Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Remalle]

'For the good of the town' is a silly rhetorical phrase and it has no place in mafia. There are only straightforward arguments free of fluff. Saying things like 'for the good of the town' makes me think that you're trying to make a crappy argument better by throwing in irrelevant rhetorical flourishes and it makes me think you're trying to look town without scumhunting, which is a legitimately suspicious thing to do.

Ok, I see your point.  Thanks for the advice.

K, so, after reading back I don't see anybody arousing my suspicion more than Dracon already has.  So, I'm going to keep my vote on you.
Dracon.  If you were on the side of mafia, how would you choose your targets in the beginning, mid-, and end-games?

[Jim Groovester]

He was mesmerised by my avatar.


You are feeling veeeeryyy sleeeeepyyyyy. You want to tell me if you are a scum or a townie....


*fingers crossed*

This is pointless.

That sounds really fun.

This is also pointless.

Damnit, at least at this early period you SHOULD suspect everybody. Force them to talk more, and they might let slip something that helps you guess who it is.


Inb4 one of the two mafiosos somehow gets killed in the first day and it turns out to be whoever has least votes against them atm.

You don't have to play like a paranoid wreck in this game by suspecting everybody right from the outset. You also run into problems where you don't have anything to suspect anyone for.

Shark: I don't, I just think he is town, though I guess we'll find out shortly. My other suspicion is that it's Dsarker + ShoesandHats, since Shoes voted for Dsarker then unvoted without giving an opinion on it, as if he wanted to seem like they weren't allies. They're now both trying to lynch drakon136, as well.

Calling scumteams early tends to work out very poorly for anybody who does it.

Instead of trying to pin people by whatever interactions they have with people that you consider scummy, just pin people for the things they do on their own. Individual scum tells, instead of scumteam tells. Only once one scum has flipped is it a good idea to start raking through his interactions to see what does, or more likely, doesn't come up.

[Caz]

Jim[/n]: Right.

Imo it's a little hard to know who to vote for on round 1, because nothing has happened yet and all we really have is a bit of meaningless banter to decide from.

[Orangebottle]

Dsarker() -
Remalle(1) - Caz,
Shoesandhats() -
Shark() -
Caz(1) - Shark,
Andrew456() -
drakon136(3) - Andrew456, Dsarker, Remalle,
Jim Groovester() -
Toaster() -

Not Voting(4) - Shoesandhats, drakon136, Jim Groovester, Toaster.
The day ends tomorrow, October 21, at 5:00 PM GMT.

[Dsarker]

Shoesandhats

Why aren't you voting? Do you suspect anyone yet?

[Caz]

Shoesandhats

Why aren't you voting? Do you suspect anyone yet?

Trying to draw suspicion away from your partner? drakon136, Jim and Toaster also haven't voted.

[Dsarker]

Oh, yes.

Jim

Especially you. Why haven't you voted? You're an experienced player. What has caused you to decide to bypass lynching this turn?

[ShoesandHats]

The reason I haven't voted yet is because I don't want to accidentally lynch a townie, even if that almost always happens on the first day. If I have to vote for someone, I guess I'd go with Drakon. He has been acting somewhat suspicious.

[Toaster]

Dsarker:

Additional: It would also be good to occasionally throw doubt on the person who started the vote if you hit a townie with a lynch. Of course, that only works if you position the doubts before the lynching and yet also don't cause enough doubt that it makes people stop lynching them.

This is a bad reason to suspect someone.  If someone had a solid case on a person who flipped town, that does not make them scummy.  Someone being on the vote with poor reasons, especially if it was a late or tiebreaker vote- that is a reason to suspect someone.

I meant that as the scum, I would do this.

I understand that.  I'm saying that as scum OR town, this is a bad thing to do.  This is meant as advice to everyone here.


ShoesandHats:

Sorry for not posting in a while. School and all. In response to all the people asking me my reason for it, I'm voting for Dsarker...Well, actually, since the roleblocker question incident, he hasn't acted very scummy. Hopefully you guys won't go lynching me just because I'm withdrawing my vote for him. Drakon is indeed acting a bit evasive, though I'm not going to vote for him unless he gets a bit more suspicious.

If you want to unvote someone, you have to specifically do so by saying "Unvote PlayerName" in red.

Also, there's no reason for that next-to-last sentence.  It makes you look worried about your vote.

The reason I haven't voted yet is because I don't want to accidentally lynch a townie, even if that almost always happens on the first day. If I have to vote for someone, I guess I'd go with Drakon. He has been acting somewhat suspicious.

This is a great place to give examples.  Without them, this reasoning is meaningless.


Jim:  Fair enough.


Caz:

What do you think about it? Is he new or scummy? Both? Neither?

How about some definitive opinions, man.

Well, he seemed scummy about how he backed off from scumhunting when others were asking him what he was doing, like he didn't want to draw attention to himself. But... it just seems too obvious. I'm gonna go with the opinion that he is town. It also feels like I'd just be going with the bandwagon of suspicion if I changed my vote to him now.

It's not a bandwagon if you back up your vote with good reasons.

In general, you shouldn't be worried about doing something that may look suspect like you said you were- if your reasoning behind doing something (like voting someone with several votes already) is solid, then it's a perfectly valid action.

Shark: I don't, I just think he is town, though I guess we'll find out shortly. My other suspicion is that it's Dsarker + ShoesandHats, since Shoes voted for Dsarker then unvoted without giving an opinion on it, as if he wanted to seem like they weren't allies. They're now both trying to lynch drakon136, as well.

99% of the time, you shouldn't try to be building scum teams this early on.  Weigh each person on their individual actions, instead of how they act as a group.  Once you are certain someone is scum after they're lynched, you can look back for incriminating connections.  Your case on a person should still be able to stand on its own, however.

[ShoesandHats]

Caz

If you were scum, how would you try to protect your partner if he was under suspicion?

Dsarker

If you're a townie, how would you avoid getting killed by the scum?

[Dsarker]

Shoesandhats

I'm not sure how you could, other than trying to lynch them first. It just seems to me that we townies are just ablative armour for a huge piece of artillery, and sometimes we get hit by the enemy, sometimes we have a malfuction, sometimes we self destruct.

[Jim Groovester]

Oh, yes.

Jim

Especially you. Why haven't you voted? You're an experienced player. What has caused you to decide to bypass lynching this turn?

Because you're all noobs and it's hard to tell the noobtown from the noobscum if you all have no idea what you're supposed to be doing.

Caz

If you were scum, how would you try to protect your partner if he was under suspicion?

Dsarker

If you're a townie, how would you avoid getting killed by the scum?

You have silly notions of what it means to be town and scum.

If you're scum and your partner is suspicious, you bus him, making you look less suspicious in the process. This requires some skill to pull off convincingly, else you just look like you bussed your partner.

As a townie, you shouldn't care about trying to avoid being nightkilled, even if you have a good role. Excellent scumhunting is worth more than the results of any night action.

The reason I haven't voted yet is because I don't want to accidentally lynch a townie, even if that almost always happens on the first day. If I have to vote for someone, I guess I'd go with Drakon. He has been acting somewhat suspicious.

Reasons.

How many times do I have to repeat this?

Reasons.

Also, ShoesandHats, how is he only 'somewhat' suspicious? I don't think you actually suspect drakon136 at all. Else you would have reasons and wouldn't have to qualify your vague vote with 'somewhat.'

Also, drakon136 has disappeared.

[Caz]

Caz

If you were scum, how would you try to protect your partner if he was under suspicion?

I wouldn't. It would look scummy.

[ShoesandHats]

Blegh. I always forget the stupid reasons (which is probably not good at all.) He was generally dodging questions, because the answers would supposedly "help the scum." Even if he has disappeared, he was probably scum anyways.

[Jim Groovester]

That was way back in the RVS before anybody, you included, knew what to do.

It's not so bad reasoning actually, if you don't have any better idea of what to do. If you conceal your plan, the scum will be surprised by it, no? Nevermind that he was dead wrong.

Do you have anything more recent you find him suspicious for? I still find your reasons unsatisfactory.