The Syndicate

Long Con wrote:Cool game! We (the Police-baddies) knew my time was likely up when the PI (Llama) checked me and sent the cops a message that I was bad. I thought I could maybe take Llama down and at least kill the PI before everyone turned on me, but I pushed too hard and people got suspicious of me. Timmer, had you alignment-checked me?

Either way, at least my death got us the PI. As soon as we knew the PI knew my identity, we just watched for someone coming after me in the thread. Once we determined it was Llama (after a cross-reference with his eloquent and interesting PM communications to the police confirming it was him), we had to recruit or kill him. Luckily for him, he was recruitable.

MovingPictures07 wrote: I had the mass modkill mechanism in mind from the beginning, but never did I imagine the kills would be THAT much, especially in the final challenge. I honestly expected some inactivity due to the twisted nature of the game, even though I still thought it was relatively uncomplicated (almost no one had powers), but not quite to the degree it was there.

Black Rock wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Black Rock-Tyler

iirc, recruit order:

me, Russ, DH, LC, Daisy, Hedge, Unfurl, llama, Bullz

This recruit order is correct. Black Rock recruited every night.

I want to just say why each person was recruited. I only could recruit by location at first. I started with SVS and I wanted her on my team. She is very smart and good at being evil. I chose Russ because I didn't know Russ at all. There would be no connection. DH came to my town and I knew DH would love to be recruited. I didn't know people suspected him already at the time. I recruited LC to show off my role, it was better than his. That never happens. We got BTSC at this point so we found out all the rest of the police so the next moves we made was to eliminate the threat since they already got DH. It only took me so long to get Unfurl because I needed to get rid of the police threat. I wanted Unfurl for the same reasons I wanted SVS. After llama took down LC it was either kill or recruit him, he was better as a recruit because no one would suspect him. Bullz was recruited while I was out of town, SVS Facebooked me for approval, I thought it was a good idea. That was our very awesome team. I was very proud of them. They never screwed up with non-participating or anything.

I'm sorry I had to be so absent the last bit of the game but I had to put the possibility of making tons of money ahead of mafia. I literally was in the middle of nowhere and a 4 day concert. I forgot my password to this site and then with 25,000 people with cell phones my network sucked. I worked from 9am until 3 am. I just couldn't do it. It was not an excuse at all and it did effect my game play.

To our dear host, I have never had so many as answers. It was an awesome evil game. Thanks for putting up with my endless PM's and forgetfulness. I have never had such an awesome, complex role. I have never played recruitment, I have always hosted it. It was such a new different experience. Thank you for trusting me with this role.

thellama73 wrote:What I don't understand is why people were following my (basically random) vote for Dom. Given the fact that he flipped unrecruited civ, I think it looks bad. Furthermore, no one even gave a reason for following me.

Long Con wrote:I should vote now, could be my last chance. Not too sure about who's guilty here, so I vote Dom, because I think I owe him one.

That makes no sense.

As far as I can tell, Boogs gave no rationale for his vote at all.

Can you two explain your votes? Because I think they both look pretty shady.

bea wrote:LC, that makes a ton of sense what I understood of it. I think I got the basics, but when things turned into a math formula I kinda went numb in the brainz.

Now that DH has been killed by the police and Project Mayham killed INH - I notice - they are not consecutive night killings. I wonder if something has to be achieved to earn a kill? Or if there's some way kills have been blocked on the nights where there is no kill? Or a limit on kills? Dunno...just seems odd to me.

So many things to work out. *aspody head*

thellama73 wrote:Hey guys, just got back from my trip (Mongoose says hi) and I will try to catch up tomorrow. Tired now.

One thing I iwll say now is that I do not like the way the Dom lynch went down, and I will be looking into several people because of it. Good night!

Long Con wrote:Ok, here is Long Con's Grand Unified Theory Of How Fighting Works. From what I've read, a lot of people know some things about fighting, so I thought over what I know about it, and here's my theory. There are several elements that seem to affect fights. I hope I'm allowed to talk about them all, but from what I have seen, the 'possibly secret' parts have already been pretty well discussed.

1. Fighting Level - we all (I assume) started with a fighting level. I further assume that most of us started at level 1, and that winning increases your level. People who have won can confirm or deny that, if they're allowed. I also assume that a higher fighting level means you're a better fighter. A level 1 fighter CAN beat a level 2 fighter, I had that host confirmed.

2. Individual Challenge - fighters each get to have a personal challenge against their opponent, which, when judged to win by an independent party, assists them in their fight.

3. The Unknown Factor - some base decision-making thing that is somewhat random, or, even better, players earn without knowing it. I already gave my opinion of what I thought would make sense: the amount a person posts during their fight.

4. Ummm.. I was thinking it over in the car, and I thought I had four factors, but I can't remember what the other factor might have been. Maybe there was only three.

So, it's something like this: (# of posts during the fight + winner of fight-challenge gets ten points) x fighting level = your fight outcome. The player with the higher outcome wins the fight. The greater the difference between the outcomes, the greater the injury to the loser. Too great a difference, and they die.

And that's my theory.

Mister Rearranger wrote:^Glad to see you again as well, Russ!

See, I'm just of the opposite perspective. Eliminating BTSC between a baddie team essentially makes them all SKs for the purposes of in-thread behavior. Personally, I tend to have a better track record with suspecting solo baddies; however, I can never convince enough other players to believe me lol

I like SVS's notion of a baddie leader that simply PMs anonymous instructions to his cronies, regardless of if it's true or not. Just sounds like it'd be a cool role and make for an entertaining game.

juliets wrote:i just looked at the post count because I could not remember if metalmarsh had said anything and discovered boogs has only posted once in this thread. Boogs, where are you? Why are you not joining in discussions? You are not normally quiet. There are several others who are not joining us too - DP 2.0 for one. Take a look at the list yourselves and see who we need to encourage.

nijuukyugou wrote:I'm gonna forget to vote if I don't do it now, and I certainly don't want to be modkilled I've read some arguments but I feel rather confused by most of them at the moment. (I blame it on vacation brain.) The one that does stand out to me is the case on Vomps. Not terribly strong, but what is on what is really a "Day 2" kind of vote? I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been good. I've ignored Vomps before, and he's been bad. Yeah, he has his moments of lucidity, but he has been a bit more on point with this game than I've noticed in others (especially those he turned out to be good), and it seems others have noticed this, too. I'm not gung-ho about the choice, but I feel stronger about voting him than anyone else at the moment.

Keterman wrote:I'm curious as to why no one's voted vompatti yet. Is it normal over here for a strong yet failed lynch to garner no votes for quite a while the following day?

Leamiteo wrote:Also my view 'first unread post' is not functioning as it should...I just realized tonight that I had skipped a page and a half earlier because of it. Help? Anyone?

thellama73 wrote:

S~V~S wrote:Yeah. But I thought he was talking about Hedge & Boom, and addressing it to you & Unfurl?

I am so confused, lololol

He said that people who hadn't fought before and were at level 1 were very unlikely to kill each other, and I was just pointing out that it has happened before.

timmer wrote: To touch on my reasons for choosing Boomslang and Hedge today to fight, I notice a few people declaring those two to be confirmed civs earlier. IF my theory about Tyler is correct, then my short list of names are simply players who cannot be TYLER. It says nothing about them being recruits to Project Mayhem. AT ALL. A few of you need to realize this. It's entirely possible that in trying to keep Tyler from getting stronger, we're handing one or two of his recruits a chance at the same thing.

bea wrote:

birdwithteeth11 wrote:

timmer wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey everyone! I am sorry, I hate being late, but I have been so busy today!! And I am still spending time with my family for my birthday (and while I still can, since I will be leaving in a week). I promise I will get the post up as soon as I can! But it might not be until sometime tomorrow.

*votes MP*

Better idea: We spike his cake with laxatives.

While that sounds like a great idea, I'm skerred he'd actually share the cake.

Having been with MP last weekend, I can vouch for the fact that he does indeed share cake. Beware, partiers!

thellama73 wrote:

Bullzeye wrote:

thellama73 wrote:If you guys still think Bullz or Vompatti are bad, I would be willing to fight either of them and try to kill them.

And I suppose you'd be doing this favour to us all out of the goodness of your heart and not for any personal gain like an increase in fighting skill?

I don't see any reason it can't be both.

unfurl wrote:

Russtifinko wrote:I think that Hedge and Boomslang sound like great ideas. timer's idea on that seems super intelligent to me. Why risk leveling up baddies when we have perfectly good civswho need a boost?

Voting.

How and why, do you really think they are good civs so easily based in a theory?

There is only one mafia this game, I think they are the only ones who can be so sure everyone else that is not with them are civvies

am I just the only one, who does not get why sometimes people can so easily trust others?

Good point, unfurl, and also remember that if two civs fine, only one of them will get a boost. The other will be worse off.