Newbie 1517: Crossroads Mafia (Game Over)

[acryon]

...

@Billi - I like your reads chart a lot, I think it's really helpful. But those are Victor's reads, not mine, so they're probably going to change (hint hint).

I am actually starting to not like them a great deal, I think that they will help the mafia keep their story straight and also are likely incorrect on quite a few things since they are based on Billi's interpretation. I will say that what he has down for me is not entirely accurate, as I have not been 100% transparent with my reads.
...

When you play a game like, f.ex., Bridge, you keep your cards close to you, but still try to give your partner as much information about your hand as is legal - knowing that the other pair of players get all that same information, and are allowed to question your partner on how he interprets your tells. The partner has to be able to back up his reads from your tells by the system you are playing, or else you're in trouble.

When you play a game with partners you have to trust the information you are given, and you have to believe in your skills to win although you are giving information to your opposition as well as to your posse.

I.e. I believe in the sharing of information.
When I started to play mafia I even called out for mass-claims in games, while I was still figuring out the pros and cons.
(Hence, I wanted to hear what others had to say about Victors call for massclaim before I judged it fully.)
So, I believe that my chart is giving out information that both sides can use, AND that it is better for all to have that information to share, and not keep players in the dark about how I see the game.

If my chart is wrong because you want to give your fellows wrong reads to work with, then my take on that is that you are not doing the best for the town.

Somebody (Mala?) said I was not giving out too much about what I conclude from the responses I get from my possible reaction-baiting posts. That may be true. But one thing I can say now from reading my chart: shaddowes has the highest score for being positive in his reads of others. That gives me an indication that he wants to stay on the good side of most players (although that doesn't seem to be working as well for him as it does for Glass).
I don't believe shaddowes can "keep his story straight" from this point on after this information is out.

PS: If the mafia needs information from the town to keep their stories straight, then they're not too interested in the game.

While I don't like claiming unless we have a mostly-clear path to victory from it, I agree with the general concept of open information and made a very similar point in another game regarding gameplay, so I'll just quote it here:

I think the power of information in the hands of the town is more powerful than in the hands of mafia. Absence of it might make it harder for mafia, but it makes it a lot harder for town as well. We're the ones putting together the puzzle, not the mafia, so seeing the pieces benefits us a lot more than it benefits them.

I clearly can't force anyone to give out their reads, but I will continue to give out mine, because maybe something I found will be the piece you're missing to complete your reads. I personally think that's how we strengthen and solidify reads as a whole.

Mafia already knows who town is, so we have a lot more to figure out than they do. We need all the help we can get.

Although I am still on Clusk/N_M, I do want to hear from shadowz, because the mistake in 363 is pretty sloppy.

[Billi bilaði]

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that he can't really be a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

VOTE: Clusk92

[Clusk92]

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that he can't really be a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

VOTE: Clusk92

You don't think scum make mistakes?

[Clusk92]

I can't believe your top scum read has evaporated because he's making mistakes

[Clusk92]

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Billi

[acryon]

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that he can't really be a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

VOTE: Clusk92

Not that I necessarily think you are scum Billi, but this was definitely very loose. Mistakes can come from inattention by scum or town, and someone making mistakes should certainly never absolve them.

[Glass]

UNVOTE:

Actual post coming in a bit.

[Billi bilaði]

When a player gives out a misread of situation number of times, he's not too attentive. Definitely not as careful as a mafioso should be.
So, I can easily move my vote from that kind of player to another player whom I've very recently given a read on (after questioning) being just as willing to lynch.
Also giving that votes are hardly moving at all, and that takes the player to the top-votee at L-2.

Although a number of people were giving out suspicion towards shaddowez they are not acting on it with their votes for a real pressure - and do we really want to go like that for the next 4 days, and then have half the players voting in a hurry because "there's just not enough time for a discussion"?

Glass, were you worried that two players would jump to the lynch?

[shaddowez]

It worries me slightly that he doesn't realise N_M replaced into Rach's slot (hence why I voted for him). He needs to be paying closer attention to the game.

N_M had also replaced into another game I was in, and I forgot that he was a replace into this one. I generally like to let replacements speak rather than voting for the slot, so I'm still not fond of the vote, but not as bad as I made it out to be in my previous post.

Shaddow: can you please point out the contradiction please?

@ Billi: Assuming that the three on there are town, that leaves 2 mafia votes out there. While not the smartest of moves, the 2 mafia could quickly come on and vote TSO, resulting in a mislynch.

Even if that was the case, I doubt the mafia would be that stupid, as they'll be prime candidates for a lynch the next day for lynching someone so early.

Here, Doogal and Billi were talking about someone being at L-2. You play it off as not being a big deal, as you don't think the mafia would be that stupid. You make no mention of an accidental vote here whatsoever.

Why have you put him at L-1 so early?

Because he's pretty damn scummy and I've given him enough chances to prove himself.

L-1 isn't an inherently bad thing; no-one here is stupid enough to quickhammer and it ramps up the pressure on Victor.

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

Here, you give TSO a hard time about putting someone at L-1, citing that somebody could accidentally hammer. While not a direct contradiction, it still displays a different opinion. In the first example, it would be easy enough for scum to put them at L-1, and have someone else hammer (accidentally or not). The argument seems to be too contradictory with only L-2 vs L-1 being the difference in premises.

[shaddowez]

And nothing against Penguin, but I'd also like to point out the N_M/Rach replace isn't noted in the Player List (neither is the Bins/Victor, but that one is a lot more recent)

[Glass]

The fact that Clusk didn't respond well to Shadow's post doesn't really give him many townpoints.

Glass, were you worried that two players would jump to the lynch?

I was shaking in my boots.

I don't like this post. It's a setup for a WIFOM argument, especially if Clusk decided to hammer a townie, but give them time before doing so.

Okay, maybe it is a setup for a WIFOM argument, but unless he actually goes on to use said WIFOM argument, I am not seeing it as scummy.

Initial vote on Victor seems fairly weak, especially since he's citing the reason as Victor's reason for his vote being weak.

Okay, so Clusk's initial vote on Victor was scummy because it was weak. You do realize that you are basing (at least partially) your scumread on Clusk on the fact that his initial vote was weak, and therefore voting weakly must be (at least partially) indicative of scumminess? Meaning that Clusk's initial vote wasn't really weak, was it?
A better argument to be made (which I will make), is that Victor's vote was not actually weak. If you look at all the votes before Victor's, do you see any that is stronger? I sure do not. Realize that at that point in the game there is very little content to go off of, as the game progresses it is only natural that votes has more reasoning behind them.

Are you, in the space of a few posts moving Bins first to vanilla townie and then all the way back to strong scum?
Is this food reference based on some history between you two, or just one of the jokes spinning of from this steak?

(I think its a joke)
(And for reference, I was joking when I said I was shaking in my boots and when I asked why Bins wasn't lynched yet.)

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that he can't really be a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

Are you seriously saying "shadow is too scummy to be scum"?

[Glass]

When a player gives out a misread of situation number of times, he's not too attentive. Definitely not as careful as a mafioso should be.

Yes, but "should be" =/= "is".

[Malakittens]

...
Bins is v town.

Bins commited the food tell. She's scum.

Can you elaborate, please on these 2 posts?

Are you, in the space of a few posts moving Bins first to vanilla townie and then all the way back to strong scum?
Is this food reference based on some history between you two, or just one of the jokes spinning of from this steak?

The second was a joke.

Also I never said Bins was a VT. I wouldn't actually know that even if I was scum. Unless it was the old setup when scum had a role cop. I just said she's very town.

Yeah we're spinning jokes around.

I'm actually shocked at my change of mind. I'm not sure if I like the Billi wagon as much as I dd before. Him clear in someone because they made a mistake feels genuine. Like he's trying to hunt

[Glass]

Sorry for the triple post, just 1 more thing (hopefully):

So, I can easily move my vote from that kind of player to another player whom I've very recently given a read on (after questioning) being just as willing to lynch.

Ya, I don't see you questioning Clusk anywhere since your last read post which had Mala scummier than Clusk. What I do see is your scumread on Clusk seemingly arbitrarily bypass Mala in terms of scumminess in a single post.

[acryon]

I'm actually shocked at my change of mind. I'm not sure if I like the Billi wagon as much as I dd before. Him clear in someone because they made a mistake feels genuine. Like he's trying to hunt

Yeah I agree with this about Billi. While I think it's completely wrong to clear someone like he did, I didn't read it as scummy.

[Billi bilaði]

...

Glass, were you worried that two players would jump to the lynch?

I was shaking in my boots.
...

It's a bad habit wearing boots indoors, and it can lead to these terrible results.

...

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that he can't really be a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

Are you seriously saying "shadow is too scummy to be scum"?

Mistakes of these kind can be indication of not being a mafioso, so I'm saying shaddowez is maybe too townie to be a mafioso.
So, I'm deducting that Clusk is topping him on the mafioso-list - but I'm not saying that shaddowez goes to the bottom of the list.

PS: Why do so many players think that if you vote for someone that then the last one you voted for is suddenly a soap-washed angel?

[acryon]

Mistakes of these kind can be indication of not being a mafioso, so I'm saying shaddowez is maybe too townie to be a mafioso.
So, I'm deducting that Clusk is topping him on the mafioso-list - but I'm not saying that shaddowez goes to the bottom of the list.

PS: Why do so many players think that if you vote for someone that then the last one you voted for is suddenly a soap-washed angel?

I think it was due to your wording.

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that

he can't really be

a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

VOTE: Clusk92

This reads pretty strong. So just to be clear, where would Shadowz rank on your scum list?

[Billi bilaði]

Sorry for the triple post, just 1 more thing (hopefully):

So, I can easily move my vote from that kind of player to another player whom I've very recently given a read on (after questioning) being just as willing to lynch.

Ya, I don't see you questioning Clusk anywhere since your last read post which had Mala scummier than Clusk. What I do see is your scumread on Clusk seemingly arbitrarily bypass Mala in terms of scumminess in a single post.

The problem with this game is too much lurking, so there's nothing to be sorry about.

I was questioned about my top suspects. I wasn't quesioning Clusk since he was being questioned already.
I noted in my post that Clusk should probably be above Mala in my read list.

And, the responses Clusk gives to my vote tells me he's breaking bad.

[Billi bilaði]

...

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that

he can't really be

a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

VOTE: Clusk92

This reads pretty strong. So just to be clear, where would Shadowz rank on your scum list?

Below Clusk and Mala - close to the list of null reads. (Lets say 3rd-5th place.)

I think you are on the bottom. Then Bins, and maybe Glass, although Glass's retraction of his Clusk vote nudged him up the list.
I don't know where to place Not_Mafia. He came in pretty strong, and then sort of tapered out.

So, how would this list sound:
Clusk92
Malakittens
shaddowez
Not_Mafia
Glass
Bins
acryon
Billi

[acryon]

...

Now I think shaddowez is making so many mistakes because of inattention that

he can't really be

a mafioso.
I think my vote is better used in being the 3rd vote on Clusk, to up the pressure there.

VOTE: Clusk92

This reads pretty strong. So just to be clear, where would Shadowz rank on your scum list?

Below Clusk and Mala - close to the list of null reads. (Lets say 3rd-5th place.)

I think you are on the bottom. Then Bins, and maybe Glass, although Glass's retraction of his Clusk vote nudged him up the list.
I don't know where to place Not_Mafia. He came in pretty strong, and then sort of tapered out.

So, how would this list sound:
Clusk92
Malakittens
shaddowez
Not_Mafia
Glass
Bins
acryon
Billi

Thanks for the reply Billi. I think this should help clear things up for people regarding your reads. To expand on the Not_Mafia uncertainty, what did you think of Rach's activity before she was replaced by N_M?

[Billi bilaði]

I was ready to lynch Rach on day 1, and then she only had one post in this game on day two before replacing out.
I would consider lynching Not_Mafia today, but only if the town can't agree on any of the players I have above on the list.

[Not_Mafia]

Here, you give TSO a hard time about putting someone at L-1, citing that somebody could accidentally hammer. While not a direct contradiction, it still displays a different opinion. In the first example, it would be easy enough for scum to put them at L-1, and have someone else hammer (accidentally or not). The argument seems to be too contradictory with only L-2 vs L-1 being the difference in premises.

Do you think L-2 and L-1 are the same in this context?

[Bins]

Okay, I really don't like this vote:

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Billi

I do agree that Billi's reasoning for switching votes was weak (also I little awkward) - but I don't think that it came from a scum mentality. Why would he move his vote of Shaddow if he was scum? I don't see any reason he would be uncomfortable with the wagon, as it also seems to be gaining momentum. Therefore, I don't see how it caused Clusk to move his vote from someone (me) he said he suspected to be part of the scum team 100% (as he said I would be the partner to both of them).

[acryon]

The fact that Clusk didn't respond well to Shadow's post doesn't really give him many townpoints.

If nothing in your follow-up post contained any defense of Clusk, why did you take your vote off of him?

[Glass]

Mistakes of these kind can be indication of not being a mafioso, so I'm saying shaddowez is maybe too townie to be a mafioso.

I disagree that these sorts of mistakes are indicative of towniness.

If nothing in your follow-up post contained any defense of Clusk, why did you take your vote off of him?

Because shadow has increased in scumminess quite substantially, and Clusk has actually gotten townier in my books since I voted him (Mala's post in particular affected that). The reason I haven't voted for Shadow yet is because I want to see Shadow's response to my post.