Mini 857 Disney Movie Mafia 2 - The Classics (Roll Credits)

[semioldguy]

Vote: StrangerCoug

in the hopes I'm right this time.

[semioldguy]

It doesn't mean that it's useful now either.

Unvote

[semioldguy]

Starbuck's vote was obviously not random, but without good reasoning either. I'm not sure that it's scummy, but I'd be on the lookout for her reasoning on future votes.

You do realize you've voted for the same reason she did?

I think if I didn't react to a poor-reasoned vote, it would be scummy. First you said you voted to create discussion, then you said you voted to get a reaction. I don't think you really know why you voted, and just don't want to admit it.

This reeks. Not reacting to a poor reasoned vote is not necessarily scummy. In the random voting stages of games, including this one, there are many poorly reasoned votes, often which are not responded to. Does that make all those players scummy? Even after random voting I think reacting in such ways to poorly reasoned votes can be a little bit scummy. You are also deflecting over something minor, which I do find to be scummy.

Okay, this is just getting stupid. Let me know when you guys want to move on.

you can move it on yourself if you feel the need to. What benefit would a town player have of letting everyone else do the work in the game for him? It either gives scum more control over the direction of the game or if scum is the one doing this it allows scum to more easily ride the wagon/case of their choosing without risking getting caught had they tried to start a case themselves; they could just blindly follow a town player who is wrong while simultaneously pushing people toward that case.

Vote: MonkeyMan576

[semioldguy]

You clearly have no interest in discussion, just pointing fingers and making accusations. That's why I left the game. You can think whatever you want.

This is beyond hypocritical coming from the person who refuses to engage in discussion. YOU clearly have no interest in discussion if you are just going to disappear and wait for other to change the subject for you.

If you had an interest in discussion, then you could have taken the discussion somewhere else instead of siting by idly and doing nothing except complain.

[semioldguy]

Your other tactics are scummy.

[semioldguy]

@Chamber, so I am just supposed to take your vote and go with it, without seeing a single reason as to why you voted for me, or that you even acknowledged my presence at all in this game [outside of that vote]?

In my opinion you have greatly overreacted to this vote on you.

[semioldguy]

In my opinion, giving town reads is similar to claiming, and you don't want to give the mafia that kind of info unless you have to.

Please enlighten me on the first part of this sentence.

Either way you're giving scum info about the possible makeup of the town.

Town don't know about the possible makeup of the town aside from themselves, and I don't see how sharing town reads on other people gives anything away about a town setup as we don't know anything about the setup. Scum know more about the setup than town do becaus they hve the identites and roles of their buddies, town doesn't have that. Scum know who the "possible makeup of the town" are. Town doesn't, so how is this helping them exactly?

[semioldguy]

I like my current vote better.

I dont necessarily agree that it leads the scum's kill and I don't think speculation on who scum will or won't kill or why they kill ___ person is beneficial to the town at all. Just because people think that X player is town doesn't mean that they are and doesn't always make that person a valuable kill target. If you disagree on that matter, then we simply disagree, nothing more to it.

[semioldguy]

@Monkey
If you have suspects why aren't you making cases against them or doing any real scum-hunting? How is withholding your suspects and not trying to catch them in a slip, etc. a pro-town way of playing?

[semioldguy]

Hey MonkeyMan576, would you mind not ignoring Post 204?

[semioldguy]

Considering the main reasons Starbuck initially went after you are much different than the case currently on you (and the reasons I am voting for you), why do you continue to insist that the people on your wagon are blindly following when they are able to come up with their own individual reasons for finding you suspicious? I have come to my own conclusion. Starbuck is not preventing players from reaching their own conclusions, nor is she speaking for other players to the extreme you suggest; she has simply read the thread and points out what others have said since you seem to always miss it and continue to miss it.

[semioldguy]

Okay, this is just getting stupid. Let me know when you guys want to move on.

you can move it on yourself if you feel the need to. What benefit would a town player have of letting everyone else do the work in the game for him? It either gives scum more control over the direction of the game or if scum is the one doing this it allows scum to more easily ride the wagon/case of their choosing without risking getting caught had they tried to start a case themselves; they could just blindly follow a town player who is wrong while simultaneously pushing people toward that case.

You clearly have no interest in discussion, just pointing fingers and making accusations. That's why I left the game. You can think whatever you want.

This is beyond hypocritical coming from the person who refuses to engage in discussion. YOU clearly have no interest in discussion if you are just going to disappear and wait for other to change the subject for you.

If you had an interest in discussion, then you could have taken the discussion somewhere else instead of siting by idly and doing nothing except complain.

He also completely ignores the points brought up against him by me. The only time he even responded (which wasn't even a good or even accurate response) was on the most recent page and I had to specifically point out to him that he was ignoring me. If he thinks my reasons are not good then by his own logic he is scummy:

I think if I didn't react to a poor-reasoned vote, it would be scummy.

If not, then he thinks my case against him is good by his own admission. Either way there is a clear contradiction in Monkey's own logic here, as well as in many other of MonkeyMan576's posts. He has done absolutely nothing to defend against the points I bring up against him. He has been a hypocrit in many ways and has been acting scummy in more than one way, none of which has to do with his original vote and reason about the RVS stage.

He makes attempts to discredit the wagon on him by misrepresentation and making ridiculous claims about it, like people are only following Starbuck, which from my point of view is clearly not the case as I am not simply following Starbuck, but following my own reads which MonkeyMan576 has chosen to ignore all game.

Are my posts invisible to you too chamber?

[semioldguy]

So to put it shortly, he ran away from the thread then didn't defend those actions? Cause I can see either alignment running like he did, and I wouldn't be defending them either, as it was clearly wrong, as either alignment.

Did you read my whole post? It doesn't seem like you have, as you missed a good portion of the case.

Even if running away is a mistake you can see either alignment making (which is a view we don't share), there must have been a reason why he did it to begin with, which he has refused to give by ignoring these points on him. I find ignoring other players in the game to be scummy. Town should not ignore anyone, because everyone is a potential suspect.

[semioldguy]

chamber and Gorrad are correct.

[semioldguy]

What about the other 3 players Kmd4390?

[semioldguy]

@StrangerCoug
Why do you have such a strong town read on me?

[semioldguy]

V/LA for a few days.

I am at the hospital right now, had a really bad back muscle spasm, but they've got me drugged up and feeling better and I'm hoping they send me home within a day or two.

[semioldguy]

Got back from the hospital last night, caught up in my other games first. Seems like a few pages have gone by here and the votecount on this page suggests a lot has happened. Will be back later tonight or tomorrow morning to read what I've missed.

[semioldguy]

First instinct is that MonkeyMan’s role is more useful as a scum role. As a town role it makes little sense as the odds are strongly against scum lynches on day one. But if scum get behind it can help them try to catch back up by finding a town power role. I find it strange you refuse to give flavor. The last game when someone said the line “it should be obvious…” about their role it ended up coming from the mouth of a scum role. Assume it isn’t obvious and humor us anyway. If it’s really that obvious it can’t hurt to say it.

At this point people are switching to chamber rather quickly, which I do not agree with. (as I kept reading it also seemed to fade quickly) I don’t find him particularly scummy nor do I agree with the reasons people are using when placing their votes on him.

@Starbuck
Asking questions is only pro-town if you are able to do something with the answers. Otherwise it just gives of the appearance of being helpful without really doing much.

@MonkeyMan
The speculation that Pixar characters are scum is just that: speculation. It is distracting and won’t get us anywhere in terms of scumhunting. Lynching Starbuck gives no info on the scum role make-up (specifically since you separate this from the potential Starbuck-Crazy scumpair theory)

Regarding this supposed “slip”… why the heck would Starbuck point out a slip that condemns herself to be lynched? Anyone who didn't agree with the wagon on MonkeyMan for his poor play is seriously hypcritical for voting Stabuck based on her poor play.

Starbuck’s claim is more believable to me for her being town than MonkeyMan’s claim. Buzz Lightyear is an amazing vanilla candidate. He’s a TOY. He thinks he can fly but he can’t, he only falls with style. His laser is a little, harmless flashing light.

StrangerCoug is becoming suspicious to me, and maybe you’ll just be one of those players who I always find suspicious, but I really don’t understand your strong town read on me earlier. No one else had a town read on me then, and if I’m being perfectly honest, I would have a somewhere in the neutral read on myself.

[semioldguy]

Scumlist:

Fuzzylightning

- Late to the first two wagons before later requesing replacement. Had some strange responses in the thread, many of his posts contain nothing useful. Generally keeping to the background. Overreated to the single vote placed upon him. His Unvote in ISO 13 was strange/scummy as well.

StrangerCoug

- Has been on all three wagon so far, and mostly just following on the coattails of others. Partially gut feeling here and also uneasy that he got such a strong own read on me, feels like I was being buddied (since it seemed to wok against me last game).

Jazzmyn

- Lots of lurking, has also been present on all wagons (though arguabl not actually a part of the MonkeyMan wagon). When chamber's wagon sways, she comes in with a rather opportunistic vote on Starbuck with not much else to add.

Neutral:

MonkeyMan

- I'm still not sure I believe your claim to be town. I still find you scummy. You essentially claimed the closest thing possible to vanilla and I don't know why everyon think that should save you. Also don't like this claim because if you are town and we lynch town today you are a really easy mislynch tomorrow and two mislynches to start he game is not where I want to be. Leaning scum on you still.

Brandi

- I disagree with a lot of your game assessments, but nothing sticks out as overtly scummy. Neutral leaning possible scum here

Crazy

- No solid read here.

YankCane151

- Needs to post more, but nothing bad so far.

Gorrad

- Nothing too out of the usual from here. But nothing that points to town either.

Town:

Starbuck
Chamber
Kmd4390

[semioldguy]

WIFOM, much? I don't know what Starbuck's mindset is. It doesn't make her play less scummy.

Which is why I think it's pointless to discuss and is distracting. I don't know what our mindset is, and it doesn't mke your play less scummy, especially when you've refused to answer questions about your play all game.

That's based on your opinion that my play has been poor, which I disagree with.

You self-admittdly have made poor play decisions this game. Unless you've had a change of heart and think your hissy-fit and rage-quit until being prodded was good play.

Even if he's a toy, he's still heroic. He saved Woody. And just because he's a toy and doesn't have "real powers", doesn't make him vanilla.

Not having real power does make someone vanilla, and if you've actually watched Disney movies most of the characters can be considered heroic and thy don't need special powers to be heroic. Case in point: Bolt from last game. He is heroic in the movie. He does not have special powers. He was a vanilla role.

Are you admitting to not playing pro-town?

I am admitting to not yet being involved or posting enough in this game for someone to get such a strong town read on me. I am giving an honest opinion of myself so far this game.

[semioldguy]

I have a 3 yr old son, I'm sure I've watched more disney movies than you have.

This is of course off topic, but I think I have you beat on this. I own every single full length feature animated disney movie, including old obscue ones like

Melody Time

and

The Three Caballeros

, and have watched multiple Disney movies literally every week for the past twenty years. My favorite movie of all time being

Beauty and the Beast

which I have seen over 100 times and can recite by heart. I await the day to meet my Disney-rival. While other people during highschool did things like videogames, I watched Disney Movies in my free time. If have a passion, it is Disney. You can see it plastered on my wall, my bookshelves, multitudes of souvnirs and trinkets, I admittedly have an unhealthy love for Disney.

..and my friends make fun of me all the time for this.

[semioldguy]

We've played as scum together, Kmd; and the last Disney game we played you were town. Even though you have not been extremely active this game, my recent previous plays with you has me thinking you are town (or rather not scum, which leaves town).

[semioldguy]

Unvote; Vote: Neopi

fuzzylightning was bad. Your entry into the game is looking like you just want to slip right into day two unnoticed and without much to be held against you by putting everyone a day behind in getting a read on you. You need to provide some more solid thoughts on the game thus far rather than an "I agree, let's go!" post.

Coming to that conclusion after supposedly going through the whole thread in less than an hour doesn't look so hot either.

[semioldguy]

V/LA in all my games for a couple days, back problems acting up again. Hope to be back by this weekend

[semioldguy]

Back and catching up as quickly as I can since as our deadline is very near.

[semioldguy]

And Monkey, can you just explain why Peter Pan is a "conditional" watcher?

I've asked this before as well, and haven't seen it answered yet. Why are you ignoring this MonkeyMan?

Either

a) The day killer knew kmd was right about starbuck, and wanted him dead to eliminate a threat.

b) The day killer knew kmd was wrong about starbuck, and killed him so we would think he was right.

c) The day killer is actually town, thought kmd was scummy, but was wrong.

I think the best way to find out is to lynch starbuck, and find out if I survive the night.

I think this is scummy for the speculation, which is very railroaded, and for you supposed "best way to find out" solution which is in my opinion ridiculous.

Also, did Kmd's death affect you having an ability tonight?

@Everyone
I don't doubt that Starbuck is the role-name she claims. I am certain that is her character name and movie. Based on last game, character and movie did not determine alignment and I doubt that would change here. People debating whether a Toy Story character would be a scum-role or not is a really dumb idea.

[semioldguy]

Back and catching up as quickly as I can since as our deadline is very near.

Atm I believe there are 3 votes for both neopi and starbuck that makes you the swing vote under these deadline rules if no one else shows up (hint: vote for neopi).

I didn't need the hint. I don't find Starbuck to be all that scummy. I would still prefer a MonkeyMan576 lynch. He continues to make scummy posts and ignoring players.

HoS: MonkeyMan576

Vote: Neopi

fuzzylightning was scummy, which Neopi did nothing to erase and has done nothing to seem town this game (or really has done nothing at all).

[semioldguy]

Oh, we did get a deadline change with the Daykill.

Unvote; Vote: MonkeyMan576

FoS:

Neopi

YankCane151, you've been very silent, care to give us some thoughts?

[semioldguy]

It's speculation and distraction from scum hunting. Period.

[semioldguy]

Also you continue to ignore the request, from multiple players, to explain the flavor of your conditional ability. I am happy with my vote.

[semioldguy]

Crazy and myself alone would make multiple (which means more than one).

Also this:

Read below my RC.

Oh, okay. That went past me.

Does that mean Vanilla Townie or any pro-town person?

Any pro-town person, I presume.

Ask the Mod via PM.

[semioldguy]

If it isn't that hard to figure out, then you should have no problem sharing it. What you just said and have said is almost word for word what scum said last game about their fake-claim.

I don't believe your claim.

The mod is fallible. Last game was Disney-Dreamworks. There was an Ice-Age character which is neither. Your speculation remains and will continue to be useless. I'd go as far as to say that it is actually harmful to the town.

[semioldguy]

Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.

[semioldguy]

The above was directed at YankCane151

[semioldguy]

If you don't explain now, expect me to vote you the first time we lynch a townie.

This is another reason why Monkey's claim smells bad. It's a horrible role for town to have. If the town is losing, his claim turns to vanilla which would encourage another mislynch.

Add this to the reasons Monkey's claim is likely false.

[semioldguy]

Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.

massive fishing

What do you see me as fishing exactly?

[semioldguy]

FOS: Semioldguy

He was suspicious before, he is really suspicious now. Not as suspicious as Starbuck, but right up there. And he can't claim OMGUS

because I suspected him first

.

Please quote where you suspected me first.

Here is where I first suspected you: viewtopic.php?t=12398&postdays=0&postor ... &&start=68

[semioldguy]

Did you guys not see in Monkey's claim post which I have linked MULTIPLE TIMES that he explained the condition of his watching?

He can watch as long as TOWNIE ISN'T LYNCHED. The lack of attention to detail here is really starting to bug me, but Monkey has explained himself (in my eyes) to fullest that he can without quoting or going into modkill land.

The request is for flavor, not ability.

[semioldguy]

Do you not know your own flavor for your role? A simple "yes" or "no" will do, I don't want anything more than that at this point.

massive fishing

Why didn't you point this out as being massive fishing?

Can anyone besides Starbuck claim to be a movie after 1980(Don't give the actual title, just yes or no)?

FoS:

chamber

[semioldguy]

I think that's a dumb argument. It was more or less a rhetorical question to begin with as I would find it strange for anyone not to have flavor to their role when this is a theme game.

I am town and I have flavor. I don't think it in any way damaging to town or helpful to scum to admit this.

Why are players in this game getting hung up on really dumb ideas?

[semioldguy]

I think that's a dumb argument. It was more or less a rhetorical question to begin with as I would find it strange for anyone not to have flavor to their role when this is a theme game.

I am town and I have flavor. I don't think it in any way damaging to town or helpful to scum to admit this.

Why are players in this game getting hung up on really dumb ideas?

I don't think anyone is "hung up" about it. You are the one who keeps on bringing it up. And the one who wants people to keep on giving more of their role info than they are comfortable with.

Dumb ideas like whether Toy Story is a Disney Classic movie or not or whether or not a character from that movie is scum or if only Pixar animated characters or certain timeframes would make up the scum group. These are the dumb ideas I refer to and the ones I wish people would all just drop because they are not and will not be fruitful for the town.

You are the only one I want more role info from. Partial claims are scummy.

[semioldguy]

@YankCane151
You're right. I thought she had, but looking back through just her posts she was never the one to mentioned any flavor. Monkey's claim is still scummier in my eyes because he has blatantly refused to provide flavor. Starbuck seems not to have been requested for it yet, and her claim loses much of the current credibility it had to me because I thought she had...

@Starbuck
I'd like to hear your flavor as well. Why are you, Buzz Lightyear, vanilla?

[semioldguy]

To me that flavor makes sense and the willingness to give it when requested along with the claim that may or may not have been necessitated by her wagon falls in line with a town player's claim.

[semioldguy]

That's what I've been assuming.

[semioldguy]

@MonkeyMan576
You have ignored Post 636. Your 632 is not nearly OMGUS as it is heavy misrepresentation.

[semioldguy]

MonkeyMan is

STILL

ignoring Post 636.

I didn't ask about the name of the role at all. So you are wrong yet again. Trying to find out if there is a pattern to scum roles helps town, obviously.

I didn't ask for the name of the role at all either.

i'm not asking about role's at all. I play at another site and hypothesizing about game makeup is standard. Players hypersensitivity to this on mafiascum is a little absurd.

I'm not asking about roles either. I'm asking about flavor. You have already claimed your role. Making sure your flavor matches is in line with deciding whether your claim is town and not scum.

Flavor is something that helps determine alignment.

[semioldguy]

So they could determine if I was fakeclaiming or not.

This is a reason that benefits town.

[semioldguy]

@MonkeyMan
Don't expect me to push a case elsewhere when you ignore almost any post I make toward you or whenever I ask you a question. There are still things you have yet to answer and that you have continued to ignore. I know you have read, please address them.

[semioldguy]

You shouldn't be pushing cases based on what someone else does or doesn't do or as a way to get back at them or make friends. As far as I know I've answered all questions you've asked of me.

Post 636, Post 666 and Post 692 to name more recent ones. As far as I know, ignoring the points of a case brought against you isn't going to make the case go away.

Cases are based on what people do or don't do, that's how the game is played. Find me a case that isn't based on what someone does or doesn't do. I'm not here to get back at people or to make friends; I'm here to play mafia. If I wanted to make friends here I'd go post in General Discussion.

[semioldguy]

Those are all the same question. Please don't exaggerate a case by making something sound like more than it is.

Questions that require research shouldn't be expected to be answered in the same timeframe as questions that don't. In fact, it's quite rude to ask such a question and demand it be answered immediately.

692 has other things for you to address as well.

I first suspected you around post 126, semioldguy.

Which shows that you didn't suspect me first.

[semioldguy]

I also do not understand why semioldguy said that Monkey's failure to post flavour when he claimed amounted to only a "partial claim" and said that "partial claims are scummy" and yet semi did not apply the same rationale to Starbuck, who had also claimed her role and no flavour. I am further suspicious of the fact that when someone (YankCane, I think) mentioned this,

semi posted almost immediately (within 3 minutes) that he had re-read Starbuck's posts and yes, lo and behold, she had not made a full claim either. Three minutes from the time of YankCane's post to semi's response and he read all of Starbuck's posts from her claim forward? Really? I doubt that.

Then there's semi's gratuitous "I'm town" claim when nobody asked and it's not as though scum would claim any different.

By three minutes you mean 13, check your facts before posting. It isn't very difficult to skim an ISO read looking for something specific.

[semioldguy]

But speaking of "checking your facts before posting," your own post 649 (your 6:30 post on page 26) shows that you did not "check your facts before posting" when you called Monkey scummy for his "partial claim" (

your

definition not claiming flavour with the roleclaim) while you did no such thing when Starbuck made her own "partial claim" and you "thought she had".

If I thought she had claimed flavor, how could I find it scummy for something I didn't know? When I asked, she gave flavor without any fuss, Monkey had refused multiple times.

I agree with Gorrad's 774

@Neopi
Without revealing who it might be, do you know who the Tramp is?

@Monkey
This is why claiming things such as what movie era a player is from can be bad for the town, when it could help scum narrow down unrevealed potential roles like the Tramp.

[semioldguy]

Emphasis on the word "if".

As should be obvious, my point is that you had no townie reason whatsoever to think that Starbuck had claimed flavour when she clearly had not. Yet, according to you - and you alone - failure to claim flavour when roleclaiming is scummy. And you only felt it was scummy for Monkey not to have flavourclaimed when he roleclaimed but you said nothing of the sort when Starbuck roleclaimed without flavourclaiiming.

This does not compute.

Regards,
Jazz

Best explanation I can give is that I had a back trauma accident and was in the hospital for a few days, so when I caught up it included both claims as well as other stuff for just this game. I was still being heavily medicated and more than a little out of it so I must have missed that Starbuck hadn't claimed because I thought she had due to others speculating on the viability of her claim as vanilla. Since others were openly discussing Buzz's flavor (which I even joined in on in my post after coming back), I thought that she had given it. I was obviously wrong. I missed the fact that none of the posts discussing flavor at the time of the claim were hers.

First of all, you're not considering how a revealed fakeclaim could help the town, second, I don't see what the movie era has to do with the potential Tramp role. Usually the mafia already knows or has a pretty good idea what their mafia consists of, and could deduce what the town consists of.

For one, I know that Gorrad isn't the Tramp because of your question, and would have known that Kmd4390 wasn't as well. Since

Lady and the Tramp

is from 1955, which would be before 1980. That's the point I'm making, which you clearly missed.

[semioldguy]

@Neopi
You need to claim your flavor.

[semioldguy]

I am against a Starbuck lynch.

[semioldguy]

Because I have a town read on her, whereas I have a scummy read on MonkeyMan576 and neutral leaning scummy read on Neopi (and slight scum read on fuzzylightning prior to Neopi).

[semioldguy]

Can you explain your town read on Starbuck from a gameplay perspective?(as opposed to her claim)

Because I have played quite a few games with her before, both on this account and on an alt.

[semioldguy]

So you have nothing to base your town read on besides meta? You are not taking into account her play from this game isolated?

I don't find her play in this game, isolated, to be scummy.

[semioldguy]

Also it could tell us if Pixar movies are in the town are not.

No, it won't tell us this. Even if she is scum it won't mean that Pixar characters aren't town or are only scum. If she is town it won't mean that Pixar characters are all ton or that Pixar characters can't be scum. This is a huge leap from you and a really dumb all around assumption in my opinion.

You seem to be suspicious of me, would you mind making a case on me that doesn't center around me being suspicious of you?

[semioldguy]

her lynch gives us the most information.

MM, explain this.

She has had quite a few interactions with other players. Her alignment could give us clues as to semioldguy as they seem to be buddying.

What about this makes her lynch give

more

information than yours or Neopi's? I could argue that your lynch also gives us lots of interactions between players as well.

[semioldguy]

All you seem to be interested in doing is undermining the town's progress, not advancing anything or dicussing.

This is just ignorant. The town is the uniformed majority. How is any town supposed to know whether we are truly helping the town progress or not? I think that I am because I don't think you are town, therefore I don't see me as undermining the town.

It's hard to discuss when most of the points you bring up against your suspect are routinely ignored by that player and are STILL continuing to be ignored. By your own logic earlier this game,

you

are being scummy.

If you think my points are bad, you said it would be scummy for you not to react to a bad case. You haven't reacted to most of the points I bring up against you. You sit by and pretend I did nothing. If you think my points are good then you wouldn't be attacking me, or you would but doing so would be scummy.

[semioldguy]

All you seem to be interested in doing is undermining the town's progress, not advancing anything or dicussing.

This is just ignorant. The town is the uniformed majority. How is any town supposed to know whether we are truly helping the town progress or not? I think that I am because I don't think you are town, therefore I don't see me as undermining the town.

It's hard to discuss when most of the points you bring up against your suspect are routinely ignored by that player and are STILL continuing to be ignored. By your own logic earlier this game,

you

are being scummy.

If you think my points are bad, you said it would be scummy for you not to react to a bad case. You haven't reacted to most of the points I bring up against you. You sit by and pretend I did nothing. If you think my points are good then you wouldn't be attacking me, or you would but doing so would be scummy.

You also seem more interested in being insulting and cryptic than advancing your case. You could have easily reposted your case rather than insulting my play. The truth is your and Starbuck's case against me is weak and you know it.

I do repost my case, when I do, you still ignore it.

[semioldguy]

Your buddying with Starbuck, for one. Your failure to listen to other people's cases, for two.

I have not failed to listen to other people's cases. Though I don't agree with yours, it doesn't mean I haven't commented on or seen other people's. I have. You just miss it apparently like everything else I post.

[semioldguy]

Starbuck's case and my case aren't and haven't been the same. There are points in Starbuck's case against you that I actually disagree with, as I've even mentioned before. Just because I don't like all of her case on you doesn't mean I can't find you scummy for other reasons or that I can't have a town read on her.

[semioldguy]

If someone would bring a decent case against me, maybe I would react more positively to it.

If it wasn't a decent case you think that it'd be easy to refute instead of routinely ignoring it

[semioldguy]

The following is a small collection from my posts of the things you have ignored and parts of my case on you that are already there which you don't acknowledge. TL:dr version in next post.

You clearly have no interest in discussion, just pointing fingers and making accusations. That's why I left the game. You can think whatever you want.

This is beyond hypocritical coming from the person who refuses to engage in discussion. YOU clearly have no interest in discussion if you are just going to disappear and wait for other to change the subject for you.

If you had an interest in discussion, then you could have taken the discussion somewhere else instead of siting by idly and doing nothing except complain.

You have been hypocritical and contradicting yourself all game, yet refuse to acknowledge any post that mentions this point. The above is one of these posts.

That's based on your opinion that my play has been poor, which I disagree with.

You self-admittdly have made poor play decisions this game. Unless you've had a change of heart and think your hissy-fit and rage-quit until being prodded was good play.

Here's another.

I didn't ask about the name of the role at all. So you are wrong yet again. Trying to find out if there is a pattern to scum roles helps town, obviously.

I didn't ask for the name of the role at all either.

Why is this point valid for you but not me? Another hypocritical claim against you that you've chosen to ignore multiple times now.

i'm not asking about role's at all. I play at another site and hypothesizing about game makeup is standard. Players hypersensitivity to this on mafiascum is a little absurd.

I'm not asking about roles either. I'm asking about flavor. You have already claimed your role. Making sure your flavor matches is in line with deciding whether your claim is town and not scum.

Flavor is something that helps determine alignment.

More of being hypocritical. And more of the repeated ignoring thing.

@Monkey
If you have suspects why aren't you making cases against them or doing any real scum-hunting? How is withholding your suspects and not trying to catch them in a slip, etc. a pro-town way of playing?

Either

a) The day killer knew kmd was right about starbuck, and wanted him dead to eliminate a threat.

b) The day killer knew kmd was wrong about starbuck, and killed him so we would think he was right.

c) The day killer is actually town, thought kmd was scummy, but was wrong.

I think the best way to find out is to lynch starbuck, and find out if I survive the night.

How is this plan in any way the best way to try finding out about the daykill? It involves tons of WIFOM and speculation and doesn't give us any concrete information about the daykill at all. Why do you want to find out about the day kill right now?

Also this:

Read below my RC.

Oh, okay. That went past me.

Does that mean Vanilla Townie or any pro-town person?

Any pro-town person, I presume.

Ask the Mod via PM.

Have you asked yet? This would go along with the things monkey has been ignoring.

Post 632 is not nearly OMGUS as it is heavy misrepresentation. You've ignored this point put on you as well. If you think it isn;t misrepresentation, you shouldn't have a problem pointing to where in the thread that makes you think it isn't.

So they could determine if I was fakeclaiming or not.

This is a reason that benefits town.

Why was your reason for withholding information because you were afraid of pro-town motives? You said that it could be mafia-backed to find out if you were the SK or Vig and that's why you didn't want to give it. Well, if you aren't those things, which according to your own claim you aren't, then what reason did you have to withhold that?

You seem to be suspicious of me, would you mind making a case on me that doesn't center around me being suspicious of you?

[semioldguy]

MonkeyMan576 has been hypocritical throughout the game and has been contradicting himself in multiple places as well. He withholds information from the town with reasoning that he was afraid to comply with something that had protown motives. His cases are largely OMGUS and not much else. He hasn't so much as looked at anyone who doesn't vote for him. When asked for cases he doesn't give them, chamber doesn't either, but chamber says that he isn't giving them, Monkey just ignores the request entirely. Monkey ignores many other requests/cases/questions sent his way as well.

[semioldguy]

@Yank: Both...and I'll post my defence later, but I think it would be really dumb to lynch a power role without giving them a chance to prove their power.

Why are you putting off your defense for so long? (and in many cases repeatedly) If you are town your defense should be really quick/easy to do because you shouldn't have to make anything up. It helps the town most the sooner you do defend as it gives us all more time to see your response/defense before deadline which is very near.

[semioldguy]

Clearly you at least have enough time to come on, check the thread and make that post. You could have made a more constructive post. When I wasn't being pushy earlier, you could have responded to a lot of these points for a long time now, you didn't.

[semioldguy]

You clearly have no interest in discussion, just pointing fingers and making accusations. That's why I left the game. You can think whatever you want.

This is beyond hypocritical coming from the person who refuses to engage in discussion. YOU clearly have no interest in discussion if you are just going to disappear and wait for other to change the subject for you.

I think I've been among the most active players in the game, so this claim is bogus.

This claim isn't bogus, at the time you posted this it was definitely hypocritical. because you are posting more now does not keep this post from being hypocritical in the context it was posted.

I'm not sure I follow you. My logic is consistant. Just because I want to use flavor that has already been claimed, doesn't mean i am required to give my flavor the minute one player asks for it.

The point is that you were accusing me of doing and asking things that requested or revealed things you yourself had also been asking or doing that would reveal. When pointed out on this, you deflect with answers that are true about your claim, but also true about mine, despite the fact you still have a problem with my points and not yours yet you fail to point out the difference, still having a problem with the things I am posting, but not acknowledging that the things you posted do the exact same thing. If you could have pointed out how ours were different and had a problem with that, then okay, fine. But you didn't. Instead your complaints on my posts and requests were complaints about things we have both done in game yet you find it okay for you to do them but not others. That is the definition of hypocritical.

Also this:

Read below my RC.

Oh, okay. That went past me.

Does that mean Vanilla Townie or any pro-town person?

Any pro-town person, I presume.

Ask the Mod via PM.

Have you asked yet? This would go along with the things monkey has been ignoring.

I don't need to ask. It says in my PM if a townie is lynched I lose my power.

If you had to make a presumption, then there was doubt or possibility you didn't fully know. Ask anyway, what harm can asking do?

I don't believe the motives were pro-town. If scum wants your flavor info, then I would think a town player would be hesitant to give it.

The reason you gave for being hesitant was because you were suspicious of a reason that was protown. If you disagree then explain how figuring out if you are lying about your role is anti-town.

You seem to be suspicious of me, would you mind making a case on me that doesn't center around me being suspicious of you?

I'm not sure what your point is here. You seem willing to lynch a potential town power role because they didn't give you their flavor the moment you asked for it. If someone you thought was scum asked for your pm info, would you give it to them right away?

All in all, this doesn't seem like much of a case for me.

If multiple people were asking for something, regardless of what alignment I think they are, and the motives of those people are something the is a pro-town motive, yes I would. I wasn't the first person who asked for your flavor, nor the only one. If someone I think is scum wants to ask something that my answering would help the town, of course I would answer. Before you say that you didn't think answering would help the town, the reason

YOU GAVE

for withholding your information was a reason that the town would benefit from. You didn't even provide a situation that scum would benefit from unless you are an SK... guess what... town benefits from SK getting lynched too.

You have failed to come up with a reason that your claim could benefit scum unless you were lying about your role or are not town yourself. If you weren't lying about your role, then the point you say is null and hence you still don't have a protown reason for withholding information.

You case on me doesn't seem like much of a case and you still ignored responding to things in that big post. Just because you put it in a quote box and lump it with everything else but continue not to address it does not mean you aren't ignoring it. You are.

[semioldguy]

@Brandi
You weren't voting yesterday. Why not? Who was your top suspect yesterday?

[semioldguy]

So Neopi was scum. I'm assuming that no scum were on Neopi's wagon, since I can't see scum putting their godfather at risk. SC's hammer of Monkey is suspicous, at the same time however, Monkey did look scummy, so I don't know what to make of that.

With a claim that, it now seems apparent that Neopi had no way of being able to reliably back up without other known info, I don't think it entirely unreasonable for fellow scum to be able to get on her wagon in such a case.

For a similar reason I am disappointed that our day-killer chose to kill Neopi before Neopi was even given the chance to claim results from last night.

[semioldguy]

Sorry, V/LA until Monday

[semioldguy]

Back from V/LA, will be catching up sometime today.

[semioldguy]

Prod picked up. Posting shortly.

[semioldguy]

@Brandi
You weren't voting yesterday. Why not? Who was your top suspect yesterday?

I was very M.I.A. for a long while, and didn't really support any of the major wagons. I did have a vote placed before KMD was "erased" though. (Noting in case you thought I wasn't voting AT ALL yesterday)

If you didn't support any of the major wagons... then who was your top suspect near the end of day one? Why were they your top suspect?

I hadn't thought Neopi was scum until day 2, in fact I was against lynching him initially.

If you were against lynching him initially, why didn't you post this on day one? Ending day one the person you appeared most against lynching was Starbuck, not Neopi.

@Gorrad
You're mysticism isn't helping the town much in my opinion. You said you have reasons why you didn't want to spell things out earlier. At some point you will need to spell it out as well as provide your reasons for not wanting to earlier. I dislike when people say things like that because it reeks of dangling things in front of the town which makes for a distraction and is withholding information. Those are scummy things.

@YankCane151
You've been asking questions but doing nothing with the answers you get.

Vote: YankCane151

I find YankCane151 and Brandi to be the scummiest players today. I see Jazzmyn as the most likely to be town.

[semioldguy]

I like beginning with fewer points at a time. It makes it more difficult and obvious for players to ignore as they can't just selectively answer some of your points while bypassing others.

Yes, there are further things I have for a case. No, I am not bringing those forth immediately.

[semioldguy]

@Starbuck
Why does voting without providing a full case when I vote deserve an FoS? Why do you find this suspicious?

[semioldguy]

@YankCane151
You've been asking questions but doing nothing with the answers you get.

Vote: YankCane151

I find YankCane151 and Brandi to be the scummiest players today. I see Jazzmyn as the most likely to be town.

Define "doing nothing with the answers you get". I make a mental note of them. Do you expect me to Vote or FoS someone everytime I get an answer?

What have people's answers to your various questions told you about their possible alignment? What were you expecting them to respond with and how did they meet or not meet your expectations in their responses? What were you seeking to obtain by asking your questions? Take the answers you get and say something about them. Sharing your findings is often a pro-town thing to do that generates discussion and the dissection of suspects. Otherwise you give off the appearance of trying to be helpful without really being helpful.

[semioldguy]

No use just sitting there, so I'm going to ask everybody some questions: Of those not really participating much, who do you think is scummiest? Is it related to the activity level? If not, why?

I feel ignored at my attempt to generate discussion.

My vote should speak for my suspicions. I recommend others do the same. My reasoning given so far should indicate that it isn't because of activity level, but rather a gauge on interaction/content (or lack thereof).

[semioldguy]

@Starbuck
Why does voting without providing a full case when I vote deserve an FoS? Why do you find this suspicious?

Because scum don't provide full cases. They just vote because they really don't care who dies, as long as it isn't them.

There are plenty of good reasons for town to vote without providing cases. That doesn't make those votes automatically scummy.

[semioldguy]

I am asking you to provide a full case, and you are refusing. To me, that means, you really don't have much of one.

You don't need a full case to vote someone and you don't need a full case for a vote to be pro-town.

[semioldguy]

Apologies for my inactivity the past few days. Will be reading and making a post tonight when I get home.

[semioldguy]

@Mod
Do you know how long Jazzmyn will be V/LA for or are you able to reveal that to the rest of us?

Well, my top two suspects were more flaky than myself to the point they are or have been replaced, and I don't seem to have missed much.

@Starbuck
My case/vote on YankCane was largely put there as pressure for him to take a stand and actually do something. He is gone now so pressure him as a player doesn't work so well.

I am beginning to re-evaluate my read on Jazzmyn. She has been doing some fence sitting on players today and hasn't really taken a stand on an existing case or made much of a case of her own. If Starbuck is her top suspect why doesn't she accompany that with a vote or pursue more of a case on Starbuck? She has promised a case on Starbuck, but has delayed that promise. I don't like when players say they are going to make a case on someone, they should just do it rather than say they are going to. I find doing this slightly scummy.

I've felt a tinge of misrepresentation in some of her posts as well. Most recently in 1021 it seems as though Jazzmyn is jumping to the conclusion that StarngerCoug suspected Gorrad solely on activity level, when the quote from StarngerCoug in that post to me suggests that StrangerCoug was suspicious of Gorrad who just also happened to be recently inactive.

@StarngerCoug
What do you think of the above?

[semioldguy]

@curiouskarmadog
My vote was mostly a pressure vote on YankCane151 (now you) and it will remain there until you do something (since he didn't do much) or someone else does something I find scummy and deserving of a vote.

[semioldguy]

I think YankCane was scummy. I also think Brandi was scummy. They both replaced out after me voicing suspicions on them. Moving my vote to my second top suspect in this case is not any more effective than keeping it here at the moment.

[semioldguy]

Do you suspect anybody else, semioldguy?

As of my more recent posts, Jazzmyn has been making it onto my suspects list. Due to my top suspects replacing out shortly after, I have been re-evaluating what I think of all the other players.

Unvote, Vote: Jazzmyn

How come you had more of a scum read on fuzzylighting than Neopi? What on Earth did Neopi do to reduce your suspicion of that player slot?

My neutral leaning scummy read was based on residual scumminess from the player slot that fuzzylightning left, yet I was not able to get a read on Neopi. None of his posts were hardly more than a single sentence and the newness of the player prevented a good read.

Kublai Kahn's entry from the game alleviates some of my suspicion on Brandi. I mostly agree with his reads. He brings up a good point about Jazzmyn's stance of strongly suspecting Starbuck, but not voting her (or voting for anyone).

Will wait for curiouskarmadog to finish his read, but so far he sounds better than YankCane151.

[semioldguy]

@curiouskarmadog
I'd really like to see a vote from you. I know you have just very recently replaced in, but it seems clear from your posting that you do have suspicions. Deadline isn't far off and you sitting back on your suspicions without a vote to make a solid stand makes me feel uneasy.

I don't like seeing people make a list of suspicions not accompanied with a vote. Doing that would allow cover for scum to make those suspicions and see which one hooks others and run with it or allows others to influence your vote between your top suspects making you less accountable for your own vote.

[semioldguy]

I see Jazzmyn as the most likely to be town.

bold statement, why?

It was mostly a gut read at the time which I felt was strong. I have since re-evaluated my read.

[semioldguy]

My neutral leaning scummy read was based on residual scumminess from the player slot that fuzzylightning left, yet I was not able to get a read on Neopi. None of his posts were hardly more than a single sentence and the newness of the player prevented a good read.

But isn't the fact that his posts are unreadable a read in itself? If I read a scummy read on fuzzylightning, I just can't fathom how an unreadable newb could possibly lessen that read.

Not necessarily. Hindsight can make a lot of things look more clear than they were initially.

[semioldguy]

@Jazzmyn
If you were set on trying to save Gorrad at the end of yesterday, why didn't you move your vote to StrangerCoug or curiouskarmadog to make not lynching him a greater possibility?

[semioldguy]

I'm for mass-claim.

[semioldguy]

@everyone
Include flavor along with your role claims please.

@Jazzmyn
please answer mine and Kahn's question along with your claim. Also, why didn't you make that post at the end of the day any earlier? Since apparently you've known for a long time, withholding that until it is essentially too late makes little sense to me. You could have given the town more than a mere two hours I'd think.

[semioldguy]

@curiouskarmadog
If you are a double voter, please remove your vote for now. It'd be too easy for a scum quick lynch otherwise, especially if we do have three of them.

(double posting in part to allow for the next page so LlamaFluff can make the vote count and so you can then unvote)

[semioldguy]

Yes, I'd be in support of hearing each separate flavor.

[semioldguy]

If the extra vote shows up in the vote count, hopefully it would show up under the vote count of those not voting as well.

[semioldguy]

Voting or lynching curiouskarmadog today would be a bad decision. Of the five of you left, I am most sure of his innocence. He is very likely town. His play has looked very good since replacing in and if there isn't a counterclaim to his kill I see no justification for lynching him.

[semioldguy]

curiouskarmadog is town because his claim is provable and more or less irrefutable. Unless our daykiller came out and claimed vig or someone else did, then I don't think this game would have three anti-town killing roles. That'd be ridiculous.

[semioldguy]

What is your non-vanilla ability?

[semioldguy]

I am Robin Hood, Vanilla Townie

I bring justice to those in power while looking out for those in need. I am an image of honor and stand for what is right and just.

[semioldguy]

Are Mafia Godfathers usually trackable?

[semioldguy]

By process of elimination, I'm thinking SOG is most likely to be scum. Robin Hood as a Vanilla Townie seems rather "meh," since there's likely greater potential for that role. Also, SOG is the only one of the claimed vanillas to not give flavor reasons for

why

he has no night actions.

I don't have flavor for why I don't have a night action.

My suspects are the same as Starbuck's, but in reverse order.

@Crazy
You shouldn't have aimed for town today. Especially if you think it is a three person scum team. It essentially means the town cannot win in that scenario (if it's currently at 2-2-1). If we lynch you, we lose. If we lynch town, we lose. If we lynch scum, we are either at 2-1-1 or 1-1-1 the next day.

2-1-1
You kill someone who you think is town putting it a 1-1-1 and into night. At this point scum knows they can't kill you (which is why it's 2-1-1) and they kill the last town, town loses. I don't know or care who wins at that point, since I can't.

1-1-1
If we lynch you, town loses. If we lynch scum, town loses. If we no-lynch, you kill one of us anyway and you win.

What motivation does town have to help you when YOU just made it nearly impossible for the town victory condition to go off.

Also I don't trust that you share your win condition with someone. Regardless of whether it's true or not, winning with you is not my win condition. I am playing for the town which means winning with you would mean going against my own win condition, excluding StrangerCoug, curiouskarmadog, MonkeyMan576, Gorrad, chamber and Kmd4390 from a victory they trust the town to carry on for them after their own deaths.

[semioldguy]

No, that isn't what I'm arguing.

How do you propose I not go against my win condition? Regardless of what I do I cannot meet MY win condition. If I go for your supposed win condition, that is also going against my win condition.

If you are a threat to the town, which you claim to be since you don't share our win condition, then my win condition says that I can't win unless you are eliminated. Killing you and not killing you both go against my win condition.

[semioldguy]

Do you see me voting for you?

The other option would be that there isn't a three man scum team, that there were only two. In which case if we lynch mafia today than town wins for sure, since erasing one of us in that case tomorrow will still leave enough town to lynch you.

[semioldguy]

Regardless I am not going to play to YOUR win condition and no one else should either. It can't be trusted as true and goes against the town win condition.

I will be aiming for scum today.

[semioldguy]

The other hope is that you accidentally shoot scum tomorrow instead of town if there is not a kill during the night.

[semioldguy]

@Kublai Khan
If Jazzmyn was scum with someone else here, I don't find it very likely that she would have been the one to submit a kill. She would have been a prime target last night for any sort of investigation.

Also your result on Jazzmyn makes little sense to me. Why did you track Jazzmyn over Starbuck? You seemed more suspicious of Starbuck, especially considering the following:

If Jazzmyn is gambitting, then she's scum.
If she isn't gambitting, then she's town but obviously values her role less than Gorrad's.

You got to see Gorrad's flip before making your night selection choice. At this point it seems like you would have believed Jazzmyn to be town because it could be confirmed that Jazzmyn likely knew Gorrad was a power role. From your stance on the matter this would seem to lower your suspicion of her, not increase it.

Also some quotes from Today:

The only thing stopping me from voting for [Jazzmyn] now is the fact that I can't see how it's in scum's interest to try to save Gorrad. (Unless, of course, I start WIFOMing the ending moments of yesterday)

This doesn't look like someone posting who had just gotten your claimed result (nor a motivation to track her over someone else). You seem so sure of her innocence now, but you did not seem so at the start of today. Why did that change?

Furthermore:

However, I'm not setting a precedent where scum can go V/LA when asked to claim which allows them to move their claim order to the end of the line.

This also doesn't make sense when talking about someone you are fairly confident as being town with your claimed result. Your claim and posts don't line up.

[semioldguy]

Consider me voting for Kublai Khan, though I'd like to first hear something from Jazzmyn regarding recent events. Haven't heard from her since Crazy's scum claim.

Also I would like to hear Khan's response to my most recent post. He has been here since it has been made, but no mention of it or the accusations against him.

Also if we have four players tomorrow and lynch scum today it is in town's best interest to immediately vote Crazy. If there are three town and him, town will win, and if there are two town, one mafia and Crazy, then town are at 2-1 against mafia and still have a shot at winning. The vote can't hurt to be done immediately, because the day kills have reset the vote counts, so there is no threat of scum quick-hammering after Crazy makes a kill and no downside to killing Crazy.

[semioldguy]

Actually, scratch that last bit, since if there is Mafia it goes to night and they kill one of the remaining town to we.

Our only hope is to hit scum and hope that Crazy hit scum tomorrow. Though he probably won't shoot anyone tomorrow, since it risks him losing.

Assuming ideal play from both scum and Crazy, I don't see any possible way town can win. I'll have to think on it a while.

[semioldguy]

Okay, so I have done some calculating. For this post it will be assumed the of the remaining players that two are mafia, two are town and Crazy is SK. A summary will be included at the end.

A red number indicates a scenario in which the mafia win, green for town and indigo for Crazy. A black number indicates a scenario that does not end the game and leads to more options.

DAY THREE:

(1)

Town lynch, scum kill the last of the townies and have a 2:1 majority and win. Mafia victory.

(2)

If we lynch Crazy, scum still kill one of the townies and have a 2:1 majority and win. Mafia victory.

(3) Scum lynch allows the game to go on. So lets see what outcomes arise from optimal play if we hit mafia with the lynch today....

NIGHT THREE:

(1)

Mafia night kill one of the town. That leaves the next day with 1:1:1. On Day Four, Crazy kills someone and wins. Not good for mafia or town, both lose.

(2) Mafia try to kill Crazy and he can be killed, then Crazy loses and the next day is a 2:1 with a chance for town and mafia to win.

(3) Mafia try to kill Crazy and he is not night killable or if mafia choose to submit a no-kill, then we are left with 2:1:1. This next day scenario will be under DAY FOUR.

DAY FOUR (A)

, If Crazy chooses not to day kill anyone:

(1)

Town lynch. Scum can kill town at night, and lose to Crazy's kill the next day, try to kill Crazy again in case night immunity was only one use, or not kill anyone leaving the 1:1:1 scenario as listed above (both town and mafia lose). Either way town loses. Mafia have a slim shot at victory here and Crazy has a good shot at winning.

(2)

A Crazy lynch here leads to a scum victory as they kill one of the townies the following night.

(3)

A scum lynch will lead to a night without a kill and 2 townies versus Crazy. Crazy kills someone the next day before he can be lynched and wins. Or in the unlikely event both town get into the thread and vote crazy the town wins (as long as any other chance for town to win remains, I am not shooting for this option; it is a last resort).

DAY FOUR (B)

, If Crazy day kills town:

(1)

The last two players lynch Crazy and mafia win.

(2)

Mafia and Crazy lynch town and Crazy wins.

(3)

Town and Crazy lynch mafia and Crazy wins.

(4)

No lynch leads to Mafia killing the last town and then Crazy wins the next day. Or Mafia attempt to kill Crazy and either win by killing him or send us into 1:1:1 scenario listed above that town cannot win.

DAY FOUR(C)

, Crazy day kills mafia:

(1)

The last two town lynch Crazy and win.

SUMMARY/THOUGHTS:

If Crazy is able to be killed at night he cannot win, as optimal play for scum is to shoot at Crazy (unless by shooting at town they win, and thus Crazy cannot win regardless). Therefore I believe that Crazy would not have claimed unless he thought it would not decrease his chances of survival. Therefore I am going to largely discount Night 3-2 as a possibility.

If we get a mafia lynch today, Crazy wins in all scenarios where he does not day kill a player tomorrow and is not lynched. Day killing a player does not prevent his lynch as it would take every other player in the game voting him to lynch him at this point, killing someone would therefore not make a difference.

This makes it in Crazy's best interest not to shoot anyone tomorrow. Town can't win if Crazy doesn't shoot tomorrow (except for rare lucky circumstance in Day 4a-3). As long as he doesn't shoot anyone Crazy cannot lose if we lynch mafia today unless Crazy is lynched. Since shooting anyone will never prevent his own lynch if it were to happen, Crazy has no motivation to shoot anyone.

If scum want to win they have to avoid being lynched today or ensure Crazy's lynch on a future day.

Optimal play dictates that town will not win if the setup has left us with two mafia, two town and a serial killer.

My next post will include a complete scenario chart if there were only two mafia players at the beginning of the game.

[semioldguy]

I didn't include calculations for no-lynches, but I did work them out. All that does is make odds worse for town (or rather it keeps the odds at no chance in hell). Doing so generally just gives the anti-town factions both an extra kill-attempt which they will use to further their own goals and not the town's. I didn't calculate who it benefited more percentage-wise as I am not included in those win condition and felt no reason to do so after I figured out town's chances of winning. I can assure you that no-lynching didn't leave any new opportunities for town to win. I'll probably post them eventually though, right now I am working on 3-1-1 scenarios, which are coming next.

[semioldguy]

Okay, here is part two. For this post it will be assumed the of the remaining players that one is mafia, three are town and Crazy is SK. Again, a summary will be included at the end.

DAY THREE:

(1) We lynch Crazy. Continue to NIGHT THREE (A)

(2) We lynch Mafia. Continue to DAY FOUR

(3) We lynch town. Continue to NIGHT THREE (B)

(4) We no-lynch, we send town into what was a winnable position into an unwinnable position. Think of a no lynch here as the same as lynching mafia in the 2-2-1 scenario.

NIGHT THREE (A)

, Crazy lynched:

(1) Mafia night kill Jazzmyn/Starbuck/semioldguy. That leaves the next day with 2:1. Kublai Khan shares his target for the night and it becomes between him and one other person. We have one confirmed townie in endgame.

(2) Mafia night kill a Kublai Khan. That leaves the next day with 2:1. Jazzmyn becomes soft-confirmed innocent. We have one soft-confirmed townie in endgame.

(3) No-kill or Jazzmyn blocks night kill. That leaves the next day with 3:1. Kublai Khan shares his target for the night and it becomes between him and one other person by process of elimination. We have two confirmed townies in endgame.

NIGHT THREE (B)

, town lynched.

(1) Scum try to night kill Crazy, see no lynch option for day three. Town is now in unwinnable position.

(2) Scum night kill town. Crazy kills someone next day and wins.

DAY FOUR:

(1) There is no night kill. Town pile onto Crazy and win.

SUMMARY/THOUGHTS:

Killing Crazy is a sure scum hit and gives us at least one confirmed town tomorrow, leaving us a 50/50 shot in endgame. If we shoot for mafia instead, we have a one in four shot of hitting right. I'd take the 50% chance to win over the 25% chance. Doubling our chances by killing Crazy would be better in this scenario.

Had Crazy not claimed, he still would have a decent shot at winning in these scenarios, since he would be an unknown.

I lean toward assuming this setup for two reasons. (1) Town can't currently win in the other setup, so assuming that setup does me no good; and (2) this setup from the game's start would be more balanced. If you think about it, if we swap Neopi's kill with Monkey's (or any town kill) then the town only had one mislynch which caused the town to lose. If town need to expect a perfect game to win that doesn't seem right to me. Yes, Crazy's kills could have hit scum, but as a serial killer that can't be killed at night he increases his chances of winning by aiming for town since town is the only one who can kill him.

Crazy is either lying (which is entirely possible) or the above is our likely setup.

[semioldguy]

1) You assume everyone else in the game has the same "ethical" notions that you have, and would prefer a slim shot of winning as a group rather than a larger chance of winning with me. The goal of the games on this site is to "play to win," not "play to your win condition."

MY

win condition is the only way I know that I can win. I can't trust that I get to win with you. unless the mod posts your PM's in the opening post or posts another win condition that "Playing to my win condition" is the ONLY verifiable way to "play to win." How else would I be playing to win since I don't know of any other verifiable win condition that is available to me?

2) A setup that included only 2 scum is NOT more likely than 3 scum. Adding an SK actually DECREASES the mafia's chances of winning. Think about it - if a standard setup has 3 mafia, and you add an SK that can kill them AND they lose one of their members, doesn't that severely hurt the mafia's chances of winning?

It's clear what you're doing - you're trying to get the town to lynch me which will lead to a mafia win, because, as you know, there were originally 3 mafia in this game.

9/2/1 is more balanced than 8/3/1. Any game that can lead to a prisoner's dilemma from a single mislynch is bad. It's even worse when town can't possibly win the prisoner's dilemma because of either a serial killer that can't be night killed or scum factions not killing during the same game phase. This game apparently has both.

Overall, most 12 player games that include a serial killer have three scum (I was recently serial killer in a game and looked this up to try getting a better handle on the setup). About 3 of four games with serial killers have 3 instead of 2 scum. I'll take the 1 in 4 shot at a 50% win chance over the 3 out of 4 at a 0% win chance any time. I am playing to win, because hoping it was a 9:2:1 is the only way town can win.

[semioldguy]

Adding to my point, note the site rule:

Play to win the game.

And I'm telling you, if I'm left at the end with one other person,

that person also wins the game!

Think about it guys, would a pro-town SOG completely disregard a certain way to win, just because he considered in "unethical?" The win condition was PUT INTO THE GAME; that proves that it's a valid way to win!

And I'm telling you that win condition cannot be confirmed for me. How is it in any way certain? It is not proven that the win condition was put into the game. Just because you say it is, doesn't make it so. You are not the mod. You are of an opposing faction to the town. Playing to keep you alive directly contradicts my win condition.

[semioldguy]

If there are two scum members, and one of you has an ability to bypass night kills, Crazy can be killed at night. If scum are somehow (extremely unlikely it may be) able to this you shouldn't come forward, but your partner should come forward saying that he/she is scum and that his partner can kill Crazy. Then we lynch you, because you are scum, and your partner kills Crazy tonight. This increases the overall chances to win for both town and scum. It also saves your partner who can kill Crazy from being lynched.

Or if there are two of you, you can just both vote for me, since I don't think Crazy will be moving his vote.

[semioldguy]

By bypass night kills I of course mean the ability ignore such immunities of other players.

[semioldguy]

(1) Kublai Khan hasn't responded to any of my questions or even posted in thread since then. My stance on him is still the same as he has done nothing to change that since my post.

(2) All the power roles in this game are weak power roles. If we are speculating based on setup, the previous Disney game had stronger power roles for town and Mafia had a third member that was unknown. So your speculation here is that town are overall weaker and mafia were made stronger?

(3) I find it odd how three people are currently being voted and no one is getting hammered. This is a point against a three man scum team in my mind.

[semioldguy]

I am not suggesting that it is a two man scum team, merely proposing and hoping for that possibility. I think the chances of it being a three man scum team are greater, I don't disagree with Crazy on that. The statistics on site lean toward three instead of two when a serial killer is present, but since that situation doesn't allow me to win I would much rather entertain it being only two scum (as I mention/discuss in post 1279).

Two man scum teams do occur in minis with a serial killer. I think Crazy is being foolish to discount this (and in reality he probably doesn't discount it, but him supporting that possibility in any amount clearly hinders his own chances to win). If Crazy assumes a three man scum team, then a scum lynch today all but ensures his own victory, so of course he is going to want to lead everyone to believe that. I did too when I was revealed as a serial killer.

[semioldguy]

No, Crazy won't day kill tomorrow since he wins anyway if he doesn't day kill as long as we hit mafia today. He can lose if he does day kill. Why would he risk losing over a sure thing?

[semioldguy]

I possibly would have voted Kublai Khan if you had Crazy, but would have been very hard pressed to vote anyone but you the following day (since anything else led to a town loss. I don't trust anti-town role claims out of both principal and experience. They only have motivation to win, and being honest with town hardly ever lines up, plus I know what I've lied about before as third party when I've been outted.

Why was Jazz trying to save Gorrad (both sooo late and quite ineffectively by also not doing anything herself to support the idea, i.e. moving her vote to help save him) a town tell for you Crazy?

I was completely right about the final five of us, and that Starbuck and I couldn't win at that point I knew that if two scum were left there was no way for Crazy not to win if we lynched scum, which is part of why I was so apprehensive of lynching scum at that point, since ldoing so led to my own loss (which wasn't a good feeling).

@Llama
The only complaint I have about the setup is that it allowed two players (Starbuck and I) to both still be playing when it was essentially impossible for us to win. That hurt the fun for me a bit, playing to win when I know I can't and knowing that I have to still keep playing. To be honest what I was thinking is that the only way I couldn't lose was to request to be replaced out, which I obviously didn't want to do because it's not playing to win or in the spirit of the game. The anti-town roles should be constructed in such a way that town (or any alignment) shouldn't be 100% out of a win at any point in my opinion if they are still playing. With both Day killing and kill immune SK, there was no chance for a real cross-kill to potentially bring town back into the game.

Any NK-immune SK should almost never aim for scum, since killing the townies early on increase the chances of an SK win drastically. Get scum on the lynches and town on your kills. (which is why I really don't like night kill immunity in any variety in minis to begin with, because it skews the balance to much with so few players) I mean, if you have a five-player endgame scenario, chances are greater than half that the Night Kill-immune player is still alive if everything assumed random, since he couldn't have been night killed. This generally makes the win condition for at least one faction practically unwinnable. Not the same case with a 20 player game, since it's much harder to make it to end game (still don't like night kill immunity on any role though), more through personal opinion.

[semioldguy]

I didn't see anyway Gorrad would have been saved with such little time left and such little activity in the thread as deadline approached. Looked to me like an attempt to appear townish rather than actually being town. Just my interpretation though.

[semioldguy]

I think it was fairly obvious who the scum were on the last day. Both Kublai Khan and Jazzmyn had several self contradictions (which were pointed out and they were unable to address). Giving a reason for not being in thread and such is not an excuse for a self-contradiction. Basically their words and actions did not line up, what they said was not supported by what they did.

This game should be another note to myself that I need to be better at persuading players to my cases. In many of the games I have lost as town I have scum pegged but am unable to convince others. Of my three suspects day two, both mafia were among them. :/