GoT Mafia Game 70

[House Redfort]

By the way, do we want to lynch Lannister? Six posts only and totally under radars.

I wouldn't mind. The only thing Lannister has done, other than RP, is say they liked Tyrell because of the healing plan, and then confirm they were healing someone. They haven't voted for real, either today or yesterday (their vote was a joke) and haven't expressed opinions on anyone other than Tyrell, or people who wanted to question Tyrell--this being after Tyrell posted an initial plan which was vastly flawed, imho, since it had an odd person out for no particular reason.

I don't want to place my vote quite yet, but Lannister is even more under the radar than I am, and their total lack of opinion is annoying. If they like the idea of everyone being protected from a night kill, but aren't willing to opine on any lynch candidate, then how is anything ever going to happen in the game? Sheesh.

Maybe they will listen if I post this really big:

Hey, Lannister! If you don't start posting or at least chipping in on other people's cases, we're going to lynch you!

[House Redfort]

Ok, I'm tired and don't have time to re-read Stonetree right now, so that will have to wait until the morning. I don't have any top suspects right now--I guess I just have bottom ones, where the lowest rung of the suspect ladder is filled with people who I think are wrong, but innocent. The grand prizes go to Cerwyn and Tyrell. Both of them are a bit hyperactive, but I want to classify that as a sign of likely innocence.

I'm also curious as to what Cerwyn will say on Stark's innocence.

[House Tully]

Okay, I'm here and I'll try to do re-reads and post from work. The board is working perfectly now, which makes me think the problem might be on the settings on my home computer, but I don't know what it is, and I haven't changed anything, and it worked perfectly well before... :frown5:

ETA #3: Does anyone else hate the new "find all posts by this user" feature? The old one, with actual post text, was soooo much better.

I hate it. It means you have to re-read the whole thread. I'd gladly migrate the mafia community to the My Little Pony board and play as Sweetie Belle if it got me the 'view member's posts' feature back... :frown5:

[Lady Gaga]

Wow. So I wake up to find out that my nemesis really was just a flu-addled brain misfiring rather than a killer?

I'd like to make it clear that this in no way makes me look bad.

Unfortunately, that'd be a lie. It makes me look dumb, tunnel visioned, and generally silly. However, Tully sums it up best with this;

Tunnelvision, perhaps, but the only logic I subscribed to was the "Well, the most suspicious person from day one didn't get lynched and since I left had only made himself look more suspicious so he's the lad I'll keep pursuing" line of thought.

So, yeah. I'd be all for a Lannister vote based on a complete and total lack of any contribution in the main game.

edit: While I don't have time for a complete re-read right now, I should have in a few hours time. I've got to spend 5-6 hours today sitting on various forms of public transport to help out a family member, so I'll bring my netbook along and do some work.

[House Tully]

re: Erenford's claim that I was Frey's main suspect and the one who most benefited from her death...

Please provide quotes, as I missed that part. :smoking: If I had felt I was a stronger candidate than Stark based on her death, I would have said so. So yeah, I'd love to see how you came to that reasoning. :)

Here's Frey's penultimate post. You can see it paints Stark in a more favorable light than you (it says Stark has posted a lot in his defense and had interesting interactions, and is critical on your focus on Stark and Botley's case). Anyway, we now know Stark didn't kill Frey, but this post should have clued is in to that.

1-Cerwyn, when you get back, can you give your opinions on a player who isn't Stark? To be honest, I think you're starting to get a bit tunnel-visioned.

2-Stark, do you still suspect Yronwood?

--

Botley, I have no problem with being nice, but you seem to be using that as a substitute for scumhunting. Your only contribution so far was to vote Stark for attacking the first person to make a serious post. Since then, you've been letting your defenders do the work for you while staying out of the fray. Stark has posted lots in his defence and had interesting interactions with other players, but you haven't commented on any of it.

And again, can you respond to this:

Is this a fair assessment of your original case on Stark?

I'm currently trying to decide if you staking so much on Stark being evil points to you being innocent or guilty... I think from remembering previous performances of mine in other mafia games I'm inclining towards the former.

Tully:

There was no case and no bandwagon and I see you still suffer from selective reading. In fact, in the quote you're replying to I didn't even call Yronwood an easy target, just an easier target than those around him, which I still consider to be undeniable. But I actually did mean something a little stronger than that. I meant that he was as easy a target as you were likely to find at that point in the game. It's true that the votes on him were jokes, although you made it pretty clear that it would take a compelling case to drag you away from Yronwood and the points you'd get. I don't blame you for that, but it means your vote provided a little more cover than a simple joke might have. Still, joke or not, it is more appealing for an FM to one vote among a group than to be voting alone.

We'll just have to disagree on that one. I think a vote is strong or weak based on its substance. Even if there were an actual lynch mob on Yronwood, if someone just jumped on it without giving a good reason they'd catch plenty of flakk. I actually hold your very points against you, Tully. To me it seems you were looking to park your vote on someone on day one and just happened to do a better job of it than Stark. You put together a load of half-assed reasons and attacked the second serious post in the game rather than attacking the first. The more I read this post:

In the small amount of back and forth we've had so far, this is the post that I dislike most. My experience of day one evil is often that they're more looking for something, anything, to say rather than looking for genuine clues, and somewhere, anywhere, to park their votes. That's what makes RP and role spec so attractive for them. The kind of one line attack above feels just like that to me. The first serious game post is obviously also the easiest post to attack, and Stark has done such a wishy washy job of it. There's nothing wrong with being either analytical (even "supposedly analytical") or pretentious in mafia. Stark hasn't even tried to invent substance for his attack, and finally it's aimed at poor old Yronwood who isn't exactly the riskiest person you could vote for just now.

All in all I'm pretty happy voting Stark just now.

the more it simply screams guilty to me. I'm changing my vote to Tully.

[House Tully]

So, yeah. I'd be all for a Lannister vote based on a complete and total lack of any contribution in the main game.

Now that is an easy target.

[Lady Gaga]

Here's Frey's penultimate post. You can see it paints Stark in a more favorable light than you (it says Stark has posted a lot in his defense and had interesting interactions, and is critical on your focus on Stark and Botley's case). Anyway, we now know Stark didn't kill Frey, but this post should have clued is in to that.

I'm currently trying to decide if you staking so much on Stark being evil points to you being innocent or guilty... I think from remembering previous performances of mine in other mafia games I'm inclining towards the former.

Wait, that's it?

Wow.

So this post that cleared Stark and made me Frey's #1 suspect was the post where she accuses me of getting tunnelled, and asks Stark a question.

I don't see this sudden huge suspicion of me and acceptance of an innocent Stark you seem to.

Seriously, you just put out the idea that I was Frey's main suspect, then when forced to, back it up with a single post where i'm called out on tunnel visioning.

Also, it's nice to see this misleading statement in there... "and is critical on your focus on Stark and Botley's case". Frey is, in this post, at no point critical of my case on Botley. Hell, I wasn't even holding to that case at the time, I had admitted that it was a bit flimsy to claim chainsaw on.

As for an easy target with Lannister, yes. It is an easy target, because right now I have little in the way of solid targets to go after. So you think we should let Lannister get through day 2 without a single contributive post in almost 3 full days of gameplay?

So lets sum up.

Erenford decides to paint me as Frey's main suspect towards the end of her day. When pushed, he posts a post which doesn't paint me that way at all, and even tries to manufacture a second point against me into it. One which doesn't exist. On top of that, he's critical of voting off someone with a non existent post history in the post-jokephase game. Why? Because it's an easy target. Sometimes targets are easy for a reason!

This doesn't paint Erenford in a great light tome right now, but as I said, I have more time for a re-read later :)

[House Tully]

So this post that cleared Stark and made me Frey's #1 suspect was the post where she accuses me of getting tunnelled, and asks Stark a question.

Well, if you can slightly read between the lines you might get more information than that. The FM probably did when they chose their night kill. Frey was criticizing you for being tunnel-visioned on Stark, so when at the very beginning of day 1 you jumped right back on, do you think she would have been critical of you or jumping on the bandwagon? Frey's reaction to Stark seemed positive to me, and that's something I feel you should have caught on if you re-read her.

It might be stretching, but since we now know the FM were not protecting Stark or Botley I feel even more inclined to pursue this line of enquiry. And I didn't say you were Frey's main subject, could you please quote my actual post for people to see?

Also, it's nice to see this misleading statement in there... "and is critical on your focus on Stark and Botley's case". Frey is, in this post, at no point critical of my case on Botley. Hell, I wasn't even holding to that case at the time, I had admitted that it was a bit flimsy to claim chainsaw on.

Botley's case on Stark, not your case on Botley.

As for an easy target with Lannister, yes. It is an easy target, because right now I have little in the way of solid targets to go after. So you think we should let Lannister get through day 2 without a single contributive post in almost 3 full days of gameplay?

I hate going after modkill fodder, but that is jus a matter of personal preference. I just said Lannister is as easy a target as you can get right now. If you don't have any solid targets (I don't either), it would be more useful if you attacked the liquid ones, even if it's only for the sake of pushing the game along, but again that's personal preference, I guess.

[Lady Gaga]

Well, if you can slightly read between the lines you might get more information than that. The FM probably did when they chose their night kill. Frey was criticizing you for being tunnel-visioned on Stark, so when at the very beginning of day 1 you jumped right back on, do you think she would have been critical of you or jumping on the bandwagon? Frey's reaction to Stark seemed positive to me, and that's something I feel you should have caught on if you re-read her.

It might be stretching, but since we now know the FM were not protecting Stark or Botley I feel even more inclined to pursue this line of enquiry. And I didn't say you were Frey's main subject, could you please quote my actual post for people to see?

Botley's case on Stark, not your case on Botley.

I hate going after modkill fodder, but that is jus a matter of personal preference. I just said Lannister is as easy a target as you can get right now. If you don't have any solid targets (I don't either), it would be more useful if you attacked the liquid ones, even if it's only for the sake of pushing the game along, but again that's personal preference, I guess.

Where you see reading between lines, i see reading things you want to see in there, and reading it with the benefit of a hindsight frey didn't have.

And until I get my reread done, I have little in the way of liquid targets either, as I quite admittedly had my entire game view based on a guilty stark.

Why do you think it's scummy to focus on someone, to the extent of even having secondary suspects based on them being evil? Odds were stark would have swung today, leaving me in the position i'm in now tomorrow instead. I'm hardly in what a killer would consider a position to manoeuvre themselves into intentionally. Scum are more likely to tunnel on less lynchable people so they can keep it up all game to seem contributive :P

Still, i'm now on a train with nothing else to do, so i may as well get started on my reread, this time with the knowledge that stark, frey and botley are all innocent.

[Lady Gaga]

Oh, and lannister isn't moddkill fodder. He posted yesterday evening, and nno doubt we'll get another single, solitary, uninformative post tonight. More a modkill dodger, flying under the radar. I'd rather lynch him now than deal with the choice between a lurker and someone who looks like they could be guilty at end game. No-posters allowed to live can win the game when evil, or lose the game when we make the wrong decision if they are good. Better to see them off early.

[House Stokeworth]

So, Stark was innocent after all? AND a drag queen?

Hmph. I too had based my view of the game on the probable fact that Stark was guilty, and he was a sort of a default lynch for today. As nice as it is to have a CF on your top suspect without lynching them, it also means I have to do some actual work today. :o

[House Connington]

Tunnelvision, perhaps, but the only logic I subscribed to was the "Well, the most suspicious person from day one didn't get lynched and since I left had only made himself look more suspicious so he's the lad I'll keep pursuing" line of thought.

Wow. So I wake up to find out that my nemesis really was just a flu-addled brain misfiring rather than a killer?

I'd like to make it clear that this in no way makes me look bad.

Unfortunately, that'd be a lie. It makes me look dumb, tunnel visioned, and generally silly. However, Tully sums it up best

So, Stark was innocent after all? AND a drag queen?

Hmph. I too had based my view of the game on the probable fact that Stark was guilty, and he was a sort of a default lynch for today. As nice as it is to have a CF on your top suspect without lynching them, it also means I have to do some actual work today. :o

Tyrell gets a pass from me because of is healer plan which makes me think he is innocent. He wins my Most Trusted Player Award right now and it will take more than tunnell-vision to change that.

But I'm quoting him anyway b/c of what he says which is part of the issue here. It's lazy to just assume a player is guilty and base all of your analysis off that without ever considering the other possibilities. That's not the type of gameplay I'd expect from Tully who seems to be pretty smart, and it's definitely not what I'd expect from Cerwyn who has taken the role of leader and projects confidence and thoroughness.

Also it's just not a smart way to play the game (no offence to any of you personally). You concluded that Stark was guilty and based everything off that b/c of his play on day 1. Is it likely that you'll nail somebody on day 1? I know it is possible and I haven't been playing long enough to know the full history of games but it seems unlikely to me that it happens very often. Why throw all of your day 2 analysis behind that theory?

Third it just seems like an evil strategy more than an inno one, to find an easy target and throw everything at him until he's dead, really just hammer him becuase it's a good way to participate and look smart and gain trust. When I'm innocent I have more doubt and less confidence, always 2nd guessing myself.

I'm not saying it's bad to continue to go after somebody you suspect, especially if you think his responses make him look even worse, but to do it to exclusion of other thoughts is what bothers me.

[Lady Gaga]

note: edit box and post box are different things. :(

[Lady Gaga]

Posting as i go. I'm on a tiny netbook, so i dont have the luxury of notepad to organise my thoughts in

Firstly, stark must have been scum. Targ must have made a mistake. Even reading with knowledge he's innocent... I dunno. He still looks the number 1 suspect?

Lannister has said nothing, but is posting enough to avoid a modkill. I can see this biting us later if we don't address it now.

I tend to agree with your assessment of Stark. Botley has successfully started the ball rolling on his lynch but has said next to nothing about anybody else. I would like know who else Botley finds suspicious.

I think that although the FM are playing as individuals they will still act together to reduce numbers in the beginning. I'd like to have a look at the people on Starks lynch mob, because if he's innocent we might find a couple of FM in there. It is a case based on very little that has gained momentum and it doesn't sit well with me.

edit: shameful misuse of the word incredible

Now on re-read, i dont like this post at all. Presuming to tell us how the FM will act? Wants us to look in a small mob for not one, but two FM?

Anybody think that the FM have a motivation to not vote for innocents, especially once they see the momentum going against one? If there were 14 of us, it takes 8 to lynch, and the ball is rolling against an innocent, the FM would prefer to have those 8 spots filled up by innocent players who could then not get a point (for not lynching an innocent). And on the reverse, at least some of the 6 points going to people who were able to stay off the mob would go to FM instead of innocents.

Lannister, Stonetree and Stokeworth all were under no risk of being on a (now known) innocent lynch train. Could it really be that easy? Still, we may at least have one of them here as a point denier. I guess Tyrell's hammer and erenford's attempt at getting the hammer could potentially put them in this group too, as point deniers?

Tully seems to spend a lot of time following in other people's slipstream, agreeing with their generally well received arguments.

This is all based on up to but not including page 13/18... But i have to change train now, so its better i post it than risk losing all my work when the netbook shuts down!

Edit: You nearly lost me to a modkill caused by real life heart attack there My train pulled in at 12.2, with my connection leaving at 12.30. I was on platform 5, and needed to get to 1.

Made it with less tha n a minute to spare, and without even collapsing to the floor clutching my chest... barely. :(

[House Connington]

It's risky because it requires the FM to push a lynch that they themselves don't want to vote for, which ought to be seen as fairly suspicious behaviour. If you simply mean that evils are less likely to pile on an innocent lynch at the end of the day then you may have a point, but you see where the assumptions start to come in? Usually we think that evil is more likely to join an innocent lynch, especially if they're trying to detract attention from an evil alternative.

When did you get the idea that they have to push a lynch and then not follow up with a vote. I'm saying they can just let the lynch happen, maybe just rate the target lower and have a higher suspect they go after or whatever. Maybe use the desire to get a point as an excuse to resist changing vote for awhile. Maybe they spread out their votes so one of them is pushing a lynch while the others go in different directions. I can see ways where it could work or at least start off as an ok strategy for them.

I do see what you're saying about how it is different from what you normally expect from an evil but I don't think it would be that hard for them to try the strategy out, if they thought of it and decided it was a good plan.

[Lady Gaga]

Tyrell gets a pass from me because of is healer plan which makes me think he is innocent. He wins my Most Trusted Player Award right now and it will take more than tunnell-vision to change that.

But I'm quoting him anyway b/c of what he says which is part of the issue here. It's lazy to just assume a player is guilty and base all of your analysis off that without ever considering the other possibilities. That's not the type of gameplay I'd expect from Tully who seems to be pretty smart, and it's definitely not what I'd expect from Cerwyn who has taken the role of leader and projects confidence and thoroughness.

Also it's just not a smart way to play the game (no offence to any of you personally). You concluded that Stark was guilty and based everything off that b/c of his play on day 1. Is it likely that you'll nail somebody on day 1? I know it is possible and I haven't been playing long enough to know the full history of games but it seems unlikely to me that it happens very often. Why throw all of your day 2 analysis behind that theory?

Third it just seems like an evil strategy more than an inno one, to find an easy target and throw everything at him until he's dead, really just hammer him becuase it's a good way to participate and look smart and gain trust. When I'm innocent I have more doubt and less confidence, always 2nd guessing myself.

I'm not saying it's bad to continue to go after somebody you suspect, especially if you think his responses make him look even worse, but to do it to exclusion of other thoughts is what bothers me.

Before i resume my reread, i'd like to answer this.

From my point of view, smart evil play is to tunnel on someone unlikely to be lynched. That way you can tunnel on them for days, appear active and evil hunting without having to find lots of reasons to suspect people you know for a fact are good.

What me, tully and tyrell have done would be poor evil play, because it leaves us with no backup, nowhere else to hunt, and back in the same position we'd be in without the tunnelling.

And day 2 is often as bad as day 1. We win and lose games on day 3. This is also where our real leader is likely to raise his mane and take charge of the game.

Anyway, back to work. :P

[Lady Gaga]

Okay, p13 onwards...

Firstly, this is where erenford starts, in my opinion, twisting the history to make it look like frey was chummy with stark and wanted me lynched. I've dealt with that elsewhere though, so it's enough to say I feel he's being liberal with his interpretations.

Okay, with my final stop approaching that's all i've got. i'm at the start of page 15 now. I also realised something about the points and voting, but that'll wait for after i've summed up my re-ead. LEts just say i've figured out how to game the system even better :P

[Mentat]

Nothing to see here...

[House Tully]

From my point of view, smart evil play is to tunnel on someone unlikely to be lynched. That way you can tunnel on them for days, appear active and evil hunting without having to find lots of reasons to suspect people you know for a fact are good.

What me, tully and tyrell have done would be poor evil play, because it leaves us with no backup, nowhere else to hunt, and back in the same position we'd be in without the tunnelling.

[Lady Gaga]

This is very WIFOMy. Tunneling on a strong player or a VPI can get you strong counterattacks or weird looks. Attacking weak players who then turn out to be innocents might seem like a worse strategy on paper, but you'll normally be able to hide amongst the crowd and defend yourself with a "Yeah, I know he was innocent, but he looked so guilty to me!". I've seen it done. Often.

Also, saying something would be poor evil play doesn't mean that much, as even the best players play poorly once in a while. It's saying you wouldn't do suspicious things if you were evil because it would be playing poorly, but if evil players don't do suspicious things then why play this game at all?

Point taken. I guess I have to concede you are right here. Tyrell's point on me is valid. Not cast iron valid, but certainly with merit.