NY 120: Flash mafia 2. GAME OVER

[Espeonage]

/confirm

[Espeonage]

Yeah cool.
I hear you.

VOTE: Richard

[Espeonage]

ebwop. That was supposed to include the line. We need a wagon.

[Espeonage]

1) What in your view is the purpose of the RVS?
2) How does using a random generator advance that purpose?

1) It generates discussion and instigates reactions. In saying that, it hardly if ever seems to do either of those very adequately.

That's because you have already shown that you do it wrong. Even playing by normal rvs protocols would have been better.

2) If it has a reason, it is not random, thereby missing the point of the stage's namesake.

lol you're missing the point of rvs. If it was completely random then we would never get anything from the rvs.

Personally, I prefer games with a night start so that RVS is much shorter or overlooked altogether. Bloody thing can die in a fire as far as I'm concerned.

[Espeonage]

Pressure. That is the true aim of rvs. To build pressure and from that things happen. It could be a slip up by a confident scum. Someone falling apart under the pressure or just simply a few small bits like people that don't choose to join the wagon(s).

The proper way is to provide a reasoning. People who post VOTE: suchandsuch for no reason are being anti town. Not anything worth going into but anti town nonetheless. It is those early little tidbits that lead to the first weak cases which leads to pressure which leads us out of rvs. Now I'm glad that we have gotten two great things from this rvs. A wagon on you and this discussion which people can use later on in the day to actually get the game going somewhere.

You are taking the name Random Voting Stage too literally. If you want a proper name something like Non-committal Case Stage would be better as that is more accurate.

All I am saying you did incorrectly (albeit saved by other people and not severe by any measure, not that it is really that important but eh.) was that you robbed the town of a potential post that can be analysed. This is magnified by it being your first post and first impressions are very important in mafia because no matter what people will get opinions from the first bit they read.

That is all for my little rantish thing. Let us continue with the game.

[Espeonage]

ebwop: When i say you were anti town I am not implying you were scummy here. Just that you weren't making the best play in the towns interests which from what I gather you were not aware of seeing as I have just explained it to you.

[Espeonage]

VOTE: Vollkan

[Espeonage]

VOTE: Vollkan

Because?

You tell me.

[Espeonage]

Acceptable but still null.
UNVOTE: vollkan
VOTE: Parama

[Espeonage]

Acceptable but still null.
UNVOTE: vollkan
VOTE: Parama

lol. scum #2 right here

lol. your a better player than that.

[Espeonage]

This is good. When more people have commented we can get this game going places.

[Espeonage]

Nothing yet. the vollkan vote came to nothing. Parama remains to be seen.

[Espeonage]

And I wouldn't expect you to. It is for my benefit not yours ... yet. That is assuming you are town.

I have a suspects just from the reactions on this page. Two in fact. But they will be revealed later when cases can be made.

[Espeonage]

You misinterpret my post.

In rvs we need to give those stupid reasons that some people neglect because it helps get initial reads. My votes here aren't random. Both my vote targets were chosen because they were what I deemed to be the most likely to result in useful reactions that I may use later when making cases.

[Espeonage]

Was going to make a post but preview shows some questions.

I have two suspects. Neither of which I have voted for yet.

Because my cases at this point lack the weight needed to convince the town at the moment. It would just create confusion and make the cases harder to make in the long run. I will be making cases on my suspects because they are scum. I'm sure everyone would agree that is what you do when you think you have found scum.

Oh and it was acceptable because it was a good reaction. The tone was good you didn't show the signs I would expect to find from a scums omgus ish vote and thus you have stayed null. In short you had an acceptable reaction by my standards.

[Espeonage]

vollkan. - points for the inquiry.

[Espeonage]

vollkan. He was giving a summary of his stances. Don't expect a full on explaination. I would even go so far as to say that if he gave reasons I would consider it scummy.

- points as in you are leaner closer to the scum side of the radar for asking.

PE: I have no qualms with his questions of me. I do have issue with the richard questions though.

[Espeonage]

ebwop. Contrary to what you believe I think I am playing well. I have two scum. I just need the third and I will have them all. Then it is just a case of convicing the rest of you that I am actually smarter than I appear.

[Espeonage]

1) Every case you make on anyone is an attempt to get the town to believe you. That was all I was refering to there.
2) Scummy people will do scummy things. Weak cases aren't good. I will wait until they do something conventionally scummy and then act. I already have my bases cases.
3) Weak cases cause stronger opinions. town would get caught up in the little things and get confused whereas scum can then see what they did wrong, rectify it and then we get nowhere.

4) That doesn't mean you can fish for information. It is a scummy tactic. There is a difference between interrogation and information fishing.
5) See 4.

why did you quote the last bit.

[Espeonage]

That is definantly a reason not to post them. Especially when the power of the case is that the scum don't yet know what they are dealing with. There is more than one way to catch scum.

Cases that have one very strong point that has a convoluded path is weak by this site's meta. Consider it a partial case with a confusing base that will explaination and backing up.

information fishing is like role fishing but for information. Scum really likes to know exactly what the town is thinking.

Because he isn't acting on the unexplained parts yet. Until he does that he doesn't need to provide reasoning and it would be pro scum to do so even if it isn't scummy.

[Espeonage]

Prozac, I expect better from you.

[Espeonage]

Also. What the town has currently is more than fine to be going on with. Mafia is a long game however. The day has barely started. I will have a serious vote well before we get in range of deadline.

[Espeonage]

Ok, you guys need a big easy to read explaination. Get ready.

My arguements may convince some people that my suspects are indeed scum but the cases are a bit weak and more will be gained from not posting them. My second sentence does make sense. If I post the case now when it is an infant then the only thing that comes from it is that scum know the case that is on them. They can change their play. the case loses credibilty and they get off. There is more to be gained from waiting. it is not a surprise attack, it is an exercise that will draw out the scumtells.

No I'm saying I already have the core of the case. I've said all this before. I feel like a broken record. I really wish you were more scummy. It would give you an excuse.

In this particular case I imagine scum would more.

Yes he should but just because you have reasons doesn't mean you should post them. You would suck as a torturer irl. Too hotheaded when people don't comply.

Hope this post has made it easier for everyone to understand that I will have the full scumteam by the end of the day.

[Espeonage]

Nuances are easy to change under the radar.

[Espeonage]

Damage been done. Really obvious if they start changing play based on case, only applicable if case is based on playstyle etc.

<3, this, +1, etc.

</3 -1 et cetera

[Espeonage]

Playstyle related. Thought that was obvious seeing as i have said that I would like it to happen again. I have definantly either said that or implied it strongly.

[Espeonage]

Espeonage, I don't remember you being a guy to get into the action as town, rather sitting back and the like. Link to recent games where you've been active like this please?

I'm not. My recent games have been fraught with inactivity because of shit going on irl. That has all been sorted and with the exams coming up I will have more time to play. (Counter-intuitive but after much trial and error a period of no study actually results in more focus later.)

Umm I have many games as town where I haven'y tried this approach. I did do it once when town earlier but I didn't explain myself well and got speed lynched before I could explain what i was doing. This kind of investigation also got me places in a newbie game that town would have lost if it weren't for my revelation in 5 man lylo that accured in a similar manner to this. Of my three games as scum, 1 is ongoing however I am dead. Another I was lynched after playing the role of confusion sacrifice and the third I almost won by playing a very good lurker game.

So yeah this isn't really part of my meta either side. I don't feel the need to make an alt if I choose to alter my playstyle.

[Espeonage]

Way to ruin a perfectly good scumtrap.

[Espeonage]

UNVOTE: mah vote

@Fishy there was. I wanted three wagons all at tipping point to see who acted where. It was a delicate point in the game. All that can be said from that however is that mbf got town points.

[Espeonage]

For avoiding wagons? Why is that a town thing to do?

Because they were all at tipping point.

[Espeonage]

When there are competing wagons and they are all at the same count alot of shit is going on mentally. Anyway, once a wagon gets bigger than the others it is the wagon that has momentum. When the wagon is on a scum it is usually a null tell because it is a prime time to bus. If the wagon that is voted for is on a townie then the person who changed their vote is even more likely to be a scum trying to get momentum on a townie wagon. mbf, by ignoring the two other wagons gets town points because he didn't force any wagon ahead which is a rather townie move to make seeing as we are definantly not in the rvs any more.

[Espeonage]

Doesn't change the fact that the tipping point exists and he avoided which is pro-town in my eyes.

I said what I said there because tbh I would have expected Parama to do a bit more reading into the situation that saying it outright.

[Espeonage]

Doesn't change the fact that the tipping point exists and he avoided which is pro-town in my eyes.

But it's not a tipping point. It's an "oh wow he went from 3 votes to 4 votes" point. In no way whatsoever does the addition of a single vote to a wagon which is baseless or, at best, exceedingly weak in any way make it appreciably more likely to advance scum's win condition.

It is because they were competing wagons. Wagons have momentum just like anything and it is a great boon to any wagon if it can get ahead of the other wagons that it is competing against.

It was my interpretation of the vote based on game theory.

[Espeonage]

Also guys stop arguing. Town v town (As I am assuming this one is) arguments get town nowhere.

[Espeonage]

I would think that is null not scummy.

[Espeonage]

He has thresholds. He uses them every game.

[Espeonage]

See sig. I'm back now. Expect something in the next couple of days. It is after midnight at the moment.

[Espeonage]

A lynch is better than no lynch. VOTE: UT
Sadly I have to encourage everyone else to do the same. Either that or we are in the poops come tomorrow.

[Espeonage]

There is alot of wifom in Fishy's case. I will post a case when I'm not eating.

[Espeonage]

First paragraph. Doesn't make the case in valid or wrong. It was just me musings.

[Espeonage]

VOTE: Oman

I can't post case now but I am posting this so I have to post the case when I get home.

[Espeonage]

And he does it again. Oman is quite scummy. I have found in my past experience that joking on a regular basis and jovial dismissal of things and basically just a simple sense of nonchalance usually points to scum. He showed this quite a few times day 1 and has just done it again.

Scum usually do this to discredit townies so that people don't listen them. When someone does this once or twice it could mean nothing. When it is done on a regular basis however, it usually points to a scum peep.

[Espeonage]

no

[Espeonage]

@ Parama: Oman, Fishy

@ Oja: I have nothing to say. I'm happy with my vote. I'm reading everything.

[Espeonage]

Already done to an extent and no.