Blackhoofs Warhammer 40'000 Game [BASIC]

[Amadine]

hhmmm my initial thoughts on the game...

 

Christine dived into the game with a reason for inactivity - scum laying low perhaps?

 

Nolder mentioned the SK possibility very early *noted*

 

Levity quickly dismissed the possibility - twice. SK is considered a basic role at DM - has been for as long as i remember. *ping*

 

Red also dismissed SK - now Red has played more games at DM than you can count and she has to know that SK is a basic role *PING*

 

VOTE RED

[bgrishinko]

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:50 AM, Lenlo said:

*Has learned his lesson... Wont do it again for the next vote.*

At least no one took a rolled up news paper into this.

 

Sooo.... you learned your lesson, but you keep your vote where it is?

 

Ok.

 

Tip of Advice: If you have a good reason to keep it there, it's fine. State it. But if you don't state a reason then it looks like you might be trying to sneak a vote by unnoticed.

[Nolder]

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

[bgrishinko]

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

 

Good advice as well.

[aemonkristen]

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

 

Bad advice. Think for yourself. Weigh the arguments and make a decision you believe correct. Keeping your vote on someone just because you want to "stick to your guns" is more damaging to the town than voting for the wrong person after evaluating the players and their actions. I also disagree with Nolder about not having to explain yourself. In mafia, you had better have a reason for voting someone, especially with the activity we have. There are several viable lynch candidates right now and if you want to throw a vote on one of them, you need to be able to explain why you think that person should go. A vote at this point without explanation looks scummy and will likely put you under pressure as well.

[aemonkristen]

  On 2/2/2012 at 2:57 PM, bgrishinko said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:50 AM, Lenlo said:

*Has learned his lesson... Wont do it again for the next vote.*

At least no one took a rolled up news paper into this.

 

Sooo.... you learned your lesson, but you keep your vote where it is?

 

Ok.

 

Tip of Advice: If you have a good reason to keep it there, it's fine. State it. But if you don't state a reason then it looks like you might be trying to sneak a vote by unnoticed.

 

This is just to emphasize my point. Notice how BG calls out Lenlo for keeping his vote where it is without an explanation. BG then agrees with Nolder that players should stick to their guns whether they explain themselves or not. Contradictory behavior which looks defensive and scummy to me. Why is he worried about Lenlo's vote so much?

[Nolder]

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

 

Bad advice. Think for yourself. Weigh the arguments and make a decision you believe correct.

I believe that is exactly what I advised...

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

Keeping your vote on someone just because you want to "stick to your guns" is more damaging to the town than voting for the wrong person after evaluating the players and their actions.

Voting the person you believe is mafia is more damaging than voting for the wrong person? What?

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

I also disagree with Nolder about not having to explain yourself.

I never said he didn't have to. Nor do I believe he does have to. I said "whether or not" he does. That choice is his.

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

In mafia, you had better have a reason for voting someone, especially with the activity we have. There are several viable lynch candidates right now and if you want to throw a vote on one of them, you need to be able to explain why you think that person should go. A vote at this point without explanation looks scummy and will likely put you under pressure as well.

I agree. You should always have some kind of reason for voting somebody. I do not agree that you must always include that reason with your vote. Although if you choose not to do so you should have a (good) reason for that as well.

[bgrishinko]

Ah, I should have been more specific. I was agreeing with Nolder that you should "stick to your guns" if you really believe it. Which goes along with what I said. But as I said, doing so without a reason can look suspicious to others. So I guess I don't agree 100% with every word Nolder said, just the main point.

[Lenlo]

Ok, ive read everything again and come up with my own reasons this time and am sticking with my choice of BG.

Thanks for the advice on all this, didnt mean for it to be a big point of arguement.

[Nolder]

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:12 PM, Lenlo said:

Ok, ive read everything again and come up with my own reasons this time and am sticking with my choice of BG.

Thanks for the advice on all this, didnt mean for it to be a big point of arguement.

don't worry about it

in mafia things are often blown way out of proportion just to create discussion lol

[Red2111]

another piece of advice for you newbs. don't trust any advice people who aren't the mod give you on the game thread.

 

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 12:00 AM, aemonkristen said:

I can see how Nolder started this with the hopes of kick starting the game. Well done. The problem is that even though his original accusation was weak and based on a 2-sentence post, he just won't let go of it. From that came his accusation of her planting the seeds of sympathy and her probable role of SK. I don't feel him as scum right now, but the stubborn clinging to a very weak 1-post case of a player is frustrating.

 

this, exactly this.

 

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 8:55 AM, Nolder said:

it's not about semantics Red

I said Serial Killer becuase I had a reason to think Serial Killer which I clearly laid out

 

  On 2/1/2012 at 7:31 PM, Nolder said:

I never said she was a 3rd party player

I said she was probably a serial killer

 

 

an SK is a 3rd party, hence you calling her a SK is also you calling her a 3rd party. = you arguing semanitcs with me.

 

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 8:55 AM, Nolder said:

have I pushed a lynch on her as of yet? no

I voted her and was done with it

you and BG are the ones that turned this into an issue

 

becuase i disagree with yo and think your tryign to push an easy lynch by slapping her with the 3rd party tag. your tryign to not only put into peoples minds tehre is a SK in this game when we have no reason to think there is yet as well as tryign to start a witch hunt for one.

 

screams of a scum diversion

 

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 11:41 AM, Amadine said:

hhmmm my initial thoughts on the game...

 

Christine dived into the game with a reason for inactivity - scum laying low perhaps?

 

Nolder mentioned the SK possibility very early *noted*

 

Levity quickly dismissed the possibility - twice. SK is considered a basic role at DM - has been for as long as i remember. *ping*

 

Red also dismissed SK - now Red has played more games at DM than you can count and she has to know that SK is a basic role *PING*

 

VOTE RED

 

i'm not dismissing the idea of a SK, i just think starting a witch hunt for one without any proof there is one (like 2 NK's) reeks of setting up a diversion witch hunt.

 

 

also, while the SK is a basic role, we KNOW there is a Mafia team in this game (see Hoof's second post in this thread). i'm not dismissing the SK right now, but i think looking for one until we know for certain if there is one is leading us on a witch hunt that will result in more townie deaths and the scum hiding in plain site.

[Sakaea]

Len, when I started playing mafia, the best way for me was to just dive in and figure it out for myself. As you can see, you'll get conflicting advice on the "best" way to play.

 

Oh, and good morning everyone.

[bgrishinko]

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:20 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:12 PM, Lenlo said:

Ok, ive read everything again and come up with my own reasons this time and am sticking with my choice of BG.

Thanks for the advice on all this, didnt mean for it to be a big point of arguement.

don't worry about it

in mafia things are often blown way out of proportion just to create discussion lol

 

Blasphemy! Nothing is ever blown out of proportion in mafia! You sir, are a lying scum bag!

[aemonkristen]

First off, you are very bad at twisting words. I am going to address the parts you quoted by numbering them as I go.

 

1.

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:07 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

 

Bad advice. Think for yourself. Weigh the arguments and make a decision you believe correct.

I believe that is exactly what I advised...

 

No. You said "stick to your guns". At no point in this post did you say that there was a need to constantly evaluate information and change your vote accordingly.

 

2.

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:07 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

Keeping your vote on someone just because you want to "stick to your guns" is more damaging to the town than voting for the wrong person after evaluating the players and their actions.

 

Voting the person you believe is mafia is more damaging than voting for the wrong person? What?

 

I said that keeping your vote on someone just because you are stubborn (sticking to your guns) is more harmful than evaluating and voting for the person you believe is scum. Of course, if you have a magic radar that tells you who is scum without the need to actually evaluate the players and their actions, I bow to your greatness. Since I do not have possession of this magical instrument, I advise players to evaluate and vote accordingly rather than put on blinders and doggedly go after someone regardless of the information that has been garnered.

 

3.

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:07 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

I also disagree with Nolder about not having to explain yourself.

I never said he didn't have to. Nor do I believe he does have to. I said "whether or not" he does. That choice is his.

 

You confirm my point about your stance on not needing to explain votes, yet you have a problem that I said it? Odd. Also, nice job separating my explanation about the need to vote so it looks like I contradicted you. What you said was:

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

 

In essence, you said: keep voting someone even if you can't explain why you think they are scum because people are going to vote for you if you take your vote off.

 

What I said was:

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

In mafia, you had better have a reason for voting someone, especially with the activity we have. There are several viable lynch candidates right now and if you want to throw a vote on one of them, you need to be able to explain why you think that person should go. A vote at this point without explanation looks scummy and will likely put you under pressure as well.

 

In essence, I said: Have a reason to vote for someone and explain it or you look like Scummy McScummerson. I have personally seen you go after people who vote without explaining their reasons, so seeing you take this opposite stance looks scummy.

 

4.

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:07 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

In mafia, you had better have a reason for voting someone, especially with the activity we have. There are several viable lynch candidates right now and if you want to throw a vote on one of them, you need to be able to explain why you think that person should go. A vote at this point without explanation looks scummy and will likely put you under pressure as well.

 

I agree. You should always have some kind of reason for voting somebody. I do not agree that you must always include that reason with your vote. Although if you choose not to do so you should have a (good) reason for that as well.

 

What would you consider a good reason for not explaining your vote on someone? The only reasons for not explaining your vote is because you are just going along with the crowd, you are throwing out a random vote, or you have a personal grudge against the person that precludes any in-game scumminess. I say again, every vote after activity begins needs to have a reason or it is suspect.

[Nolder]

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:44 PM, Red2111 said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 8:55 AM, Nolder said:

it's not about semantics Red

I said Serial Killer becuase I had a reason to think Serial Killer which I clearly laid out

 

  On 2/1/2012 at 7:31 PM, Nolder said:

I never said she was a 3rd party player

I said she was probably a serial killer

an SK is a 3rd party, hence you calling her a SK is also you calling her a 3rd party. = you arguing semanitcs with me.

it's important to my point that I was specific in calling her a Serial Killer

I had reasons to think she was a Serial Killer

therefore no conclusion was jumped to

the fact that you're trying to discredit me like this is extremely troubling

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:44 PM, Red2111 said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 8:55 AM, Nolder said:

have I pushed a lynch on her as of yet? no

I voted her and was done with it

you and BG are the ones that turned this into an issue

 

becuase i disagree with yo and think your tryign to push an easy lynch by slapping her with the 3rd party tag. your tryign to not only put into peoples minds tehre is a SK in this game when we have no reason to think there is yet as well as tryign to start a witch hunt for one.

 

screams of a scum diversion

hahahaha what?!

I don't care whether you disagree with me about Christine or even that you think I'm trying to push a lynch when I'm not

but accusing me of starting a witch hunt for a Serial Killer is ridiculous

have I gone around casing everyone for SK tells? am I suggesting there is even definitely a SK in the setup?

no, so why would you say something so blatantly false?

I'm thinking perhaps I was wrong about Christine

perhaps she was just nervous mafia and you are her partner worried that you'll lose an important role for your team on day 1

[Nolder]

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:02 PM, aemonkristen said:

No. You said "stick to your guns". At no point in this post did you say that there was a need to constantly evaluate information and change your vote accordingly.

I like how you take a little piece of what I said and try to make it seem like I'm saying something completely different than what I was

talk about twisting words...

 

my entire bit of advice was all about thinking for yourself and having reasons for your actions

at no point did I say the words "constantly evaluate information and change your vote accordingly" no

but it amounts to the same thing as having a reason

although I'd honestly argue against changing your vote too often as it makes you look like a vote hopper (I am very guilty of this myself)

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:02 PM, aemonkristen said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 4:07 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:55 PM, aemonkristen said:

Keeping your vote on someone just because you want to "stick to your guns" is more damaging to the town than voting for the wrong person after evaluating the players and their actions.

 

Voting the person you believe is mafia is more damaging than voting for the wrong person? What?

 

I said that keeping your vote on someone just because you are stubborn (sticking to your guns) is more harmful than evaluating and voting for the person you believe is scum.

I don't see anything wrong with having a little stubbornness while playing mafia

if you let other people direct your path you're just as likely to be helping the mafia as the town

and since when did I advocate keeping your vote on someone when you think someone else is scum? I never said that

I said vote who you think is scum and stick to it

if you have a better reason to think someone else is scum or you are no longer quite as sure about the person you're voting by all means switch your vote

but don't let other people direct your vote, that's my point

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:02 PM, aemonkristen said:

In essence, you said: keep voting someone even if you can't explain why you think they are scum because people are going to vote for you if you take your vote off.

bullshit

that is not what I said at all

I'm done justifying myself to you

it's obvious you're only reading what you want to read

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:02 PM, aemonkristen said:

What would you consider a good reason for not explaining your vote on someone? The only reasons for not explaining your vote is because you are just going along with the crowd, you are throwing out a random vote, or you have a personal grudge against the person that precludes any in-game scumminess. I say again, every vote after activity begins needs to have a reason or it is suspect.

the fact that those are the only reasons you can come up with shows me how narrowminded you are concerning mafia strategy

[aemonkristen]

  On 2/1/2012 at 12:50 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/1/2012 at 12:44 PM, bgrishinko said:

Vote: Nolder

 

Nolder uses day 1 randomness to plant the idea of SK. Covering for his own role?

actually I said Serial Killer because it makes a lot more sense than Mafia

if Christine had team mates she'd be a little less nervous I think and wouldn't feel like she'd need to plant sympathy seeds so early

I guess she could maybe be a Lyncher? how common are those in basic games here?

the only third party scum I can think of that fits is Serial Killer

 

 

Just to end the "I never said third party" argument once and for all. You said "Third party".

[Nolder]

did I say it when I voted her though?

[aemonkristen]

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

 

Why do I feel like you just don't want to admit what you said? The bolded section is all about not listening to what anyone else says and staying with your vote.

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:22 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:02 PM, aemonkristen said:

No. You said "stick to your guns". At no point in this post did you say that there was a need to constantly evaluate information and change your vote accordingly.

I like how you take a little piece of what I said and try to make it seem like I'm saying something completely different than what I was

talk about twisting words...

 

my entire bit of advice was all about thinking for yourself and having reasons for your actions

at no point did I say the words "constantly evaluate information and change your vote accordingly" no

but it amounts to the same thing as having a reason

although I'd honestly argue against changing your vote too often as it makes you look like a vote hopper (I am very guilty of this myself)

 

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:22 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:02 PM, aemonkristen said:

In essence, you said: keep voting someone even if you can't explain why you think they are scum because people are going to vote for you if you take your vote off.

bullshit

that is not what I said at all

I'm done justifying myself to you

it's obvious you're only reading what you want to read

 

I never said you had to justify yourself to me. I just disagree with most of what you said. The fact that you continue trying to make it mean something else just intrigues me.

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:22 PM, Nolder said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:02 PM, aemonkristen said:

What would you consider a good reason for not explaining your vote on someone? The only reasons for not explaining your vote is because you are just going along with the crowd, you are throwing out a random vote, or you have a personal grudge against the person that precludes any in-game scumminess. I say again, every vote after activity begins needs to have a reason or it is suspect.

the fact that those are the only reasons you can come up with shows me how narrowminded you are concerning mafia strategy

 

I realize that you have been playing this game for roughly a million years and have experienced things such as I can only dream of. Again, I invite you to broaden my mafia horizons with reasons and fact instead of personal insults. Please inform me in what other situations one would decline to give a reason, even a false reason, for placing a vote after the game is well and truly afoot?

[aemonkristen]

Forgot to bold for the first section of the previous post.

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

[Red2111]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yep, that about sums it up

[Sakaea]

^^ LMFAO

[Lenlo]

So many conflicting views.

So many people with seemingly helpful advice!

So confused!

Alright lets do this, no more worrying about all this random stuff.

*Dives into the crazy ocean that is DM Mafia*

[Nolder]

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:52 PM, aemonkristen said:

  On 2/2/2012 at 3:03 PM, Nolder said:

another bit of advice which I don't think gets thrown around often enough to newbies: stick to your guns

whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it

they're just as likely to cry foul if you take your vote off because of pressure as keeping it on someone with pressure

your vote is often your only power as town

don't be afraid to use it

 

Why do I feel like you just don't want to admit what you said? The bolded section is all about not listening to what anyone else says and staying with your vote.

ok...looking at what you bolded perhaps you're just misunderstanding

 

I think you're reading what I said like this "stick to your guns whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it." when it is supposed to be read like this "stick to your guns. whether you explain yourself or not if you think you have a reason to vote somebody don't worry too much about what other people say about it."

 

  On 2/2/2012 at 5:52 PM, aemonkristen said:

Please inform me in what other situations one would decline to give a reason, even a false reason, for placing a vote after the game is well and truly afoot?

for one perhaps the voter is a cop with a guilty result who doesn't want to claim but can't actually find an on thread justification for why someone should want to follow his vote

[aemonkristen]

That would be a very, very bad move for the cop because no one will follow his lead unless he has a reason or states outright that he is the cop. Voting with no explanation, as you know, leads people to vote you for just throwing your vote out there because it is what a scum member would do. The town then goes round and round until the cop outs himself or herself and we are back to square 1. I know you have seen this happen and I know you vote for people who do not give an explanation. In that situation it is better for the cop to 1) find a reason to vote for the person, 2) come right out and claim cop while voting for the scum, or 3) vote for a different player who he/she believes is scum and has a reason to back up the vote. I also find it difficult to understand why the cop would not have a reason for voting a person that he/she had enough suspicions about to investigate.

 

personal note- I am not trying to piss you off or put down your playstyle. I am just pointing out where I disagree with you.