Newbie 1517: Crossroads Mafia (Game Over)

[acryon]

We can be pretty sure that we have 2 active town roles (as setup B is not in action if the mafia sent in a kill).
That would give us 2 mafiosos, 2 PRs and 4 VTs.
A massclaim would narrow the search of the day down to 6 suspects (unless we have double claims - which I think is unlikely as it would be too much of a chance for them).

So, what do others say? Would the town benefit from a massclaim, or is the chance to high that we neuter the PR's?

This, in the same post, does not. He outright says that claiming would narrow the search. How is that arguing against the massclaim? While he does ask for other's opinions, that reads to me like he's saying he thinks it's a good idea.

I wouldn't say stating that it would narrow the search down to 6 suspects is arguing for it. Who would possibly think an action exposing potentially useful roles while leaving the possible suspect list at still 75% of the players is a good idea? If anything, that reads to me like an argument against it.

[Not_Mafia]

Starting my readthrough now. I know nothing of any flips and will be updating periodically through the day

Spoiler: Pages 1-3

7: This seems weirdly self conscious for a RVS vote, in his other games he's done the standard lulzy RVS vote

16: Hate this, "I intend to use the time fully so I'm going to withhold my vote"

20: Won't RVS but will random FoS? Okay

24: Disagree, this is weirder (Random FoSing?) than the usual newb misunderstanding of RVS or advocating no lynch etc, his join date is may and he has played before

26: This makes sense kinda, I guess, maybe believable would be more accurate.

33: This is what I see more as the newb town RVS tentativeness, not what Doogal was doing.

35: Willing to joke around and draw attention to themself when they're already in the spotlight in an at least somewhat negative light, indicates town

39: Mutiny!

48: Clearly an RVS vote, why the response saying you're town?

64: This post reads as quite awkward and forced to me. The L-2 thing is a valid enough concern, not one I particularly agree with nonetheless that was a bad vote, accompanied by the obligatory "oh no guys RVS, look everyone I'm getting us out of it". On top of that the TSO thing came out of nowhere and he already knew why Doogal chose not to vote, why no comment on that?

More in 4-5 hours or so. Victor is my early suspect. Looks like scum who doesn't know how to handle RVS as scum.

[Billi bilaði]

...48: Clearly an RVS vote, why the response saying you're town?
...

Because I am town, and so the vote should be use to hunt the mafia.
But, then again, I would probably have said the same thing if I wasn't.

[Clusk92]

Sorry about the long abscence - I will catch up soon

[Clusk92]

The Doogal lynch happened really fast, and Rach's wagon disappeared very quickly after being put to L-1. This indicates to me a scum counter-wagon.

Rach has a townread on Doogal in #232 and just SIX posts later hammers him. That change of mind wasn't natural in that short space of time.

VOTE: Not_Mafia

[Malakittens]

The Doogal lynch happened really fast, and Rach's wagon disappeared very quickly after being put to L-1. This indicates to me a scum counter-wagon.

Rach has a townread on Doogal in #232 and just SIX posts later hammers him. That change of mind wasn't natural in that short space of time.

VOTE: Not_Mafia

Hmmmmmm.

So, you reads other than that?

[Malakittens]

Glass and shaddowez are correct in the sense that at the pace this game is played there was maybe not plenty of time - BUT - at the pace a last day should be played by town, there was plenty of time. You have 2 weeks advanced notice for last day, so - there was plenty of time.

PS: I think you are a good vote candidate, shaddowez, as the next to last vote on the mislynch:

VOTE: shaddowez

why exactly do you not see Rach's hammer as scum?

Also I notice that you are scumreading me for having focus on rach, but she was doing exactly the same thing to tso/me.

[Malakittens]

You seem to have a pretty strong scum-read on Mala, as you have been questioning her comments and reads quite a bit in her time here. Massclaiming would be bad, especially given the great uncertainty of format, so I like the opposition to it from you. I don't agree with the read, but could you maybe summarize it as a whole?

It's not actually the case that I have a strong scum-read on Mala, I am very on the fence with her. I thought that TSO was town and I can definitely see possible town reasons in her postings (which I will refrain from going into at this point), but her reads are so drastically different than mine (at least, yesterday they were) that I want to know where these reads are coming from and what I may be missing.

Actually, there's a third option, which is even more likely than the first. You don't know when your activity was used, as per the Role PM.

You are indeed correct.

Our reads could be different because I'm using other approaches to scumhunt that are different from yours.

I kinda tend to have a list of scum tells that I look for, use gut and meta. I also reaction test every now and then, but that's less common of a tactic i use in newbies because I sometimes have issues reading newer players or players i dont have much experience in playing with.

[penguin_alien]

Vote Count 2.02:

With eight alive, it takes five to lynch!

Clusk92 (L-5):
Billi bilaoi (L-4): shaddowez
Glass (L-5):
shaddowez (L-4): Billi bilaoi
acryon (L-5):
VictorDeAngelo (L-5):
Not_Mafia (L-4): Clusk92
Malakittens (L-5):

Not voting: Glass, acryon, VictorDeAngelo, Not_Mafia, Malakittens

V/LA:

Deadline is in (expired on 2014-08-09 20:56:55)

[Glass]

16: Hate this, "I intend to use the time fully so I'm going to withhold my vote"

20: Won't RVS but will random FoS? Okay

Don't worry, we already lynched him. Please be town, N_M.

The Doogal lynch happened really fast, and Rach's wagon disappeared very quickly after being put to L-1. This indicates to me a scum counter-wagon.

Rach has a townread on Doogal in #232 and just SIX posts later hammers him. That change of mind wasn't natural in that short space of time.

Did Rach hammer Doogal because she thought he was scum? I think it is more likely that she realized that the lynch was either going to be her or Doogal, and better Doogal than her. Not to mention that Doogal had already claimed and getting more claims allows for easier PR hits and whatnot.

I am getting bad vibes from Clusk, half of his ISO is him trying to spread doubt "this could all be a scum bluff" or "be careful guys, somebody might hammer. Not that I am going to unvote or anything"

@Clusk
What is your Victor read right now?

[shaddowez]

I wouldn't say stating that it would narrow the search down to 6 suspects is arguing for it. Who would possibly think an action exposing potentially useful roles while leaving the possible suspect list at still 75% of the players is a good idea? If anything, that reads to me like an argument against it.

To me, it's the phrasing. Saying something slightly different, such as "it would only narrow the search down to 6 suspects", makes it sound like it's less for the argument. He never outright says he's against it, and since all we have to go off of is what he wrote and how we interpret it, that's how I read it.

PS: I think you are a good vote candidate, shaddowez, as the next to last vote on the mislynch:

VOTE: shaddowez

Considering this was the post

immediately

after I voted you, this seems like a really weak defense for what is more an OMGUS vote than anything.

shaddowez, you had me at null read on day one.
You're first vote is on me in post 47, then you move to Victor in 72 (not so long after) and to Mala in post 209.
You jump back to me briefly in post 216 before putting L-1 on Doogal.
So, I don't seem to be such a clear target for you on day one as you try to point out.
You only give an official mafia-read on me on day 2.

My first vote on you was in RVS, which others have already pointed out. Therefore, to be fair my first vote wasn't on you until post 216. I don't know why I had the word

until

in my post #270. Bad editing on my part, which I apologize for. I also realize that people have to take what they read from me, same as the reasoning I used for you above.

Yes, I null read you on Day 1, before I voted for you. Then in the post I voted you in, I gave reasonings for my vote. I'm not going to update my reads list every time I place a vote.

Yes, I put pros and cons for massclaim on the table for discussion, but I didn't claim - so I wasn't all that for it.
This is my second game on site, so of course I ask others for opinions, and as it turns out, we have an experienced player that has experience with this situation here.
So... you're fishing in murky waters.

I'm not sure I understand this. I said I wasn't fond of the entire discussion, and that to me it read like you were for it. I never said that you were completely for it. Also, I pointed out that you asked for opinions, but didn't use that as any sort of argument.....so again, not sure where you're going with this.

Yes, as you noticed on day 1, Victor never appeared on my radar! ... Not!
Now, Victor was first on the wagon, and he had my vote for most of day 1.
I was second on the wagon, and as I've read my role-post I'm not on my radar.
Then came Glass and you, and put you both high on the notice board for that -
and the only voter I want to put on the back-burner is the Lynch-voter - which I put to L-1 near the end of day 1.
So, run that by me again who on the wagon that lynched Doogal didn't get on my radar?

You're taking my words out of context. Here's the part of my post you're referring to:

PS: I think you are a good vote candidate, shaddowez, as the next to last vote on the mislynch:

Billi

- Are you saying all scum has to do to avoid your radar is make sure to vote earlier on the wagon? This reasoning for voting me makes no sense whatsoever.

The reason you provided for voting me was because I was the L-1 vote. With this logic, the L-X vote isn't deserving of a vote. I've at least provided reasons for my vote on you.

So, other than vote placement, why the scum reads on me or Glass?

NM

- Any more posts? It's been well over 4-5 hours.

Victor

- Have your reads changed any since D1?

[Billi bilaði]

...
why exactly do you not see Rach's hammer as scum?

I see it more as selfpreservation after the mafia has setup a tasty counterwagon on which she can save herself.
(I think somebody already pointed that out in a way.)

...
Also I notice that you are scumreading me for having focus on rach, but she was doing exactly the same thing to tso/me.

Rach was focusing on T S O in meta only. Her vote on him was RVS and didn't change until she hammered. She puts your slot as weak scum but is never trying to actively point you out as scum. So, she is either playing wery badly a mafia-role, or she is a townie that never gets the focus on the game.
Your slot, on the other hand has more than twice as many posts as Rach but not very much more focus on other players out of your tunnels. It smells to me as mafia trying to keep the activity up.
You say that you are always agressive, but why are you only agressive to your focus players?

[Billi bilaði]

...

Yes, as you noticed on day 1, Victor never appeared on my radar! ... Not!
Now, Victor was first on the wagon, and he had my vote for most of day 1.
I was second on the wagon, and as I've read my role-post I'm not on my radar.
Then came Glass and you, and put you both high on the notice board for that -
and the only voter I want to put on the back-burner is the Lynch-voter - which I put to L-1 near the end of day 1.
So, run that by me again who on the wagon that lynched Doogal didn't get on my radar?

You're taking my words out of context. Here's the part of my post you're referring to:

PS: I think you are a good vote candidate, shaddowez, as the next to last vote on the mislynch:

Billi

- Are you saying all scum has to do to avoid your radar is make sure to vote earlier on the wagon? This reasoning for voting me makes no sense whatsoever.

The reason you provided for voting me was because I was the L-1 vote. With this logic, the L-X vote isn't deserving of a vote. I've at least provided reasons for my vote on you.

So, other than vote placement, why the scum reads on me or Glass?
...

Vote placements are a huge deal in my book in such a quick-lynch as I claim this to be.
I have listed you as one of my top suspects before - stating that you and Mala are my mafia-team of choice.
Glass gets an inherited mafia-vibe because Lucy replacing out after 1 post smells bad to me. I know people argue against that kind of suspicions (but it was true in my last game), and so I'm trying to keep that notion on the down and low.

I took your words at face value. If they were taken out of context then that is my english skills (or lacks of) playing up.

So, if you have 2 suspects, and decide to place your vote on one of them, does that mean that the other one isn't deserving of a vote?

[acryon]

I am getting bad vibes from Clusk, half of his ISO is him trying to spread doubt "this could all be a scum bluff" or "be careful guys, somebody might hammer. Not that I am going to unvote or anything"

These are the same thoughts I had on him in my initial reads.

Clusk - Possibly Scum
The primary scummy things I have seen from Clusk are that on two different occasions, making a comment about "mafia wouldn't be stupid enough to...". Usually when someone is trying to paint a picture of what mafia do or don't do, they are trying to give the town a mafia description that will eventually clear themselves due to mismatch.

Just quoting so it can be added to the current discussion.

Also to that point:

No-ones stupid enough you're right, still possible for an accidental hammer though.

The Doogal lynch happened really fast, and Rach's wagon disappeared very quickly after being put to L-1. This indicates to me a scum counter-wagon.

Rach has a townread on Doogal in #232 and just SIX posts later hammers him. That change of mind wasn't natural in that short space of time.

VOTE: Not_Mafia

You said no one is stupid enough to put in the final vote as mafia, yet you are voting for Rach for doing exactly that.

Take this with a grain of salt, as there is some imagination here, but a possible scenario to think about:

Clusk lays out in two different early posts that scum most likely wouldn't give the final vote. This paves the way for Rach to hammer Doogal without suspicion despite how quick it was. Unfortunately, the other circumstances surrounding that wagon and Rach's posts themselves continued to make her seem very guilty(at least to me and a couple others). As she was unable to post very much, this took off some heat on her which, unfortunately for Clusk, turned to him. Seeing himself in the heat, he finds the perfect way to get out: lead a lynch on his mafia counterpart. Not only can he take the current heat off of himself by trying to put town onto something he knows we can probably get behind, but he clears himself in the future as the person who lead town to kill scum.

[penguin_alien]

Prodding VictorDeAngelo

[Not_Mafia]

Spoiler: Pages 4-10

82: ?

83: Bad oversimplification of the Doogal town case

87: I agree with all of this except the part about liking votes on you, I think it's fine to like or dislike certain votes on your wagon from an alignment perspective.

98: Where did this inference come from?

100: not buying this, that was a bad Slayer's gambit. Doogal was only an easy wagon page 1, by the time of that vote he became a reasonable poor wagon to push for an easy lynch

121: I like Glass

122: I like Glass more

124: Don't like this reaction, 123 was a valid observation and this seems so hyperbolic and unnecessarily dismissive in response, singling out "pressing" like that seems like a semantics argument to evade answering the question properly.

134: I'll never understand the paralytic fear some people have of L-1, as long as it's declared it's fine, and good pressure

139: More of this appealing for towncred because "I got us out of RVS." Act scummy ---> Claim Slayer's Gambit ---> Say it got us out of RVS ---> absolved of all scumminess. Yeah, no, still not buying it.

Why the claim here? No intent open with a counterwagon on TSO?

TSO saying L-1 isn't inherently bad is BS but it's bad for Doogal to dislike his top scumread being put at L-1?

More melodrama about his wagon at the end of the post. From the post above mine he somehow wasn't d1 lynch for some reason.

144 & 145: More melodrama and pointless resignation to the lynch, reads a caught scum to me.

152: urgh, I hope this is not why the wagon derailed

156: This makes more sense, but I would have absolutely been bussing had I been Victor's partner in that situation

163: ? Why are naked votes on inactives becoming a theme?

167: Page 7 and we're seriously back to that?

170: What was the TSO wagon?

174: How and when did you get a townread on my slot when Rach had done near-0 at that point? And your vote always serves a purpose, why remove it?

180: He's bad for pressuring active players? What?

189: You think he was distancing from Victor? Explain this please

191: Well congratulations, you managed to call pretty much everyone scum in the space of half a page

193: I agreed with him that post came off defensively

202: That's a rather stark readflip on Victor, needs more explanation

222: You included quite bare reads other players so why not the TSO slot?

225, In regard to your Billi read, to quote goodmorning, effort is not indicative of alignment

227: Why not just put her on L-1 and announce it normally?

230: Where did this strong scum read on Doogal come from?

234: Don't like this vote, Doogal clearly states a progression in his read since his pressure vote

236: Why?

237: Why Doogal over Rach, that was true of both of them

239: That was an awful speed wagon and every vote on there was suspect. I would not at all be surprised if both scum were on that.

[acryon]

222: You included quite bare reads other players so why not the TSO slot?

TSO had just been replaced and to be honest I wasn't too sure at the time of posting about how to comment on replaced players, so you can chalk that up to my not fully understanding the format. My lack of strong reads on him combined with my uncertainty caused me to leave him out at that time.

For what it's worth, my most recent individual player list reads includes everybody.

[Not_Mafia]

Spoiler: Day 2

250: Why on earth would we massclaim because a no kill occured?

252: If an role with investigative potential like a JK blocked the kill they will make that apparent in one way or another. Suggesting massclaim on the offchance of this and outing PRs to reduce the lynch pool is terrible, there's a reason we have intent to hammer and this is it. With your join date I have trouble believing you sincerely thought this was a good suggestion

257: More melodrama, how is you making a terrible and anti-town suggestion

284: Hi, my username is not a lie, also, spoiler alert

286: I agree it was a pure survivalist hammer, but when it was the end of the day and it was her or claimed vt, why does it indicate scum?

VOTE: Victor

Starting here.

Overall I have scum reads or leanings on Victor, Billi, Shadow and Clusk. Billi has a lot of weird posts but I'm not sure if it's an ESL issue and it's clouding my read a bit. I agree with Glass read on Clusk. Acryon is null

Mala and Glass are townreads. Glass is asking the right question in a lot of instances and seems to be genuinely scumhunting, still not spotless though, the Doogal vote is the main blemish. I was townreading TSO and Mala has done nothing to change that, and her Rach read feels natural , anyone who has played with Rach 2-3 times or more will tell you she has a very set way she behaves as town and is usually insanely easy to read when town, she was dropping none of those usual obv town tells here. And before someone calls amished tell, I am fully aware of it as I am writing this post.

[Not_Mafia]

Why is half the playerlist not voting?

[acryon]

Why is half the playerlist not voting?

I'm still between voting you and Clusk. I want to hear some more from Clusk before I make a decision.

[Glass]

VOTE: Clusk
Good idea, N_M.

Glass gets an inherited mafia-vibe because Lucy replacing out after 1 post smells bad to me. I know people argue against that kind of suspicions (but it was true in my last game), and so I'm trying to keep that notion on the down and low.

Ya, good job with keeping that on the down and low. To be honest, I am not sure why this needs to be kept on the down and low, you are allowed to talk about incorrect tells if you want.

@N_M
Well, I voted Doogal because I have had a slight scumread on him all game, and I have had a townread on Rach. The townread on Rach is because of meta, the only other game that I played with her she sat with her vote on my wagon forever and didn't really do much else. That is pretty consistent with her play this game, so I gave her a decent townread. Now that you are in the game hopefully I can get a more solid read since more activity and whatnot. I also figured that trying to start a wagon on Clusk with so little time remaining would have ended in failure, so I went with my secondary suspect, who already had a couple of votes.

[shaddowez]

NM

-

237: Why Doogal over Rach, that was true of both of them

In Post #209 I did my reads list, where I already had a slight scumread on Doogal, and null on Rach. That's why when I did change my vote, I moved it over to Doogal not Rach, even though my reasoning technically applied to both of them.

[Not_Mafia]

The townread on Rach is because of meta, the only other game that I played with her she sat with her vote on my wagon forever and didn't really do much else. That is pretty consistent with her play this game, so I gave her a decent townread.

Why do you find that alignment indicative and not just a symptom of inactivity/her IRL issues?

[Not_Mafia]

Why is half the playerlist not voting?

I'm still between voting you and Clusk. I want to hear some more from Clusk before I make a decision.

If you find my slot scummy you should be voting me, if Clusk comes in and you find him scummier you can always just move your vote. If you're town you should always try to be using your vote.

[Glass]

Why do you find that alignment indicative and not just a symptom of inactivity/her IRL issues?

...Because it was the same with the last game I played with her. If someone has the same plays from one game to another it is at least slightly indicative that they are the same alignment.

Speaking of Rach's play, I believe that Mala missed a question of mine:

@Mala

Does Rach not typically have sticky votes?