(ADVANCED) Naruto Mafia GAME OVER!

[John McClane]

This "lets just lynch anyone because its D1" mentality is awful scummy, and if nothing else lazy. No, there isn't much to case with on D1, we all know that. Which is why watching people try to build cases on D1 can be informational... additionally, you won't actually learn from a D1 lynch unless we actually play the day out with some level of due diligence, forcing people to take a position on some competing trains, and such.

 

I actually totally agree with this. What I didn't like was the way Nolder suddenly seemed to come around and say:

 

it doesn't have to be just anyone but yeah I'm not too concerned with who it is either

 

and yeah maybe I spoke too early

I just don't want a Day 1 that drags on for the rest of November

that's all I'm sayin'

 

Which you seemed to accept without question,

 

Seems a little contrived.

 

Is this serious?

 

I hate slow games, I say it all the time. Don't mistake me agreeing with him on that, as "making the peace". Weak sauce... and meta? From a guy I've never played with.

 

Saying "Weak sauce" doesn't actually make it so. And playing together isn't a prerequisite for having an idea of the way you play.

 

 

Damn, I forgot to unvote.

 

Unvote

 

Vote Mcclane

 

 

You'd be better off reading between the lines of my posts.

 

If you're going to hint at some type of reveal, make it a little more obvious for my clumsy eyes.

 

 

I think you were on the right track with Nolder, and then got off it by making misguided assumptions about "how I play". There's people that have played 20+ games with me that don't know "how I play" and yet you are forming a D1, meta case, when you haven't played with me? That is weak sauce.

 

For the record, I never backed off of my position on Nolder. Another ill-informed assumption you have made. There was a reason I wasn't tripping over myself to lynch him over one post that could represent a scummy agenda, or just a bad player playing bad. I want to see more... I want to see competing trains. So, I pointed out Nolder's scumminess and stayed on Red, hoping to have multiple dialogues going on - without me being the one to totally spearhead them both. It allows me to get a sense for who is being opportunistic, who is legit scum-hunting, who is distancing, etc. This is how I play. I'm surprised I have to explain it, since you were able to surmise my entire approach to mafia in what 10-20 posts?

 

Nolder's post is a definite ping to me - and I made that clear. I also made it clear I am looking to elicit reactions. Everything I've just explained is why I said "read between the lines". I would NEVER feign a role reveal after 1 vote, in fact its laughable that you'd even imply that... I don't like that you are trumping that statement up to try making me look scummy.

[John McClane]

I would add that Rey is basically saying that IF Nolder is scum, then I am scum... because Nolder pushed a scummy agenda, and I pointed it out, then supposedly let him off the hook. Yet Rey is voting me... this seems to be logically flawed. He should be voting Nolder, no?

 

I never like it when people push these connect-the-dots cases, and then vote on the last of the degrees of separation. Its majorly sketchy to theorize that IF player A is scum, then player B is scum too... and then vote player B.

 

Unvote

Vote Rey

 

This feels a bit like Rey may have some scum-mates that have been in other DM games with me.

[Reyoru]

I think you were on the right track with Nolder, and then got off it by making misguided assumptions about "how I play". There's people that have played 20+ games with me that don't know "how I play" and yet you are forming a D1, meta case, when you haven't played with me? That is weak sauce.

 

"Forming a case?" More like pointing out what I deemed to be an inconsistency. Don't try to blow everything out of proportion. I wanted to see the way you'd react, and you have responded in your own fashion.

 

For the record, I never backed off of my position on Nolder. Another ill-informed assumption you have made. There was a reason I wasn't tripping over myself to lynch him over one post that could represent a scummy agenda, or just a bad player playing bad. I want to see more... I want to see competing trains.

 

You seemed to back off somewhat, by agreeing with him in a way that was all too sudden to my liking. Call me paranoid.

 

So, I pointed out Nolder's scumminess and stayed on Red, hoping to have multiple dialogues going on - without me being the one to totally spearhead them both. It allows me to get a sense for who is being opportunistic, who is legit scum-hunting, who is distancing, etc.

 

Sure. That's the only possible explanation

 

Or it could also allow you to disagree early on with your mafia buddy, so that when people look back further down the line, they notice that you were suspicious of him from the very beginning.

 

Nolder's post is a definite ping to me - and I made that clear. I also made it clear I am looking to elicit reactions. Everything I've just explained is why I said "read between the lines". I would NEVER feign a role reveal after 1 vote, in fact its laughable that you'd even imply that... I don't like that you are trumping that statement up to try making me look scummy.

 

Maybe I misinterpreted. Or maybe I didn't.

 

In either case, I'm not a fan of people "role revealing" by telling others to go back and pick up the hint themselves. It's just a protracted way to draw attention to themselves, and is in no way a method to keep their role "hidden" from scum.

 

And by mentioning the statement once, I'm automatically "trumping it up." I see. So if you were role claiming and I had mentioned it, you could blame me for "putting a target on your back," and if I had ignored it, you would have ample excuse to say "I hinted at the role, he lynched me anyway" a bit further down the line.

 

Yeah, I don't like situations like that.

[Reyoru]

I would add that Rey is basically saying that IF Nolder is scum, then I am scum... because Nolder pushed a scummy agenda, and I pointed it out, then supposedly let him off the hook. Yet Rey is voting me... this seems to be logically flawed. He should be voting Nolder, no?

 

How is that logically flawed?

 

I never like it when people push these connect-the-dots cases, and then vote on the last of the degrees of separation. Its majorly sketchy to theorize that IF player A is scum, then player B is scum too... and then vote player B.

 

No it isn't.

 

The basis of playing a game of mafia is to piece together the way people interact together. The order in which you get rid of scum is secondary to that (in my opnion.)

[John McClane]

@ Rey, Multi-quoting and inline responses are a pain, sorry -

 

1. When you say, "I'm voting so-and-so for this reason." It is forming a case. You can spin it however, you want though.

 

2. I pointed out a scummy statement, then made a crack about the slow games. Just because I think he's scummy, doesn't mean I can't agree with him that the pace of games here occasionally sucks. That isn't "backing off".

 

3. The game was barely underway, a play like that makes NO sense for scum at that point. You are fabricating. Furthermore, here you are again stating that if Nolder is scum, then I must be too. This IS flawed logic. You should be voting the guy you felt was scummy first, get his alignment and THEN hypothesize about the nature of those interactions other had with him. What you are doing is assuming you caught Nolder as scum, and jumping ahead to catching a second scum before actually catching the first. See what I'm saying? I used to do this all the time, its flawed.

 

4. "Trumping it up" is when you take a statement like "read between the lines" and insinuate I'd be hinting a role reveal after 1 vote. You aren't telling me anything I don't already know, or agree with. The ONLY time a townie should be hinting a role is if they are intentionally trying to draw a NK. Otherwise, hinting roles is scum play... regardless, I was doing no such thing, and here you are again insinuating it. You accuse me of doing it, yet you yourself admit that there was nothing there for your "clumsy eyes" to pick up on. You want to keep spinning it as such, then produce an example. Otherwise, you are coming across dirty here.

 

To this point in the game, I've seen only one post that resonated as a role hint - and it was Nolder's post. The one we agreed was scummy. Yet, I wonder since you are so sensitive to it, how you missed him do it, yet accuse me of doing it when you've seen no examples of it.

[John McClane]

I would add that Rey is basically saying that IF Nolder is scum, then I am scum... because Nolder pushed a scummy agenda, and I pointed it out, then supposedly let him off the hook. Yet Rey is voting me... this seems to be logically flawed. He should be voting Nolder, no?

 

How is that logically flawed?

 

I never like it when people push these connect-the-dots cases, and then vote on the last of the degrees of separation. Its majorly sketchy to theorize that IF player A is scum, then player B is scum too... and then vote player B.

 

No it isn't.

 

The basis of playing a game of mafia is to piece together the way people interact together. The order in which you get rid of scum is secondary to that (in my opnion.)

 

 

You are wrong.

 

If your theory is that if player A is scum, then so is player B. Then you have to prove A first, otherwise to me - it is logically flawed.

 

I've seen scum do this as a semi-bus play... One scum member says if player A (who is really scum) is scum, then so is player B (who is actually town). Then they vote player B, player B gets lynched, flips town and player A is left alone because the theory is "broken".

[John McClane]

Personally, I concentrate on catching one scum at a time. Playing connect the dots rarely works, especially in a game this early. You aren't going to see scum sticking their necks out for each other until they have to... which is why, despite my willingness to discuss it with Rey, this is laughable.

[Reyoru]

@ Rey, Multi-quoting and inline responses are a pain, sorry -

 

No worries.

 

1. When you say, "I'm voting so-and-so for this reason." It is forming a case. You can spin it however, you want though.

 

You're right, I guess I am making a case. I'll concede.

 

2. I pointed out a scummy statement, then made a crack about the slow games. Just because I think he's scummy, doesn't mean I can't agree with him that the pace of games here occasionally sucks. That isn't "backing off".

 

No, you are right. But that doesn't also mean that there was an ulterior motive behind your "agreement."

 

3. The game was barely underway, a play like that makes NO sense for scum at that point. You are fabricating.

 

No, I'm afraid I disagree. It is indeed early, which is when you would want to plant seeds like this to protect yourself from an angry mob who lynched your partner a little way down the line. I might be fabricating (i.e. I may be incorrect) but this seems plausible to me.

 

Furthermore, here you are again stating that if Nolder is scum, then I must be too. This IS flawed logic.You should be voting the guy you felt was scummy first, get his alignment and THEN hypothesize about the nature of those interactions other had with him. What you are doing is assuming you caught Nolder as scum, and jumping ahead to catching a second scum before actually catching the first. See what I'm saying? I used to do this all the time, its flawed.

 

Yes, I understand what you are saying. But as this is a non-coroner game, I don't think it will be as simple to discover alignments post-mortem. It won't work the way you are suggesting in this game.

 

4. "Trumping it up" is when you take a statement like "read between the lines" and insinuate I'd be hinting a role reveal after 1 vote. You aren't telling me anything I don't already know, or agree with. The ONLY time a townie should be hinting a role is if they are intentionally trying to draw a NK. Otherwise, hinting roles is scum play... regardless, I was doing no such thing, and here you are again insinuating it. You accuse me of doing it, yet you yourself admit that there was nothing there for your "clumsy eyes" to pick up on. You want to keep spinning it as such, then produce an example. Otherwise, you are coming across dirty here.

 

I think it is perfectly reasonable to understand "read between the lines" as "I have dropped you a role hint" in a game of mafia.

 

And just because I "admitted that there was nothing there to see" doesn't mean there wasn't something that I actually hadn't picked up.

 

To this point in the game, I've seen only one post that resonated as a role hint - and it was Nolder's post. The one we agreed was scummy. Yet, I wonder since you are so sensitive to it, how you missed him do it, yet accuse me of doing it when you've seen no examples of it.

 

I completely missed this so-called role hint from Nolder.

 

For the reason I thought you had role-hinted, see above.

[Reyoru]

Personally, I concentrate on catching one scum at a time. Playing connect the dots rarely works, especially in a game this early. You aren't going to see scum sticking their necks out for each other until they have to... which is why, despite my willingness to discuss it with Rey, this is laughable.

 

Scum don't always interact to be "sticking their necks out for each other."

 

They could be trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes.

[Reyoru]

Ourgh, that should read:

 

No, you are right. But that doesn't also mean that there was not an ulterior motive behind your "agreement."

 

I'm in no state to post, need sleep.

[amegakure]

OFFICIAL VOTE COUNT:

 

BG (1) keyholder

rey (2) red,john

panda (1) soy

levity (1) nolder

corrosive stare (1) cosmic panda

cosmic panda (1) corrosive

red (1) , ishy

locke (1) locke

john (1) rey

 

 

16 alive, 9 to lynch.

 

 

still waiting on one person to check in. Could be replaced shortly.

[WWWwombat]

It's never too early to make lists or connect dots as long as you don't set things in stone. And my dearest Ape, why would you point out what you thought was a role hint?

[mmeeshal]

If that's the case, Amega, then you really need to review the rules you have posted. It's not good to confuse your players.

 

This is from the rules post:

You may not reveal who you are, or even hint at it. You may share your role if you like.

 

This is talking about flavor characters vs roles. This rule means: "You can't say you're Harry Potter, but you can say you're a Vigilante if you want."

[amegakure]

ah bloody hell! must have missed that when i copied it over.....hmmm i guess it wont be a problem..nvm me!!

[WWWwombat]

So are we allowed to reveal roles or not?>.<

[John McClane]

It's never too early to make lists or connect dots as long as you don't set things in stone. And my dearest Ape, why would you point out what you thought was a role hint?

 

Yeah, yeah.... It was tongue in cheek, remember I'm the one that used to get heat for FOS' img half the game on d1.

 

To answer your question... as I stated above... The only people role hinting d1 are either scum, or bullet- proof townies. Otherwise it wouldn't be happening. Unless its bad play, and I have to assume its not... There is no harm in pointing it out.

[John McClane]

So are we allowed to reveal roles or not?>.<

 

I'm assuming yes, and we can't discuss characters.... Which is how the rules usually work.

[WWWwombat]

It's never too early to make lists or connect dots as long as you don't set things in stone. And my dearest Ape, why would you point out what you thought was a role hint?

 

Yeah, yeah.... It was tongue in cheek, remember I'm the one that used to get heat for FOS' img half the game on d1.

 

To answer your question... as I stated above... The only people role hinting d1 are either scum, or bullet- proof townies. Otherwise it wouldn't be happening. Unless its bad play, and I have to assume its not... There is no harm in pointing it out.

 

Still would ruin the bulletproof play =\

[amegakure]

So are we allowed to reveal roles or not?>.<

 

I'm assuming yes, and we can't discuss characters.... Which is how the rules usually work.

 

correct!

[Blackhoof]

Day 1 doesn't need to be terribly long imo

 

hmmmmm

 

does anyone else see this as styrange that Nolder is championing a short day one... when in the game heis modding now he gave 2 weeks to the players for Day 1?

 

vote Nolder for his sudden change in opinion

 

FOS @ John and Reyoru for drawing attention away from Nolder's comment

[amegakure]

OFFICIAL VOTE COUNT:

 

BG (1) keyholder

rey (2) red,john

panda (1) soy

levity (1) nolder

corrosive stare (1) cosmic panda

cosmic panda (1) corrosive

red (1) , ishy

locke (1) locke

john (1) rey

nolder (1) blackhoof

 

16 alive, 9 to lynch.

 

 

still waiting on one person to check in. Could be replaced shortly.

[SBoydW]

I don't like how Rey voted for nolder, removed his vote and put it on Ape, then said he was okay with either... If that's the case why did you change the vote? Vote Vote: Rey Maybe due to a connection.. Though that would have been pretty sloppy... so maybe not... still doesn't sir right with me.

[bgrishinko]

Day 1 doesn't need to be terribly long imo

 

hmmmmm

 

does anyone else see this as styrange that Nolder is championing a short day one... when in the game heis modding now he gave 2 weeks to the players for Day 1?

 

vote Nolder for his sudden change in opinion

 

FOS @ John and Reyoru for drawing attention away from Nolder's comment

 

Don't like this comment at all. Meta in the worst way... vote Hoof

[amegakure]

OFFICIAL VOTE COUNT:

 

BG (1) keyholder

rey (2) red,john

levity (1) nolder

corrosive stare (1) cosmic panda

cosmic panda (1) corrosive, soy

red (1) , ishy

locke (1) locke

john (1) rey

nolder (1) blackhoof

Hoof (1) bg

 

16 alive, 9 to lynch.

 

 

still waiting on one person to check in. Could be replaced shortly.

[Blackhoof]

we dont have much else to go on BG :P