Mini #1007 (Game Over)

[AGar]

Oi.

Hi Hoopla. Hello gonnano.

And VRK is here. Scratch one off the list of players I wanted to play with.

[AGar]

Elleran - Raszagal? (spelling is off)

[AGar]

Why make the claim now? I think that's a waste of a potential Town NK. Best case scenario is that you're now guaranteed to be in LyLo with the last Mafia and an unconfirmed Townie who've cross-voted and you have to make the final decision.

Really, I had no choice. Just think if I left it, and was responsible for one or two town PR deaths? Of course, there is the chance of hitting scum if I can play well enough to attract the night kill. Knowing me, I'd be likelier to attract doctors and investigation roles if I didn't claim, though. Ever played with a PGO before, Vel? What are your current thoughts about how I should be treated?

I disagree with part of this.

I agree with claiming on Day 1 as PGO. You don't want to necessarily draw any pro-town PRs to you and end up responsible for their deaths.

I disagree with claiming to start Day 1. I'd find it a much better idea to wait until Day 1 has progressed some, and maybe even towards the lynch happening or twilight before claiming.

I also find this slightly scummy, because I've seen you pull this stunt before, back in 909, where you claimed miller off the bat, and then turned out to be a goon.

VOTE: Hoopla

[AGar]

I would have had the same opinion about the claim itself. But knowing you've done this before, basically to avoid any investigative results being used against you, I feel like you could be manipulating the same ploy. By claiming PGO, you are basically trying to deter any pro-town PR from targeting you. Again, this can basically force investigative roles away from targeting you and allow you to have one less worry on your back if you are scum. So basically, to your insinuated question, yes, I feel that this is potentially a scummy gambit because of a previous gambit you made in similar fashion.

[AGar]

Can you explain what the scum motivation would be for me to fake-claim in this instance,

knowing

that you have witnessed me do this as a miller before? I'm well aware this will improve my chances of being lynched (even more so with your knowledge of my scum game), but the rewards of this claim certainly isn't worth that risk as scum. For me, the prevention of town PR's deathes takes precedence over my own survival, which was the catalyst for my decision to claim.

The scum motivation remains the same - attempt to avoid targeting by pro-town roles while trying to play the move off as pro-town. The question really lies in how much did you think about your potential gambit, and how much you thought about how each player would play into it.

First of all, if your memory serves you correctly, I pretty much flaked out of that game. I had gone inactive and the only reason I didn't get replaced out was because I was NKed before it could happen. Overall, I inadvertently flaked on about 8 games simultaneously, that was one. I didn't even know I had been NKed in that game (which occurred in February) until June. I didn't see that game through to the end. I went back and read it about a month ago when I was updating my wiki.

Second, there's the potential WIFOM element that can pollute my thoughts if you do it as scum - "surely he wouldn't try this twice as scum with me in both games" I would think - and that I might not bring this up because of that. If that's the only game with me you've played, then you don't know my meta well enough to determine what kind of player I am. I lurked woefully in that game.

Third, you may not have even connected me with this game and 909 until I brought it up. You have 10 other completed games in 2010 according to your wiki. Sure, if you're keen on your memory, you might remember every player who you played with in each specific game. But most people aren't.

Conversely to your question - had I not brought it up, would you have honestly remembered that I was in the game where you fake-claimed a miller as scum?

If you don't make the connection, the risk/reward is greater - you basically have pro-town PRs off of your back, and you don't worry about this pesky meta bringing you into potential lynch material when you make the claim. You simply set it up to play it off as a pro-town move with the best interests of the town in mind rather than your own best interests. You likely don't expect me to attack the ploy, so you think this can be well played, like the last time.

If you do, and you do realize that I'm generally the type of player who attacks WIFOM-type issues head on rather than skirting around them, you may find the risk/reward a bit less. But what have you got to lose? You may get lynched, but you can maybe find a way to steer clear of leaving any dead tells linking you to anyone. You have also effectively derailed the town's attention on D1.

[AGar]

So, of course I know and remember. I even know

you

remember about that game as you were talking about elsewhere on site (here).

Ok, so I can name off the roles of the game. How are you to know that I know more about the game than that? How are you to know that I even read more than the roles of the game and the results post.

Every point you have made is something that we can't confirm, because it's all you saying one thing that is supposedly in your head. There is no proof that you remembered, you could easily be bluffing every post you make to fit in with "I remember you being in that game." The only point you bring up that's confirmable is, yes, I did talk to Amished about that game. But, again, nothing in that post shows that I read more than the OP, so how are you to know from that post alone that I know that you claimed miller falsely.

[AGar]

@redtail - Have you read the rest of the thread in regards to what I brought up about his past meta?

[AGar]

But, again, nothing in that post shows that I read more than the OP, so how are you to know from that post alone that I know that you claimed miller falsely.

Eyes everywhere, my friend;

Oh yeah. Stupid scum lynching Quag and ruining everything; he could've killed Hoopla miller's claim....

Lol I helped. He refused to read his role PM. It was a policy lynch. Cyberbob and I actually spearheaded that wagon and we were town lol.

Unless you're claiming to have posted this message without reading what Amished had to say. You know I fakeclaimed miller as scum that game, and I know you knew. I don't even know why you're trying to argue this.

I don't write down my thoughts on every post, you know. So I can't tell you if I read Amished's post in full. It's quite possible that I didn't, I do that quite often. I don't know.

What I don't get is why you're going to such great lengths (basically stalking my posts outside of this thread) in order to try and prove that you knew I was going to attack this head-on.

I'm arguing it because you're basically trying to say you know how I think, and that makes your actions pro-town.

[AGar]

Here's something else to consider -- AGar and I just got out of a game where he was scum. He and his partner managed to win by convincing a townie that my claim was a gambit. He could be trying to pull the same trick again. Gambits do exist, of course, but the reason that they work is because a straight play is much more likely.

Mm. Circumstances were different. It was LYLO. I was pretty much a goner if I didn't do anything. I didn't think IP would survive LYLO with any of you, quoi and artem.

This situation that I'm going after Hoopla for - same circumstances. Day 1, beginning of play. No pressure. Openly claims a role that will basically get pro-town PRs off of his back.

I also find it oddly strange that you decided to bring this up. It's like a weak, variant chainsaw defense for Hoopla.

Thanks for outting his buddy, bro.

[AGar]

Oh shit i didn't know he had those votes on him when i did that. Sorry my computers running slow i submitted that when there was only like 10 posts. I think that what he did was dumb, but not necessarily a for sure scum read. I'll keep my vote after reading what y'all have been talking about, but I'm really on the fence about it so don't get angry if I unvote.

Your computer is so slow, it takes 12 hours to post?

-_-

[AGar]

it doesn't make you it just tells you that something else has been posted you don't have to read

So you just ignored the rest of it?

[AGar]

.

AGar;

you seem to be finding it difficult to find any town motivation for my claim, jumping to hasty conclusions. Hypothetically speaking, how would you have played the PGO if you were dealt that hand?

I already told you. I would have waited until late in the day, if not twilight and mentioned it.

I can find town motivation for the claim. But the past meta makes it hard to believe that it is truly town motivation that caused you in particular to make the claim.

[AGar]

Oh and KKN -

Game where Hoopla fake-claimed miller - http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13130
Game where my scumbuddy and I pushed that a claim was a gambit - http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... =2&t=14341

[AGar]

Vote AGar

because of the REALLY strong push against Hoopla, and because when I expressed the viewpoint that Hoopla might not be scum, his response was to call my post a "weak chainsaw defense" (is that possible?) and to accuse me of being Hoopla's scumbuddy.

If you'll learn to read, I didn't call your post expressing the viewpoint that Hoopla might not be scum the weak chainsaw. I addressed the fact that when you came in, you brought up something that was, in my mind, completely irrelevant due to a different set of circumstances and tried to pin that against me and my attack on Hoopla's claim.

Glad to see you're back at your regular "Anyone who accuses me of anything is scummy," ways.

UNVOTE:

As for Hoopla's gambit... I'm finding it really hard to not suggest Lynch All Liars. And before gonnano gets all excited thinking "OMG HE DID THIS LAST GAME TOO!!!!!1!1!1!!111ONEONEELEVENTYONE!!!!!", it's in my meta to push policy lynches when the opportunity arises regardless of alignment. Look at Mini 909, Newbie 863 and Newbie 965. Off of the top of my head, I pushed a policy lynch on Quagmire D1 for not reading his role PM in 909, I pushed a LALiars against Panacea in 863, and again, LALiars against DavidParker in 965. I do believe I was town in all three of those games.

The thing I don't like about Hoopla's gambit is that I don't feel Hoopla got as much reaction as she could have because of my attack on the meta. The breadcrumb makes sense, mainly because of the K sentence. Hoopla's smart enough to know that you won't attract a cop and a doctor with the same playstyle in most cases. But I feel like it was a misguided attempt, especially if she knew I was going to meet the claim head-on, as basically all discussion that followed revolved around whether this was a gambit as has been executed in the past or not.

With regards to drmyshottyizsik, I'm definitely in the "VI" crowd about him. Either that or maybe a jester. His play is erratic, nonsensical and just ridiculous, so I don't know 100% what to make of it other than VI at this point.

[AGar]

Hoopla, I don't see the similarities in Vel's and Almaster's arguments. Vel attacked you for the holes he found in the logic of your defense against the meta argument, but Almaster basically latched on to my meta argument and ran with that.

I don't particularly like Almaster much at this point. Like I said, he latched onto my argument for his vote. Also, I dislike the notion of him directing a vig to waste their shot on drmyshottyizsik, when I feel the shot could be better used. I'd much rather use him as lynch-bait on an appropriate day, as I've seen the case come that there are appropriate days, and we'll probably have at least one day where it's ideal to lynch him pre-LYLO.

VOTE: AlmasterGM

EBWOPreview:

Hoopla - Yes and no. Policy lynches like the one for quag was epic fail on our part. LALurkers is a waste. LALiars, in the right situations, can benefit the town in the fact that, while it provides essentially no vote analysis or scumhunting in the leadup, you can a) eliminate a major source of confusion for the town and b) go back and find who might've pushed a

little

too hard for the policy lynch, especially if it doesn't fit the meta.

[AGar]

@gonnano - Your humor never ceases to amuse me.

---

Because you and AGar have played a game (or more) together before, you guys can easily read each other's meta and understand each other's strategy without direct PM or communication.

One game. And no. I barely understand Hoopla's meta at all. I remembered the miller claim from that game, but (as I even said) I practically flaked out of that game. I got skinned N2 if I remember the flavor correctly (it stands out because it was one of my more interesting death scenes), but I had stopped participating somewhere during D2.

Unless Hoopla has read some of my games in depth, I doubt she understands my meta. Especially because it has probably changed since that game.

Understanding one player's strategy isn't a result of playing games with them. It's just a result of playing games period. The more you play, the more you pick up on tactics for each alignment. Simple logic.

Re: Policy Lynches.

Not going to start a huge MD debate here. Simple points:

Elleran, trying to push the Lynch-All-Liars PL is scummy right now. Really. He has breadcrumbing to back it up, and while it's not the most attractive way of getting reads, I will admit it's getting the job done.

KKN, usually when I push a policy lynch of LALiars, it's because the lie that was told is going to cause confusion for the town. Confusion for the town is basically pro-scum. It puts townies in a frenzied state and has them all messed up and not thinking straight, allowing scum to get by with slips that they might not normally get away with. Whether the player's motivation was scummy or not, it can often cause problems regardless. Read Newbie 863 if you get the chance. We had not 1, not 2, but 3 players claim doctor. 2 were townies, 1 was the doc. While the scum had no hand in any of the 3 claims, they greatly benefited from the confusion surrounding all three players.

I want to vote Elleran, as his push for the policy lynch is really screaming "HI GUYS I'M SCUM!"

But I like my Almaster vote better.

[AGar]

@AGar - why mention Lynch All Liars if you don't want to suggest it? Is it possible that you DO want to suggest it, but without committing yourself to anything? I also noticed that you were very quick to turn on someone who followed the suggestion that you were extremely careful to not make.

First nature of my play-style is very aggressive towards lynch all liars. Trying to reign it in. Mentioned it just because I was posting as I thought things.

I don't want LALiars, because I see the effectiveness of Hoopla's claim.

I turned on Elleran because I just discussed with Hoopla why I think certain policy lynches are appropriate and others are not. We discussed the anti-town nature of most policy lynches, and why they often can benefit scum heavily.

---

@Almaster:
Mmm. The vigging thing should likely be scratched - I had read into that too strongly. Not familiar with vig play, so I wasn't actually sure what vig theory was. Attempting to direct the NK at a player I felt was better lynch bait later on pinged me, but again - don't know vig play.

Besides, I'm not going to vote Zach (who isn't coattailing as far as I can see) and redtail when you're starting to crumble already:

1) I gave very clear reasons in my post why I was voting Hoopla. You can go re-read them if you want, but to say I just agreed with you is rather self-centered. My argument focused more on why I thought claiming PGO was a bad idea, not you.

However, I can see the justification for claiming, so I don't think the claim in and of itself is scummy. It is the meta argument that makes it relevant - poor logic plus scum motivation for using that logic plus evidence that you used the same tactic before ....

So, care to backtrack again?

As for VRK or Shotty - VRK has produced original thoughts and input into the game that makes sense. Why would I find him scummy? Shotty is playing VI like right now, and there are better lynches for D1. Primarily, you or Elleran.

EBWOPreview:
Elleran's unvote is intriguing.

What the hell is with the super-sized votes everyone?

[AGar]

Mmm. Fuck my phone - it just deleted my post.

Re: Almaster - I do believe he missed my new points about his repeated backtracking on multiple occasions. Thus, my entire case isn't latching.

Re: Elleran - His unvote while saying "I have a reason for this, but keep me alive until tomorrow so I can tell you" is uber uber scummy. It's a shame I only have one vote.

Re: drmyshottyizsik - He's an idiot, I'll get that off my chest. His claim to be a doctor isn't believable at all. His scum claim, as ridiculous as it seems, is more believable. Especially when he introduced the "why would I do this" wifom. So much wifom all about.

Re: gonnano - His logic on dr's claim is bad. His logic about scum killing him is worse. Scum have what reason to kill him? He's not a strong player, so even if he is the doc, it's not like he's going to get off a successful protect repeatedly. Also, where do I back off of my case on Almaster? I dismiss the vig note, but otherwise, I keep on him. I'll get to the rest of his case and the holes in his logic when I get to my actual computer.

I want to comment on more, but until I get to a computer, I can't quote multiple people. I should be discharged in the next day or two.

[AGar]

So much that needs to be addressed towards gonnano, it isn't funny.

- First of all, my sole case isn't latching. I started with latching and vigging. I dropped vigging after I realized it was essentially a difference in theories, but at the same time, I found more backtracking from Almaster, which I even pointed out (in other words, read the entire fucking post or don't read it at all). This is now the second time someone has found Almaster backtracking (the first being him saying he believed the claim to make sense then Hoopla's play was illogical).

- Second, your case. 1) Tell me now, how can you confirm a PGO claim other than a flip? Anyone who targets the PGO, even if they say they did, can just as easily be killed by mafia. Simple. Without knowing the setup, that can't be confirmed. So yes, it was a similar situation, as I pointed out. 2) Mmm. I already stated why I went after you. Not going to repeat myself. 3) You can't read. I don't say at all in ISO #13 that I think Hoopla is still scummy. I said I don't like keeping admitted liars around, regardless of alignment, and I said that I didn't feel that the claim was able to garner full reaction. 4) I'm scummy for pushing cases and scumhunting now? When did that meta shift happen? And where am I backing off of it?

- Why you freaking out about CA's vote?

---

KKN is non-committal to the max. Just thought I'd bring everyone's attention to that.

Elleran's explanation, which I apparently missed, is bogus.

[AGar]

The point that I was trying to make about your ISO 13 is that you don't retract any of your reasons for voting Hoopla in the first place, but you still unvote. To me this seemed like responding to pressure by unvoting while still leaving an opening for you to jump back on the Hoopla wagon if you saw a chance.

Apparently an unclaim with a breadcrumb and logistical explanation (whether I like it or not) is no reason to unvote someone. Keep the misreps up buddy.

[AGar]

Apparently an unclaim with a breadcrumb and logistical explanation (whether I like it or not) is no reason to unvote someone.

...

but you've already said that you think lying is a scumtell

, it's already been pointed out that the breadcrumb could have been planted regardless of alignment, and logical explanations of Hoopla's claim have been around since the beginning of the game.

Where?

I've said lying is detrimental to the town, and I've said lying causes confusion to the town, I've even said that a lying townie is a worthy mislynch if a player isn't acting scummier. But I've never said that lying is a scumtell, at least not that I recall in this game.

Mmm. Logical explanations by people not named Hoopla, and none focused around why a falseclaim with a breadcrumb. Hoopla could be lying, sure thing. But I suspect that if she is, her play will show that later on, no?

gonnano, your tunneling is impressive. Mostly null, but definitely not in the town's best interests. Stop. Start actually doing something rather than carrying a grudge because my team was able to blow your gambit apart last game, because that's all I'm getting anymore. I disprove something, you come back with a re-iteration and a slightly different angle. You're operating on confirmation bias now. Scumhunt.

KKN, I'm anticipating a vote with the next post. You've read the thread, things have been discussed up, down, forwards, backwards and sideways. There's no reason not to cast a vote at this point, it'll hold some weight.

[AGar]

AGar, what was your purpose when you were trying to prove to Hoopla that you might not have read that post by Amished which mentioned Hoopla's "Miller" claim?

In this post, G&H demonstrates the scummy tactics of not reading the entire thread, while projecting the same issue onto another player who is, by default, unlikely to be their buddy.

It was pretty fucking clear why I made that statement. If you didn't read the 30-or-so posts regarding the entire issue, too damn bad. I'm not rehilighting why I posted what I posted. Go back, read the thread, and try again later.

Not sure where I stand on Hoopla's plan. I don't see the tremendous gains from it. And I see plenty of potential pitfalls.

Let's say we're in 3:9, with no doc/protective role. It could happen. dr is falseclaiming doctor as scum. One of his buddies, seeing this plan, decides "Hey, wait. I'll counter-claim the bastard." They take their chances. We lynch either dr or the buddy, and the other remaining scum cruises on the "Well, I guess that proves that I'm the doc." Pulls the wool over the town's eyes and turns our own plan against us.

There are a thousand and one ways this can go wrong, and very few where it goes right, in my eyes. Also, are we just "agreeing" to go along with it and claiming or are we going to do a popcorn style claim?

EBWOPreview:

First paragraph: Yes I will. I've explained why already - people who lie to the town usually cause mass confusion, and even if they seem the most pro-town person in the world after the lie, there's still that "well... what if?" factor about the lie that you don't want introduced in LYLO.

For the second: No. I consider lying to be wholly detrimental to the town, but it can come from any player regardless of alignment. As I just said, the lie is something considered to be dangerous in LYLO, at least I feel that way, and that's why LALiars is called a

policy

lynch. There is no "Well he's definitely X alignment" involved, it is a precautionary lynch to protect the town from confusion in LYLO.

Also, sorry I'm refusing to just tunnel on one player and thus am apparently not scumhunting.

[AGar]

Is it V/LA with limited access or V/LA with no posting? Just curious, honestly.

Alright, Hoopla, I'll bite. I admit my mistrust with the claim is simply that I don't see 100% benefit to mass-claims almost ever. I tend to lean pessimistic in regards to them.

I still want to know if we're just claiming out of the blue or if we want to do a popcorn style claim or something.

[AGar]

Also, gonnano, for #230, it was in response to the end of your #225 where you said it was a stretch that I was scumhunting. dry, sarcastic remark, really.

[AGar]

34 hours and 57 posts and that's all you have in the way of input. Congratulations, you just leap-frogged Almaster.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Elleran

[AGar]

Ok gonnano.

[AGar]

Ok. I don't think that's popcorn but alright.

I'm not a protective PR.

[AGar]

I'm gonna say Elleran next if we are doing actual popcorn.

[AGar]

Ok. Then Elleran next.

[AGar]

Alright.. myself, Hoopla, KKN, gonnano and redtail have claimed.

Almaster, VRK, Elleran, G&H Confidanon and Zach have not.

Can we please try to start going popcorn style? Because the benefit of popcorn is being lost when people just come in and chime in about their claim out of the blue.

[AGar]

I have already said that I don't approve of people discussing how to get rid of drmyshottyizsik. This is quite an easy target. I don't see what huge problems drmyshottyizsik can cause. I don't think drmyshottyizsik is really going to be able to influence anyone much (sorry, drmyshottyizsik). The only danger might come from these sudden votes - but the players here should now be aware of this. So I'm not impressed with those who have been most eager to get rid of drmyshottyizsik - Zachrulez and, to a smaller extent, AlmasterGM. On the other hand, I find it good that some players haven't supported at all any drastic measures against drmyshottyizsik - like redtail896 and Vel-Rahn Koon (who has recently stated that drmyshottyizsik should just be ignored). gonnano is against getting rid of drmyshottyizsik - but that's because gonnano believes drmyshottyizsik's "Doctor" claim. gonnano, if drmyshottyizsik is not a "Doctor", would your position change?

BTW, I missed this early, but this post strikes me as odd. Like scum trying to gain townie cred for being against a particular wagon.

[AGar]

@MOD: Where is Hoopla's vote in the most recent VC?

Look closer. :p

[AGar]

Gonnano claimed too.

RTFT.

Elleran lynch is looking mighty fine.

[AGar]

G&H, I've decided that when you stop playing at shotty's level, I'll address you. Otherwise, I'm going to get modkilled. By the way, stop bringing up yours and other people's ongoing games. Now.

All of your points are re-hashing things that were already discussed until we were blue in the face. Start playing for real and putting a half a neuron (if you have it) to use and making intelligent posts and I'll address your points.

[AGar]

What's up with the recent need to dismiss people's comments as stupidity? Honestly, insults don't get you very far. Here's looking at you, Almaster and AGar.

Really? I've won a fair amount of games, at least, the mods have told me so.

---

Nice fencesitting, Elleran. There's plenty to take a stance on as being scummy. Like your partner, for starters.

[AGar]

Eh, I'm doing fine in life anyways lol.

Hopefully VRK can get in here soon and pick the next to popcorn to so we can lynch Elleran.

[AGar]

Wow.... Just, wow.

[AGar]

I'm not defending. I'm calling you out on your misrepresentation.

Ok.

Where's the misrep?

I'd like to echo this sentiment.

If someone is making contradictory, tunneling, flawed scumhunting, is it really scumhunting? I believe it's moreso likely to be from scum who are trying to make the appearance of scumhunting to avoid being accused of lurking or middling. Note that Elleran's entire vote-history is thus:

1) Hoopla for unclaiming PGO and him feeling that one previous game in which I replaced out of with Hoopla gave us uber psychic powers. (Would be cool, I'd love to psycho-communicate with Hoopla during games sometimes lol)

Unvoted shortly thereafter.

He hasn't cast a vote since.

@G&H - No, I'm not intending to ignore you for the rest of the game unless you resume playing like a naive VI. If one good thing came out of the town in Mini 992, it was Seacore's expressing how people need to stop waiting around for the deadline to come. Elleran is proving to be unhelpful, commiting scummy actions, is fencesitting with his opinions, and has attempted most of the tricks in the book that are fairly scummy. He isn't scumhunting, he's trying to mask fluff and pass it off as scumhunting. Also, meta 101: You can't meta someone based off of one alignment alone. Good scum players will try and play to their perceived town meta to throw people off their trail. Unless you can provide examples of a game where Elleran was scum and had a substantially different playstyle (on-site, mind you. I feel off-site meta is completely and utterly worthless), your example of him in Newbie 957 is worthless. Sorry to say it, but meta isn't just something that you look at one or two games and say "Oh hey, that's how he plays."

In other news, the massclaim is complete with G&H's refusal, although before we do any lynching, I have a question to ask.

G&H - Why are you refusing to participate? What harm do you see?

[AGar]

*shows hand*

#324 - More fence-sitting and middling for Elleran. Nice.

....


....

Something clicked. We should definitely move to lynching G&H. Gonnano, what's your objection to lynching G&H? Because I think that G&H's objection to claiming is because he knew he wouldn't be able to gain anything at this point from a false-claim as scum. Redtail's last post triggered this line of thought. I don't buy any player that says "I don't lie" in a game of mafia. It's crap. Complete and utter bullsnot. G&H has insisted that he believes drmyshottyizsik is a VT claiming doc. If he buys into Hoopla's stats (which it appears he did), then he knows there is only a 14% chance that there is no protective powerrole. Which means if picked earlier, he could've fabricated a false-claim and maybe drawn out a pro-town PR with a counter-claim. If we're in 9:3, it's not a bad trade, especially if the PR is a weak doc or something of that variety. By being forced into the last position, G&H has nothing to gain with a false-claim at this point - either drmyshottyizsik is a protective PR, or we're in that 14% category. No other player was drawn out into a claim, and G&H wasn't able to extract any kind of counter-claim. I expect some bogus reason that could've been brought up when the massclaim was initially being discussed to be G&H's reasoning.

EBWONinjaPreview: Redtail - why do you think refusing to massclaim and not bringing reasoning up earlier is not scummy?

[AGar]

Oh wow, I missed the entire 14th page. Fail.

Although there's not much for me to address, just read.

KKN - Contributing is relative to the eye of the beholder then.

[AGar]

AGar's argument against G&H is just a little bit too farfetched. I find it hard to believe that an experienced player like him would fail to see the obvious scum exit that redtail just described, which is even consistent with G&H's "bullsnot" playstyle. I will most likely be pushing for an AGar lynch on Day 2.

Mmm. I forgot that people had no fucking clue what a popcorn was, if that's the out you're referring to. If you're referring to him saying "I'm not a protective PR" then yes, it would be easy. But why the fuck else is he denying a reason to make a claim?

Also, nice job focusing on D2 before D1 is even done. Care to tell us who you're going to NK while you're at it?

[AGar]

Summary of #348:

Suspicion 1: OMGUS

Suspicion 2: Not even reading the thread.

Suspicion 3: I am always scummy, I guess.

[AGar]

KKN - Almaster has a point. But you guys should drop it. Elleran needs more votes, since no one else wants to wagon G&H. He better have a damn good reason for denying the claim.

[AGar]

Ok, so I consider that endgaming.

Gratz Almaster.

Sucks I was killed N1

[AGar]

The only way this playstyle could

possibly

work is if you pulled a 3rd party role, like an SK.

That'd be the lamest SK forever lol.

Zach/Almaster - Why me N1? Did the Hoopla PGO claim actually concern you? I was baffled to die, really.

[AGar]

The problem with your playstyle is twofold:

1) You want to be "good and honest" but as scum you're a lying, conniving, sonofabitch scumbag who should be willing to do whatever it takes to win. Machiavelli type shit. By not wanting to lie to the town, you're a detriment to your team when you draw scum because the town can pin you very easily. That automatically dogs the scumteam down a man. Also, your refusal to submit a kill hurts the team in that any time a watcher/tracker type role is present, they automatically have one less target to follow, increasing the odds of a hit on your partners. It also borderlines on not playing to your win condition if you're the only scum-member left.

2) You refuse to vote unless you know someone is scum. This means you essentially refuse to take a solid position, and anyone who relies on vote analysis can't read you. Being readable is pro-town. Being obstinate and stubborn is not.

In the end, you're not realizing something. Mafia isn't a single-player game. When you sign up for a game, you're not the only one. Your playstyle isn't fun to play with, analyze or isolate, and by joining games and insisting on playing like this, you're sucking the fun out of the game for a number of other people. I fully warn you that you should expect to be policy lynched repeatedly until you either change your playstyle or something else occurs.

[AGar]

I also just got the sudden urge to find a copy of

The Prince

.

[AGar]

Tracker/Doc v RB/Goon with a town/scum lover pair.

Meh, it was kinda bland (sorry!).

Then again, most mini normal setups run that way, if you think about it.

It wasn't a bad setup, by any means. My perspective is a bit biased in that I only played a single day, so I didn't get to experience much, but I do think it worked out well for the most part. Might have been more effective if the town wasn't as apathetic, as the roles may have made more of an impact, but that's not really anything you could do. The biggest one that actually did anything was the lover pair, honestly. I know someone had a gripe about it, but double town lovers would be a horrid idea I think. I dunno, I'm fairly unfamiliar with the role.

I'm a bit of a harlot in that I like a little more mod presence in terms of votecounts (once per 24h), but I know some people don't care, so that's just me.

[AGar]

Almaster... why not just shoot Gonnano if you wanted G&H dead? Lulz.

Also, still interested in knowing why I died N1. Seems bizarre to me, but I'm sure there was some reasoning.