Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

House Targaryen

GoT Mafia Game 70.5 - Jingle Hell

Recommended Posts

Bashful, do you really want to say that everybody who is unlikely to be a symp is likely innocent?

We have some killers here, in case you've forgotten.

So you think that Durin looks more suspicious because of his posts or less suspicious? And if it's the further - what makes him look like an FM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think that Durin looks more suspicious because of his posts or less suspicious? And if it's the further - what makes him look like an FM?

Accusing a strong and inquisitive player is what inexperienced killers often do. Because, you know, they need to get rid of such players to win.

Truely, inexperienced innocent players do this also, for different reasons; but mafia is a game where presumption of innocence doesn't exist. So, Durin has to explain his rather unnatural accusations... and you, by the way, should explain your rather unnatural defence of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Accusing a strong and inquisitive player is what inexperienced killers often do. Because, you know, they need to get rid of such players to win.

That's why they prefer to kill them. :ninja:

Truely, inexperienced innocent players do this also, for different reasons; but mafia is a game where presumption of innocence doesn't exist. So, Durin has to explain his rather unnatural accusations... and you, by the way, should explain your rather unnatural defence of him.

I was not defending Durin, but I was answering questions. The only defense I gave so far was the "a rather good sign" comment which has been stretched to an ridiculous amount by now.

However, you gathered some minus points by implicating that this comment meant that I was not looking for FM. :P

And since my vote on Oompah (or whatever his name is) becomes a bit ineffective with him being absent, I am happy to vote

Happy

I think there's a chance that he was deliberatly trying to misunderstand me. I clearly referred to both FM and symp when explaining my theory, so why did he say that I also should look for the killers? But than the Smurf also does not look very good by asking questions and interpreting a straight answer as "overdefensive".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why they prefer to kill them. :ninja:

I was not defending Durin, but I was answering questions. The only defense I gave so far was the "a rather good sign" comment which has been stretched to an ridiculous amount by now.

However, you gathered some minus points by implicating that this comment meant that I was not looking for FM. :P

And since my vote on Oompah (or whatever his name is) becomes a bit ineffective with him being absent, I am happy to vote

Happy

I think there's a chance that he was deliberatly trying to misunderstand me. I clearly referred to both FM and symp when explaining my theory, so why did he say that I also should look for the killers? But than the Smurf also does not look very good by asking questions and interpreting a straight answer as "overdefensive".

So...you voted Happy because he hurt your feelings? :unsure: And what's with the contradictory statements? You say you weren't defending Durin, then in you next statement admit you did defend him?

As for the overdefensive comment: You made a weak defense of Durin that didn't make much sense. Sleepy and I then called you on it, at which point you posted a response that I felt was slightly overdefensive. I feel totally justified in my initial assessment of you. :P

Pro-tip: If your trying to not appear overdefensive, it's probably not the best idea to make an OMGUS case on the first person to throw suspicion on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're getting onto the more serious stuff now, I'm moving towards moving my vote to Bashful. I don't buy into the "mistake" of confusing me and Tyrion. Especially coming as it did after I'd pointed out that he looked a better FM fit than Tyrion because of it. The mistake just doesn't seem at all plausible to me.

But you didn't vote Bashful, despite saying you were voting Bashful. Why not? Are you wating to see if you get support? It's not like you've got a serious vote on someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I missed a lot. Sorry I've been busy.

Gimli, I'm curious. If your post wasn't a symp clue, then why did you say it? Did you try to be funny, and if that's the case then why didn't you worry about causing confusion. If you're innocent, stuff like that always leads to problems and is best avoided.

Tyrion I don't mind that you questioned the post but the way you did it was full of fail. You ask if it's a symp clue and then you believe him when he says yes. The Tyrion in the books was never so simple and naive. I see you misinterpreted the rules but still dude, that's weak. I'd feel better about you if you had just pointed out the possible symp clue.

More to say in a bit, addressing specific posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else find it odd that so many of Durin's serious posts has been a defence of Tyrion? All but one, that I can see.

I think Tyrion has the right idea in looking for signals from potential symps. Gimli did use terminology that related back to the symp description from Targ although I'm not sure that he'd be so obvious if he were a symp. Tyrion himself could be signalling his masters as a symp by making a false symp accusation, it's kinda hard to say at this point in the game, but the reasoning is sound.

If the symp dies the ability to gift is passed on to a random person, good or bad.

(This one I didn't read as a defence of Tyrion at first, just someone jumping in to answer a query, but I did ask Tyrion, not Durin)

I think that his powers make it even more important for him to find his masters, because he may use his powers to injure rather than help them unless he knows who they are. The powers he has are useless otherwise because he doesn't know where to use them.

Why does having a strong opinion make someone more suspicious? I think it may make them less suspicious. The symp in particular but also the FM would be wary of killing an ally this early in the game.

Other than making the first serious post(and I don't think his point was unbelievably ridiculous), what else has he done?

Thats kinda weird because at the time you said you liked the way Gimli thinks, but meant Tyrion, his main point was that Gimli was FM. If you mixed them up, what were you liking about Tyrion's way of thinking?

(This is the odd one out)

If you really believe that that's what he thought then you must think he's innocent, so why are you trying to lynch him? I don't like it.

It is also possible that you(Sleeppy) are shielding Gimli.

I think Tyrion meant that the gifting element of Santa is passed on since he did mention that he knows Santa can be ressuscitated after his accusation.

Tyrion is one of the less likely bad guys atm because he's shown himself willing to pick a potential FM and stick to his guns. Because of this he's an excellent choice for FM/symp to lynch as its fairly unlikely he's an ally.

I find Sleeppy far more suspicious than Tyrion atm. He's made some funny claims, icludinf finding a comment that was clearly a joke suspicious and is targeting the player who appears most innocent.

I also have concerns about Bashful. The timing of his comment about liking Gimli/Tyrion was odd since the main point of discussion at the time was his suspicion of Gimli, and not looking for symp clues.

I gotta go to bed.

And with this last post, Durin both defends Tyrion and attacks the person who's been attacking Tyrion most.

I don't object to people defending a player. There is a limit, though, to what proportion of effort i'd expect an innocent to put into this, especially on day one where it's very hard to get a handle on the guilt or innocence of the other players.

These posts from Durin don't match the style i'd expect from an innocent at this stage of the game.

Durin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Tyrion has the right idea in looking for signals from potential symps. Gimli did use terminology that related back to the symp description from Targ although I'm not sure that he'd be so obvious if he were a symp. Tyrion himself could be signalling his masters as a symp by making a false symp accusation, it's kinda hard to say at this point in the game, but the reasoning is sound.

This is the most wishy washy post of the game so far. First Durin says Tyrion is right to look for symp clues, but then he follows up by saying the possible symp clue posted by Gimli was too blatant. So instead he suggests that Tyrion pointing out the symp clue was actually the more suspicious symp clue. Except then he hedges by adding that it's too early to tell anything.

Sound reasoning? No I don't think so.

Tyrion is one of the less likely bad guys atm because he's shown himself willing to pick a potential FM and stick to his guns. Because of this he's an excellent choice for FM/symp to lynch as its fairly unlikely he's an ally.

Durin, did you see the last game? Cerwyn was FM and attacked one target. It happens all the time. It's very strange that you would try to defend Tyrion with that argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These posts from Durin don't match the style i'd expect from an innocent at this stage of the game.

Durin

Apparently Durin is a popular topic at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you didn't vote Bashful, despite saying you were voting Bashful. Why not? Are you wating to see if you get support? It's not like you've got a serious vote on someone else.

Well, partly because it is a bit of a flimsy case from other people's points of view, but mainly because at that point that was the only thing to come out of Bashful that was non-fluff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I missed a lot. Sorry I've been busy.

Gimli, I'm curious. If your post wasn't a symp clue, then why did you say it? Did you try to be funny, and if that's the case then why didn't you worry about causing confusion. If you're innocent, stuff like that always leads to problems and is best avoided.

Tyrion I don't mind that you questioned the post but the way you did it was full of fail. You ask if it's a symp clue and then you believe him when he says yes. The Tyrion in the books was never so simple and naive. I see you misinterpreted the rules but still dude, that's weak. I'd feel better about you if you had just pointed out the possible symp clue.

More to say in a bit, addressing specific posts.

1. Part of the reason I said it was to give the game a bit of a shove.

2. Part of the reason was to try and get feedback of some sort from FMs. Because neither the FMs know who the symps are, nor vice versa, in order for them to work together they would have to try and feel each other out. I was hoping to fish for an FM bite, and to my mind the closest thing to that I have was Bashful's comment and subsequent denial.

3. On a selfish point, if the FMs think I may be their symp, or if I attract general suspicion, I am less likely to be NKed.

4. At the back of the head when I was doing it was that, given that I am the Santa-symp, that it would be fun to mess with people.

:rolleyes:

One of the above statements is false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, partly because it is a bit of a flimsy case from other people's points of view, but mainly because at that point that was the only thing to come out of Bashful that was non-fluff.

What do you mean, it's a bit of a flimsy case from other peoples points of view? You're saying that you thought Bashful was suspicious enough for you to say you were going to vote for him, but you didn't think you were going to get support, so you held back? That's a scummy thing to do, IMO.

And so what if it was the only thing to come out of Bashful that was non-fluff? If you thought it was suspicious, vote for it. You thought it suspicious enough to say you were voting for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To repeat myself, the symp stands to gain no more than usual (decreases the risk of them being NKed) but risks more than usual (team evil could lose present power if the symp is killed) by exposing themselves. The symp gains something if their masters make a blunt move, but what FM would do that?

Oh c'mon, the symp could easily make the post that Gimli made and then blow it off as a joke. The FM would be left thinking that he's possibly the symp making a bold move, so they avoid killing him. The innocents meanwhile make arguments like the one you're making, defending him because it was just a joke. And the symp ends up in a good position. You make it sound like a symp would never do that but I disagree. Bold moves can win games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean, it's a bit of a flimsy case from other peoples points of view? You're saying that you thought Bashful was suspicious enough for you to say you were going to vote for him, but you didn't think you were going to get support, so you held back? That's a scummy thing to do, IMO.

And so what if it was the only thing to come out of Bashful that was non-fluff? If you thought it was suspicious, vote for it. You thought it suspicious enough to say you were voting for it.

I don't think I ever said that I was going to vote Bashful - I said I was moving toward voting for Bashful. This is because I doubted, and still doubt the strength of the case myself.

I don't think the suspicion scale is a binary thing, there's a lot of grey area in the middle where it is possible to be suspicious of someone without voting for them. If there had been subsequent input to move me further along the scale then a vote may have been forthcoming. I don't know where you pull the idea that support would move me towards voting from though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, partly because it is a bit of a flimsy case from other people's points of view, but mainly because at that point that was the only thing to come out of Bashful that was non-fluff.

Who cares about anybody else's point of view? That shouldn't matter to you.

1. Part of the reason I said it was to give the game a bit of a shove.

2. Part of the reason was to try and get feedback of some sort from FMs. Because neither the FMs know who the symps are, nor vice versa, in order for them to work together they would have to try and feel each other out. I was hoping to fish for an FM bite, and to my mind the closest thing to that I have was Bashful's comment and subsequent denial.

3. On a selfish point, if the FMs think I may be their symp, or if I attract general suspicion, I am less likely to be NKed.

4. At the back of the head when I was doing it was that, given that I am the Santa-symp, that it would be fun to mess with people.

:rolleyes:

One of the above statements is false.

See this is what I'm saying. When I saw the post my first thought was either direct symp clue that people would say is too blatant to be suspicious, or selfish innocent who wants to try to keep the FM from killing him.

Gimli if you intended your post to be realistic enough to catch a FM, then why did you respond to Tyrion's questioning with a surprised are you serious? reaction. If the post was intended to be realistic, wouldn't it make sense for somebody to notice it and ask about it in the thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares about anybody else's point of view? That shouldn't matter to you.

See this is what I'm saying. When I saw the post my first thought was either direct symp clue that people would say is too blatant to be suspicious, or selfish innocent who wants to try to keep the FM from killing him.

Gimli if you intended your post to be realistic enough to catch a FM, then why did you respond to Tyrion's questioning with a surprised are you serious? reaction. If the post was intended to be realistic, wouldn't it make sense for somebody to notice it and ask about it in the thread?

1. I don't particularly care about other people's views. I expressed myself poorly there, as it should have referenced the fact that I felt the case was flimsy as well, as I pointed out just now.

2. I didn't really think about it - it was a bit spur of the moment, and, as I have done before, it was a bit blatant. A lot more than I realised at the time.

3. My response to Tyrion was in response to him considering that my flippant confession, replete with smilies, was somehow serious, and that Tyrion thought that he may have got a straight out confession with minimal pressure. It's blatantly, blatantly obvious and you not getting that suggests that you haven't read the thread properly, or that you are wilfully trying to misconstrue things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I ever said that I was going to vote Bashful - I said I was moving toward voting for Bashful. This is because I doubted, and still doubt the strength of the case myself.

I don't think the suspicion scale is a binary thing, there's a lot of grey area in the middle where it is possible to be suspicious of someone without voting for them. If there had been subsequent input to move me further along the scale then a vote may have been forthcoming. I don't know where you pull the idea that support would move me towards voting from though.

Uh, how about from your post? You just said if there had been subsequent input to move you further along (aka support) then you'd vote. You're doing a really poor job at trying to defend the wording of your posts to the most literal meaning and it bothers me. It means you don't really have a leg to stand on.

I don't think you posted a symp clue (symps do NOT make symp clues on day 1) but I do think you're defending yourself extremely poorly and trying to back out of a situation that you're obviously worried about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×