out because talk ain't cheap here. You are being dishonest about the ideas you say you have. It's a Mafia ploy. And that's terrible.
Interesting plan, but I don't suspect you for lack of plan. You could have thought of that plan after I accused you, I have no way of knowing. My original judgment - that you were just trying to seed cred for yourself by mentioning a plan - still stands
That reads to me as Eloh defending LC and then leaving the door open with the "oh but he could be tricking me" comment.Elohcin wrote:I don't see the case on LC. As of right now, i am thinking civ on him and I don't see the waffling that Missing Person pointed out about him.
@ llama - can you tell me why you think LC is bad? I know he has a way of tricking me so if I'd like to hear your thoughts.
I think it's very frustrating that Rico was civ. I mean, why come into a game and act like that and be lynched. Help out your team, man! Others who have not been contributing/helpful (Ika is who comes to my mind right off the bat), if you are civ, please be helpful with your posts and act like you care so we don't have another mislynch.
Eloh names 3, count 'em, 3 suspects before her vote on TH. Myself and Llama who have been contributing in different ways, and then Ika, a (sorry but its true) Non/low contributor. Further evidence that Eloh's suspicions and her votes are disingenuous. First she agreed with TH for a case he never made, and now she is voting for TH for not contributing EVEN THOUGH she expressed concern that lynching non-contributors would lead to continued mislynches as was the case with Rico. No me gusta. No me gusta MUCHO.Elohcin wrote:So, DH, Llama, and Ika are on my radar. But then I decided to look back at TH's posts b/c of Golden and I encourage all of you to click on this link:
http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/search ... 8&sr=posts
I am voting TH today. I don't know how he thinks he can get away with posts like this in such a quiet game.
Indeed, a time-honoured tradition for the bold and evil. I'm not doing that though; I am a Civilian.[/quote]Long Con wrote:First of all, I'm currently playing 90's Kids Mafia on Jesus Toast Mafia, hosted by Missing Person himself. He is a very involved host, and I now currently reside in the Dead Players' Area, where Missing Person is a high poster. I was and am pretty sure that MP could handle a little barb, and, well, I thought he handled it quite well:DharmaHelper wrote:@LC - Firstly, I was put off by the rudeness of your post here: http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 40#p145811
Having known you for some time I can get your sarcasm/jokes/ribbing, but Missing Person and some of these other players are playing with you for the first time, I expect? Maybe I’m reading too deeply into it, but you really fired back at Missing Person there, and I’m not sure it was called for.
I LOL'ed.Missing Person wrote:Oh snap, my first putdown on this site. I'm actually pretty aroused by this.
And anyways, it wasn't even an insult. It was simply an analysis of the situation. Missing Person read my post and believed I had said that I was voting for DH for being too helpful. There are two reasons I can think of for that to happen: a) he read my post and didn't comprehend what I had said (aka a "reading comprehension issue"), or b) he understood what I meant just fine, and was trying to twist my words to make it look like I was flip-flopping. If he wants to let me know that it was Option B then I'll take back what I said, but I doubt he would admit to doing that. So... Option A, no insult, just an analysis of the situation. You're being too sensitive, DH. If it's rude to say that, then I claim an equal level of offence at being called a "flip-flopper". I do not respect flip-flopping, and it upsets me slightly to be accused of such a thing, especially when it's not even true.
And furthermore, I smiled when I said it. Like that. It's like a signal that says "This is friendly". If I was trying to be a dick, I would have used maybe.
First of all, don't tell me what I "should know". It just makes me more suspicious of you. You don't know how I read you, how I analyze you, and how I remember your post play in games. You know how YOU do these things, but the things I know, remember, and analyze are not going to be the same as you. And I didn't accuse you having a fear of being nightkilled, I accused you of saying something that could make you a target to the Mafia without saying much else.As for your comments about me, I’ll forgive your obvious oversight, because you are historically bad at catching mafia compared to me*, but if I *TOLD* the mafia what I was looking for in order to catch them, they wouldn’t fucking do it would they, big guy? Am I worried about being NKed? No more so than I would be in any other game. I’m NKed more than lynched by a wide margin. I’m not going to let fear of being NKed affect my strategy though, and you should know that.
So you have a plan. Something up your sleeve. "A few ideas and strategies in order to try and catch mafia".
Your last sentence is almost ironic, given that this entire post really says nothing valuable.DharmaHelper wrote:An interesting game conceptually and one that will play counter to my usual strengths. I think that early-game will be particularly difficult, given that there will be very little evidence to go on (even less than a usual early-game.) I have a few ideas and strategies in order to try and catch mafia, so we'll see how that plays out. For now, I'll be carefully watching to see who is posting the least valuable information and go from there.
So, what is it about Omertà Mafia that gave you not only one, but *a few* new strategies to try and catch Mafia? It's a pretty basic game, with the one big difference... talking about 4 posts per page, of course. So, I'm really interested how this setup has given you this number of ideas.
I'll lay it out because talk ain't cheap here. You are being dishonest about the ideas you say you have. It's a Mafia ploy. And that's terrible.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++Missing Person, could you explain what +Insightful means? I'm not familiar with that.Missing Person wrote:+InsightfulLong Con wrote: but this one looks like a much more intentional misread of what I said. It's pretty clear that I think DH is bullshitting for some time or cred by saying he has some "ideas on how to catch Mafia" in this game, without actually saying any more. If that were true, then the Mafia would be smart to kill him before he gives his big ideas... so that would make it not smart of him to tell everyone that he's got those big ideas. But he did. He did because he's not afraid of being nightkilled. And there's only 3 players in the game that don't have to fear a nightkill.
+A Double Insightful!Long Con wrote:... and this site does have Multiquote capabilities. When Replying, simply click "Quote" from the Topic Review below, and that post will slam on up into your reply within Quote tags. Not the most ideal multiquote, but it's better than nothing.
I take it that it was accusatory. Is it shorthand that is meant to identify when Mafia add insight to the thread to try and seem Civ?
Mafia hiding out in the open, essentially. It's been done before as the "So obvious it's too obvious" play.Long Con wrote:WTF is "Mafia in-thread communications"? Are you assuming the Mafia doesn't have BTSC, Missing Person? I've never seen that accusation before.
I justified my vote for you IN MY VOTE POST.Elohcin wrote:This was stated right before he was lynched. Then right after the lynch, DH piggybacks by saying this.Ricochet wrote:???Elohcin wrote:That said, I can see your case on DH as having validityTurnip Head wrote:Nobody's here.
I don't think he actually had a reason to vote me and he stole this later to justify his vote.DharmaHelper wrote:
Other Thoughts:
To clarify my Eloh vote, since I was rushed and had just woken up: I found her post to be suspicious because she said she thought TH’s case on me had merit, when TH hadn’t built anything close to resembling a case. He’d just voted for me.
Anyway...looking back at TH's posts, I clearly made a mistake about who made the case on DH. I do remember reading one though .
1
It's not a problem. Actually the first thing I thought of when I saw the game mechanics was that my usual baddie hunting style would be cut off at the knees, lol. The 4-Post restriction definitely cuts down on conversation, but I'm confident that we can find a happy medium. As I said in my other post, MM basically forced himself into that situation, and so I don't suspect you for it as much as I would have if he'd had 3 or even 2 posts remaining.MovingPictures07 wrote:Oops, duly noted, DH. I totally forgot that asking questions will lose a lot of purpose here, I didn't even think of that while I asked it.
ika, why do you think that? (you don't have to answer in a separate post, I suppose)
This game is insanely restrictive to me; I can't handle it. I'll just post this one more time I guess and will have to post all of my reads and make my final vote with my last post.