[Advanced Mafia] Black Ajah - GAME OVER!

[Phelix]

Phelix thanks for responding, I do see some of where you're coming from, but we'll agree to disagree on the accuracy of your paraphrasing.

 

And thanks Csarmi for supporting the idea of some discussion on day one. Usually I play it pretty safe on day one and say very little until I see a safe opportunity tocomment and cast my vote - precicely because it puts you at a lot of risk for standing out. But in the past few games I've played, inactivity has been really bad, so I thought I'd try a different approach to things today. At least we have (mostly) moved on from Bieber lol!

 

Again I will say hat our best tool against the mafia in this game is to use their discomfort about the lynch rule. If others have different thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them!

 

 

I'll always do my best to respond in a timely manner, Aust... assuming I'm awake and near a computer, and I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

 

I do agree that the lynch rule is key to winning this game, but I don't think we have enough evidence to lever it correctly right now. The scum have to get 3 players in on the lynch if they want to night kill someone... to my way of thinking, they could either stagger their votes, one early, one middle of the pack, and a final vote either just before the hammer or as the hammer itself... or they could try to get their votes in all at the last minute. Voting early opens them to suspicion, and reduces the chances that their chosen lynch will go through.

 

From our end, as Town, that means we can't do much other than wait and see on Day one. We might get lucky with our lynch, or we get to see what the scum do.

 

Unless you have a better way of leveraging the lynch rule?

[Mav]

We can't really blame Aust for initiating this discussion in my opinion, what he said had to be said sooner or later.

 

On my behalf tho from witholding with posting, I'm new to the community and I can't "taunt" people who I don't know on the first day, it might come over as offensive...

[Red2111]

Aust - i disagree about the "be on the lynch or not NK" rule making the scum uncomfertable. you ignored my post as well *pouts* your snookums feels left out

 

 

Phelix thanks for responding, I do see some of where you're coming from, but we'll agree to disagree on the accuracy of your paraphrasing.

 

And thanks Csarmi for supporting the idea of some discussion on day one. Usually I play it pretty safe on day one and say very little until I see a safe opportunity tocomment and cast my vote - precicely because it puts you at a lot of risk for standing out. But in the past few games I've played, inactivity has been really bad, so I thought I'd try a different approach to things today. At least we have (mostly) moved on from Bieber lol!

 

Again I will say hat our best tool against the mafia in this game is to use their discomfort about the lynch rule. If others have different thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them!

 

 

I'll always do my best to respond in a timely manner, Aust... assuming I'm awake and near a computer, and I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

 

I do agree that the lynch rule is key to winning this game, but I don't think we have enough evidence to lever it correctly right now. The scum have to get 3 players in on the lynch if they want to night kill someone... to my way of thinking, they could either stagger their votes, one early, one middle of the pack, and a final vote either just before the hammer or as the hammer itself... or they could try to get their votes in all at the last minute. Voting early opens them to suspicion, and reduces the chances that their chosen lynch will go through.

 

From our end, as Town, that means we can't do much other than wait and see on Day one. We might get lucky with our lynch, or we get to see what the scum do.

 

Unless you have a better way of leveraging the lynch rule?

 

the bolded unlderlined seciton caught my eye.

 

 

why 3 people?? we have 18 players and multiple teams (per rules and mod hints) why would you assume the scum groups are in multiples of 3's

 

 

inside information maybe??

[hotpocket2006]

Lol sure you can Mav! That's the good thing about being new here ^^

 

Sorry I've been a little quiet, I was out of town this weekend. I am currently driving home so will have more to add when not on my phone.

[Phelix]

Aust - i disagree about the "be on the lynch or not NK" rule making the scum uncomfertable. you ignored my post as well *pouts* your snookums feels left out

 

 

Phelix thanks for responding, I do see some of where you're coming from, but we'll agree to disagree on the accuracy of your paraphrasing.

 

And thanks Csarmi for supporting the idea of some discussion on day one. Usually I play it pretty safe on day one and say very little until I see a safe opportunity tocomment and cast my vote - precicely because it puts you at a lot of risk for standing out. But in the past few games I've played, inactivity has been really bad, so I thought I'd try a different approach to things today. At least we have (mostly) moved on from Bieber lol!

 

Again I will say hat our best tool against the mafia in this game is to use their discomfort about the lynch rule. If others have different thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them!

 

 

I'll always do my best to respond in a timely manner, Aust... assuming I'm awake and near a computer, and I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

 

I do agree that the lynch rule is key to winning this game, but I don't think we have enough evidence to lever it correctly right now. The scum have to get 3 players in on the lynch if they want to night kill someone... to my way of thinking, they could either stagger their votes, one early, one middle of the pack, and a final vote either just before the hammer or as the hammer itself... or they could try to get their votes in all at the last minute. Voting early opens them to suspicion, and reduces the chances that their chosen lynch will go through.

 

From our end, as Town, that means we can't do much other than wait and see on Day one. We might get lucky with our lynch, or we get to see what the scum do.

 

Unless you have a better way of leveraging the lynch rule?

 

the bolded unlderlined seciton caught my eye.

 

 

why 3 people?? we have 18 players and multiple teams (per rules and mod hints) why would you assume the scum groups are in multiples of 3's

 

 

inside information maybe??

 

Nope, not inside information, an assumption based on the world set up. This is a Black Ajah Game. The storyline mentioned multiple groups, but they are larger than are possible for this game (if we had 11 Mafia on a team we couldn't lynch a single person), so I thought it safe to assume the Black Ajah in this game would be organized along the same lines as the Black Ajah in the books... Hearts of three women.

 

Plus, larger groups would be more difficult to hide in a lynch group. Three is already a large percentage of a lynching, and it will only get larger as players are killed off. If there were four people in a scum group, they would be fairly obvious after two lynches.

 

Just my assumption, but it's possible I could be wrong.

[Aust]

Red my schnookums I'd never ignore you lol! I think we all posted within minutes of eachother there.

 

I'll tell you why I think it will make them uncomfortable - so often when I've been on a mafia team, especially early in the game, there's been a lot of discussion about where to place votes, and a common strategy is to defend someone you know is innocent. They can't use tricks like that in this game - they'll all have to vote for the person. So they're going to have to figure out how to slip in their votes, and I bet we're going to see some people lurking and then just slipping in a vote with no explanation at all, or something very little like "I agree wih everything that's been said". Anytime someone HAS to do something in a game, it makes things a little uncomfortable, and we can use that.

 

If everyone had to post a well thought out reason or do some casing for their vote, rather than making weak excuses for voting someone or slipping in "ninja votes" we have a better chance of catching people slipping up - making a vote just because they have to.

 

That's my idea- to insist on well thought out reasons for a vote.

[Thorum]

unvote

 

vote meesh

 

 

For consolidation's sake. Day 1 is still interesting, so a bandwagon is not yet necessary.

We DO need to have our votes on as few people as possible. Which makes it more difficult for mafia to hide in between them.

 

I won't have internet for the next fourty-odd hours.

[Red2111]

So they're going to have to figure out how to slip in their votes, and I bet we're going to see some people lurking and then just slipping in a vote with no explanation at all, or something very little like "I agree wih everything that's been said".

 

 

that already happens in games, so i don't see why the "all scum need to be on the lynch" rule would change this. i don't think we'll see any difference in scum play from a normal game to this one; i just think that the rule was made to get the teams more active since lurking is a problem right now on DM.

 

you'll also still have scum aligning themselves with people then "reluctantly" throwing in thier votes towards the end.

 

and to your "well thoguht out reason for lynching" again this feels like you attempting to place a set up further on down the road. some people in these games talk alot *points to self* so your goign to have poeple say "i agree with so & so" to avoid being repetative. again, this is normal game playing that isn't a result from this new rule.

 

 

the only people who should feel "uncomfy" by this rule is scum Aust. tbh, i'm perfectly happy with the thought of the scum not having a sure NK handed to them each night. so why are you making such a big deal over it?

[Aust]

Why wouldn't we try to use it? Do you really think it's a bad idea to ask people to at least put some though behind their vote ?

 

You ask me why I'm making a big deal about it and the answer is because I think it's something to give the town an advantage. Any rule that places the scum at a disadvantage is helpful.

 

I'll ask you the question - why are you trying so hard to minimize this?

[Alanna]

MODSPEAK: I'm sorry if my comment earlier confused anyone; I wasn't encouraging you all to lynch someone soon; I was encouraging more game-related posts, and less Beiber-related posts (Which I'm not totally opposed to). So I just meant I wanted more activity, not a lynch right away. Lynch whenever you like; if I wanted a lynch asap, I would've set a deadline.

[Alanna]

Vote Count:

Wombat (3) - Song, Tynaal, Csarmi

Blackhoof (1) - Berf

Aust (3) - Meesh, Krak, Phelix

Krak (1) - Blackhoof

Meesh (2) - Leelou, Thorum

Tynaal (1) - Wombat

Red (1) - Player

Talmanes (1) - Drew

 

Not Voting (5): Red, Curt, Aust, Mav, Talmanes

 

With 18 alive, it takes 10 to lynch. Note: Currently no deadline.

[Red2111]

Why wouldn't we try to use it? Do you really think it's a bad idea to ask people to at least put some though behind their vote ?

 

You ask me why I'm making a big deal about it and the answer is because I think it's something to give the town an advantage. Any rule that places the scum at a disadvantage is helpful.

 

I'll ask you the question - why are you trying so hard to minimize this?

 

 

i don't relaly see how it's useful to use townies Aust. i mean you keep saying it'll make people play differently, but in all honesty the "differetn" plays you've posted are all plays that are made in a normal game by both townie & scum.

 

 

it is a good idea to have peopel put some thought behind their vote; but the way your making it sound is that we should go after the first person who "votes to get a majority" or says "i agree with everythign thats already been said" when they place their vote. why shoudl this sort of voting behavior be considered more so scummy now than in other games?

 

 

also, how is this rule giving us an advantage in scum hunting. i could see this if there was one scum team; but by all indications there are multiple scum teams in this game. so your attempt to try and use "late" or "ninja" voters to pin pont scum is moot imo.

 

i'm not trying to minimalize this, i just don't understand the benefits of talking about it in the open where the scum can see "who we'd consider scummy for voting one way" and use that to manipulate us. what i find more talk worthy is why you've decided to push this as a focal point of discussion for the day when it will get us no where. distraction technique much?

[csarmi]

Point of fact, Csarms m'man, you got out of the lynch by claiming my role. You weren't gainsaid by anyone, but it wasn't your role you claimed.

 

Just chose a role. I wasn't picky :)

Seriously, i didn't want to ovecomplicate my post here with more off topic than I felt necessary (anyone can read up),

 

I think there is much more reason to vote for Aust than there is to vote for Wombat. Would you care to share your reasoning for that vote?

 

Sure. I voted and unvoted you for random fun.

I voted Wombat for

50%: wtf there's day 1

25%: sounded fun to vote the guy who voted the girl for not joining the bandwagon

25%: ever since I saw his nick in the 'Rebel Mafia' thread on my readups, I dreamed of voting Wombat. Dunno why.

 

Dream fulfilled.

[csarmi]

Now how many votes does meesh have? For me, 1+1 <> 3.

[Leelou]

I'm moving will have comp access hopefully by tonight or tomorrow the latest.

[Talmanes]

Ok well since we still have no deadline I see no reason to bandwagon. Wombat is pinging me, but he always does, so I won' vote him just for that.

Right now Krak voting for absolutely no reason on a bandwagon bothers me the most, so I'll vote him tonight when I'm home and can use the code. Lol I don't remember how to use it on my phone.

[Alanna]

Now how many votes does meesh have? For me, 1+1 <> 3.

 

*scratches head* I though 1+1 was 3....

 

LOL. Fixed.

[WWWwombat]

Aust - i disagree about the "be on the lynch or not NK" rule making the scum uncomfertable. you ignored my post as well *pouts* your snookums feels left out

 

 

Phelix thanks for responding, I do see some of where you're coming from, but we'll agree to disagree on the accuracy of your paraphrasing.

 

And thanks Csarmi for supporting the idea of some discussion on day one. Usually I play it pretty safe on day one and say very little until I see a safe opportunity tocomment and cast my vote - precicely because it puts you at a lot of risk for standing out. But in the past few games I've played, inactivity has been really bad, so I thought I'd try a different approach to things today. At least we have (mostly) moved on from Bieber lol!

 

Again I will say hat our best tool against the mafia in this game is to use their discomfort about the lynch rule. If others have different thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them!

 

 

I'll always do my best to respond in a timely manner, Aust... assuming I'm awake and near a computer, and I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

 

I do agree that the lynch rule is key to winning this game, but I don't think we have enough evidence to lever it correctly right now. The scum have to get 3 players in on the lynch if they want to night kill someone... to my way of thinking, they could either stagger their votes, one early, one middle of the pack, and a final vote either just before the hammer or as the hammer itself... or they could try to get their votes in all at the last minute. Voting early opens them to suspicion, and reduces the chances that their chosen lynch will go through.

 

From our end, as Town, that means we can't do much other than wait and see on Day one. We might get lucky with our lynch, or we get to see what the scum do.

 

Unless you have a better way of leveraging the lynch rule?

 

the bolded unlderlined seciton caught my eye.

 

 

why 3 people?? we have 18 players and multiple teams (per rules and mod hints) why would you assume the scum groups are in multiples of 3's

 

 

inside information maybe??

 

I have never seen you accept the title of snookums before. Clearly you must be doing it to buddy up to Aust. Yet you are also calling Aust scummy. Why the contradictory behavior. Also, note that Play3r has placed a distancing vote on Red. I think we are looking at a scum team with Play3r and Red on it.

 

unvote

Vote Red

[berf]

Unvote

 

VOTE PHELIX

 

 

1) The rule of 3 sounds like a slip of the black, black tongue.

 

2) Jumping down Aust's throat to manufacture excuses.

[Aust]

 

i don't relaly see how it's useful to use townies Aust. i mean you keep saying it'll make people play differently, but in all honesty the "differetn" plays you've posted are all plays that are made in a normal game by both townie & scum.

 

 

it is a good idea to have peopel put some thought behind their vote; but the way your making it sound is that we should go after the first person who "votes to get a majority" or says "i agree with everythign thats already been said" when they place their vote. why shoudl this sort of voting behavior be considered more so scummy now than in other games?

 

 

also, how is this rule giving us an advantage in scum hunting. i could see this if there was one scum team; but by all indications there are multiple scum teams in this game. so your attempt to try and use "late" or "ninja" voters to pin pont scum is moot imo.

 

i'm not trying to minimalize this, i just don't understand the benefits of talking about it in the open where the scum can see "who we'd consider scummy for voting one way" and use that to manipulate us. what i find more talk worthy is why you've decided to push this as a focal point of discussion for the day when it will get us no where. distraction technique much?

 

Red, I won't argue in circles with you over this as we clearly hold very different views. I see your point of view on this too, but I still think it's quite worthwhile to try to use, and I don't advocate pouncing on someone who votes to get a majority. I could accept someone stating that they are voting to achieve consensus if it makes sense within the context of their vote and they articulate it. And even someone who is agreeing with other people's reasons for voting can at least summon the effort to point out the particular issues they saw as relevant, or add support to key points with at least one original thought.

 

I put that comment out there as I say, to get some reactions and to spur some discussion. I'll just clarify on your last point (bolded) - there was nothing going on to distract from when I raised this issue, and if you have something you'd like to raise as a point of discussion - please do so.

 

So I'll leave this issue in your hands now to see what you do with it. You can try spin this as me trying to distract/set up lynches, etc., and I could go at you for trying to make it easy for people to make lazy votes, but I truly don't think that's going to get us anywhere - and I don't know yet whether this is just you being your typical day one assertive self.

 

 

 

 

Now as for Phelix - what made you throw out the number 3? You may have stated this already and if I've missed it, I'm sorry but I did a quick scan and didn't catch it.

[Mav]

Wombat, I am confused now, why would a mafia player lynch a fellow team member?

[Mav]

Well, for the above post, player has to be changed in member.

[hotpocket2006]

So basically these are my thoughts on things that stuck out to me on my reread, I'll put them in 2ish posts because they are quote heavy.

 

You mean you don't have a Justin Bieber haircut Tynaal???

 

So we've had a lot of banter go on so far, but not much of substance.

 

I wonder if the mafia team will start the serious voting since they have to have all their members on a lynch in order to get an NK?

 

It is very interesting that Aust would point this out so early in the game. How does he know what the mafia may or may not be planning. It seems as if he is thinkng outloud, but it looks like he's trying to cast some suspicion on those who decide to get down to the nitty gritty and start playing.

 

 

I actually don't like Aust's point; it seems set up to cast suspicion on whoever the first person is to vote for serious reasons, which doesn't seem like a Light-loving move to me. Black Ajah getting all ready to point fingers? Just might be.

 

Speaking of serious voting, I might as well head it off. I don't have anything to add to the banter except that Bieber is a girl, so since I have nothing to do today but play mafia, let's get down to business.

 

unvote

 

vote Aust

 

If meesh wouldn't have done it, I probably would have if I had the time. Yes people who talk more get more votes usually. They are the ones who slip and say suspicious things. That's what voting is for, it's not always to lynch.

 

I actually don't like Aust's point; it seems set up to cast suspicion on whoever the first person is to vote for serious reasons, which doesn't seem like a Light-loving move to me. Black Ajah getting all ready to point fingers? Just might be.

 

Speaking of serious voting, I might as well head it off. I don't have anything to add to the banter except that Bieber is a girl, so since I have nothing to do today but play mafia, let's get down to business.

 

unvote

 

vote Aust

 

Well Meesh - I threw that comment out there because undoubtedly the mafia are feeling very uncomfortable with this stipulation that all scum be on the lynch in order to get their NK. I wanted to see who reacted strongly to that. Interesting that rather than discuss things you jump right into a vote. We have no deadline today - we have some time to take a look at things.

 

Of course we don't have a deadline, are you saying we should vote at all until a deadline is set? I love the gotcha post though.

 

Now are we consolidating, or just playing along?

I'm eager to see how it all plays out. Never really understood how first day lynches work. I mean, nothing to work on, so what?

I've only played once so far and there it was easy. The first one to get attention almost got lynched. Then,on the second day, the player whose only fault was to post unbiased, thoughtful posts followed :)

 

 

Okay I feel I need to vote Wombat too. First, to protect that nice lady over there, second, to remove myself from Wombat's 'dont join bandwagons' list.

 

Now seriously, is Bieber a boy or a girl?

 

 

vote Wombat

 

I always had a dream of voting Wombat anyway, ever since I saw that game with Halima.

 

I don't like these quotes from csarmi at all. He asks a weird question about consolidating or playing, makes a joke about wombat, then votes wombat with another joke and starts the bandwagon.

[hotpocket2006]

Player, why not vote someone who already has at least one vote for him/her, instead of adding another name on that list?

 

I would so vote for you, if that wouldn't make my argument null.

 

This was weird. Two votes doesn't mean anything and if he's voting a nonvoter then one vote isn't normally going to get someone to automatically jump in and play, it normally takes more than that.

 

Vote Aust.

It seemed like the right thing to do. *shrug*

 

Phelix, why did this seem like the right vote for you to make? You've just placed the third vote on me, and not provided any reason for doing so.

 

 

Well, looking at the situation, there were two people with multiple votes against them and we have a Mod who is "encouraging" us to come to a conclusion. We need to consolidate on one person, and I don't see a reason to vote Wombat.

 

Beyond that, I think your comments about the Scum needing to move things along so they can get a NK are interesting. I just went through a game where the most "helpful" person ended up being the scummiest... it's made me suspicious of people trying to take the lead. You told Meesh you were doing it to provoke a response from the scum, but that doesn't sit right with me at the moment.

 

It's Day One, so my reasoning is very thin and light at the moment... but that's the nature of Day One, isn't it?

 

Well normally day 1 is about gathering the most information, not really about finding scum. So while I agree with you vote on Aust, I don't like this reasoning for it. Very thin and light? lol

 

lol Well upset is a little strong, but yes. I dislike Perrin. I read my PM and then cracked up for like 5 mins. I was like of course I would get one of the characters I highly dislike. But I guess I was lucky it wasn't Faile, I probablywould've killed myself then

 

at least he didn't have you searchign for Faile half of the game

 

 

I actually don't like Aust's point; it seems set up to cast suspicion on whoever the first person is to vote for serious reasons, which doesn't seem like a Light-loving move to me. Black Ajah getting all ready to point fingers? Just might be.

 

i thought this as well when i saw Austs comment. smells like scum attempting to set up a future lynch.

 

 

Wow Krak, bandwagon much? Don't want to miss that lynch, do you?

 

he was a 2nd vote on you ... doesn't really count as a bandwagon. over reation much drew??

 

 

Phelix, willing to sign a truce? If you unvote me, I'll unvote you :)

 

That's fair.

 

UNVOTE Csarmi.

 

open tema work on the thread. making alliances with eachother already *shakes head* leave it for the QT boys

 

 

 

To address this part I want to be clear - you stated that I suggested that the scum need to start the voting, but this is not what I posted. I wondered in my post if they would try to start it out given the unique rule in his game, and it was a comment truly designed to spur some conversation and take a bit of a poke at the scum - this has to be something thats making them feel very uncertain about how theyre going to play the game and i think we should exploit it to keep them off balance. And up until that point the most interesting topic had been Justin Bieber lol.

 

You're rigt to be wary of people trying to direct things early on bu really up until tha point I bad really just raisedthat one question. You jumped to a few conclusions in your post that were incorrect, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Day ones are actually not about voting for a flimsy reason- in my view they're about starting to gather information.

 

 

i don't see how this will make the scum feel very uncertain about how they'll play or keep them off balance. typically you can expect the scum to jump on a lynch (especially if the lynchee is innocent). all this will do is create a mad rush to vote at the end by the scum and to push harder for people their team is on to be lynched.

 

 

your original comment instead seemed to make it look like you intended to FOS anyone ho started a vote on someone who eventually got lynched. you seem to assume that scum will be those people reluctant to vote; where imo the scum will be those people most egar to vote and cast doubt on those who are voting.

 

I would've killed myself and Faile if that happened.

 

I actually agree with most of what you said here and elsewhere in the thread. I won't quote all your posts, but is it weird that I find myself agreeing with you?...

 

 

I think Aust's comment was the thing that has made this game start slowly - he wondered if mafia would jump to start voting because they had to get on board a lynch. I think just saying that, though it was obvious, has kept all the mafia from voting. They don't want to fall into that category. I don't blame Aust for this, because it kind of set up a neat trap. Maybe there's some scum hiding in that list of people who haven't voted? I don't know, but I'm going to vote Talmanes for now, for those reasons.

 

I just think it's weird to point out that you think scum is now scared to vote because of Aust's comments. I kind of find it laughable. Weird to vote Talmanes, but he did post after you a reason why he isn't voting so maybe it had the effect you intended?

 

Phelix thanks for responding, I do see some of where you're coming from, but we'll agree to disagree on the accuracy of your paraphrasing.

 

And thanks Csarmi for supporting the idea of some discussion on day one. Usually I play it pretty safe on day one and say very little until I see a safe opportunity tocomment and cast my vote - precicely because it puts you at a lot of risk for standing out. But in the past few games I've played, inactivity has been really bad, so I thought I'd try a different approach to things today. At least we have (mostly) moved on from Bieber lol!

 

Again I will say hat our best tool against the mafia in this game is to use their discomfort about the lynch rule. If others have different thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them!

 

 

I'll always do my best to respond in a timely manner, Aust... assuming I'm awake and near a computer, and I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

 

I do agree that the lynch rule is key to winning this game, but I don't think we have enough evidence to lever it correctly right now. The scum have to get 3 players in on the lynch if they want to night kill someone... to my way of thinking, they could either stagger their votes, one early, one middle of the pack, and a final vote either just before the hammer or as the hammer itself... or they could try to get their votes in all at the last minute. Voting early opens them to suspicion, and reduces the chances that their chosen lynch will go through.

 

From our end, as Town, that means we can't do much other than wait and see on Day one. We might get lucky with our lynch, or we get to see what the scum do.

 

Unless you have a better way of leveraging the lynch rule?

 

I just find it highly highly weird that you just pulled the number 3 out of nowhere. Do you have some inside information that the rest of us don't have? Assuming in this game is ridiculous, and assuming that you know the number of scum on a team is highly suspicious.

 

So they're going to have to figure out how to slip in their votes, and I bet we're going to see some people lurking and then just slipping in a vote with no explanation at all, or something very little like "I agree wih everything that's been said".

 

 

that already happens in games, so i don't see why the "all scum need to be on the lynch" rule would change this. i don't think we'll see any difference in scum play from a normal game to this one; i just think that the rule was made to get the teams more active since lurking is a problem right now on DM.

 

you'll also still have scum aligning themselves with people then "reluctantly" throwing in thier votes towards the end.

 

and to your "well thoguht out reason for lynching" again this feels like you attempting to place a set up further on down the road. some people in these games talk alot *points to self* so your goign to have poeple say "i agree with so & so" to avoid being repetative. again, this is normal game playing that isn't a result from this new rule.

 

 

the only people who should feel "uncomfy" by this rule is scum Aust. tbh, i'm perfectly happy with the thought of the scum not having a sure NK handed to them each night. so why are you making such a big deal over it?

 

QFT. I have seen some scum teams win, and actually in Alanna's last WoT game, because of innactivity on both the scum team and the town. a townie was left to decide between an innactive scum and an innactive townie, and it sucked for the town. I also don't believe scum play will be any different. Normally scum members are on the lynch anyway.

 

 

Unvote

 

VOTE PHELIX

 

 

1) The rule of 3 sounds like a slip of the black, black tongue.

 

2) Jumping down Aust's throat to manufacture excuses.

 

Agreed. After seeing the back and forth between Phelix and just arguing the same thing over and not moving on to find more info, it's the same dance.

 

So I am going to UNVOTE, VOTE PHELIX

[Talmanes]

Vote Krak like I said I would.

I'm kind of iffy on Phelix. I've never played with him before, and the whole '3' thing is a suspicious, but his explanation makes some sense too. I think I'll be watching him, but don't feel I have enough on him to vote yet.

At this point Krak is who I'm sticking with.