Jump to content

Mafia 75 -- Revolution in Vanillaville


House Targaryen

Recommended Posts

I have to go now. I leave my vote on Ashford for a completly egoistic reason: in a small game like this I prefer to keep those who keep talking to increase my fun of the game.

Sorry I'm are not playing at the same times as you. If I had known that was a requirement, I would not have signed up. :P

I am here now and have caught up on the game. I'll take a look at Vance, but yesterday I didn't find him suspicious, but then, there was pretty little to go on.

I will be here until the end.

I can assure you my levels will be up today. I was out a good portion of yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very well, thank you.

Estermont is bothersome. I don't like the whole thing with Reed and Westerling. Reed is obviously playing with Estermont, and he's rising to the bait. Reed's too obvious in his teasing and not vote worthy (at least not for this). Westerling I am not sure of.

I don't like Tarth's last statement, it just feel's off a bit.

I dislike this post. "Bothersome" is a fun word but i'm not sure what exactly it means in mafia. Suspicious is probably how Ashford means it but it's not exactly strong. Doesn't like the thing with Reed and Westerling, Estermont's thing is rising, not sure of Westerling, blah blah, but there's nothing good there, I don't get any serious suspicion from the post.

It has nothing to do with when you voted, it has to do with the continue back and forth. You say you hate something, Reed does it it big bold red, obviously not being agreeable, which is the reason you voted for him, but he (Reed) is being snarky about it. You quoted his "be an ass" comment, but I thought that was you, rising to his bait (not quoting him). I had to go back and double check that, sorry.

Talks about Estermont rising to the bait. Still not getting any serious suspicion here.

Wow, now that's what I call a defensive post. Thanks :)

I explained my reasoning (yes, it involved a little confusion). How is one off the cuff question "pressure"? I had no pressure from anyone, just a question I felt was fair based on my earlier post.

I actually think Ashford is right about Estermont being defensive. There's nothing in that Ashford has said to provoke such a big response.

aw, I see what happened. Look, the back and forth seemed to me like Reed was teasing and you were getting upset. On a read that happens after the fact, that is the way it looked to me.

When I looked back again, there was another comment that fit with my original impression, so yes, we cross posted, but added into what I previous thought, it fit my impressions.

And Ashford disappointingly backs off. Estlemont may be right that Ashford's "rising to the bait" post was a load of rubbish, but there's no reason to be so nice about it.

So who does Ashford suspect? Dunno.

Ashford would be a fine choice for a lynch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 votes for Ashford (Estermont, Tarth, Frey)

3 votes for Vance (Fossoway, Connington, Westerling)

1 vote for Westerling (Bolton)

1 vote for Fossoway (Vance)

1 vote for Bolton (Reed)

Ashford and Vance will evidently end voting each other, so it's effectively 4-4.

Bolton and Reed will be deciding votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some comments and questions:

1) FM do take cases personally, especially when the case is BS.

2) You're right about the nonchalant FM thing. The problem is that we can only judge one's reaction when there is actually some pressure on them.

3) If Bolton was more engaged or defensive, wouldn't you clear him for taking the case personally? :P

4) Why do you think that Reed and Bolton are easy targets? And why don't you at least vote for one of their attackers if you feel that way? If you think Reed and Bolton can't handle the pressure themeselves, why don't you try to back them up? Comments don't help here at all, but action does!

5) You're right about Ashford, Frey and Connington.

1. Almost every day 1 case is BS, because we don't really know anything yet. I don't expect an FM to get that jumpy right away.

2. There was some pressure on Bolton - two votes, Fossoway going after him, and still no reaction. When the game's as slow as this one's been going, that's pressure.

3. There's a spectrum - it's not only defensive or nonchalant, it's a scale.

4. I do have my vote on one of their attackers, Fossoway. He just changed it over to Frey, which made me more suspicious. Voting for someone for not posting is too easy - it's just a nudge to get them to vote, doesn't say anything.

Am I dead? I think I came close to dying last night in RL - If you want to know more wait till the spoilers.

Hope you're doing ok now!

The highlighted sentence seems weird to me. It's not like either case is that strong, and they've both been defending themselves reasonably competently. That makes it feel like a statement that's designed to sound conscientious.

In addition, the sentiment that Player A has made a weak case on Player B, and is therefore suspicious seems disingenous at best. It creates an artificial division of the players based on their opinions of the case in question, as opposed to encouraging players to generate fresh content with new viewpoints and cases.

Vote Vance

I may be getting ahead of myself and anticipating lynch mobs where none formed. That's what I expect to usually happen on day 1, but here they didn't materialize. And I disagree that they were doing a great job defending themselves. Both seemed to be gathering suspicious and not really dispelling it. Reed getting sarcastic right away didn't help; Bolton

But then there's this. I think it's a bit much. Lots of typing, certainly, but not especially helpful. So I looked more closely at Vance.

Attacks someone for an obvious joke vote. Silly.

Already explained that - not a real case. Trying to get him to post more. Thread had been quiet to that point, and still has been pretty quiet. At least I'm trying.

The case didn't just suck, i've got nothing against weak day 1 cases. But we were still in the joke phase, it was an obvious joke, and exactly what sort of different reaction were you expecting from a killer? It's nonsensical.

I wasn't expecting anything but for him to come out and post more. Or to see how other people would react. We win or lose this game based on our reads on people, and sitting back, not making votes and not stirring things up doesn't get anyone to post.

But it's this post that's the major problem. This post is horrible. "Not really liking" cases. "A little suspicious" of Tarth, Estermont and Fossoway. Qualifying words I don't like on day 1, it removes any pressure you're trying to put on. There's no pressure on any of them from this, particularly since Vance included three people in the little suspicion. Having trouble with Ashford - Is that suspicion or not? :unsure: Wants the non-contributors to post more - Who doesn't? Does that really add anything?

It's a lot of words of nothing.

Vance

First, it's day 1. Of course I don't have strong suspicions of anyone. No one's done anything of substance yet. It's a lot easier to have convictions when people have posted more, when we have more information from lynching, NKs, and/or reveals.

I have to go now. I leave my vote on Ashford for a completly egoistic reason: in a small game like this I prefer to keep those who keep talking to increase my fun of the game.

I agree. It's more fun when people are participating. But shouldn't you still vote for someone you think is guilty, even if that person is playing the game more? I don't understand why Ashford now if you think others are more guilty.

I'll post a more general defense and offer my thoughts on Ashford in a minute, just wanted to post this reply first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dislike this post. "Bothersome" is a fun word but i'm not sure what exactly it means in mafia. Suspicious is probably how Ashford means it but it's not exactly strong. Doesn't like the thing with Reed and Westerling, Estermont's thing is rising, not sure of Westerling, blah blah, but there's nothing good there, I don't get any serious suspicion from the post.

Talks about Estermont rising to the bait. Still not getting any serious suspicion here.

I actually think Ashford is right about Estermont being defensive. There's nothing in that Ashford has said to provoke such a big response.

And Ashford disappointingly backs off. Estlemont may be right that Ashford's "rising to the bait" post was a load of rubbish, but there's no reason to be so nice about it.

So who does Ashford suspect? Dunno.

Ashford would be a fine choice for a lynch.

I had a few hours last night, made one, confused I admitted, statement. But even after I admitted my error, Estmont didn't let it go and I had to keep answering him (ok, I could have ignored him, but that is not my general style)

By the time it was (somewhat) dropped, I was done and ready for bed.

I really want to spend today on something else. If I have to keep going back to this, it takes time from being able to move on to new things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys, I woke up too late to get on the comp and didn't get out of class until now.

I have at least an hour, right? The Day 1 timer doesn't seem to be linking me to the right countdorn. Going to look back at everyone's posts, though from yesterday, I had no real read on either Ashford or Vance. Hopefully I will have a better read soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok... not sure what else I can really say to try to defend myself. If you lynch me it's not the worst choice in the world, at least I'm roleless, and apparently I haven't been very helpful to this point.

I'm evidently rusty at mafia. It's been a while since I played and I guess I should have thought things out more. I wanted to go into this trying to be as active as I could and as honest as I could. You might not agree with me on a lot of things but that's actually what I'm thinking. It may be murky but it's day 1, hard to feel confident.

This isn't how I play an FM - I'm much more cautious. I would have sat back and let people fight it out instead of getting myself so involved.

I'll give my thoughts on Ashford in a minute. Still in a "I don't know" category, not particularly suspcious, not particularly not. Probably going to vote him if the alternative is lynching me because at least I know I'm innocent. Ashford I have no idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a few hours last night, made one, confused I admitted, statement. But even after I admitted my error, Estmont didn't let it go and I had to keep answering him (ok, I could have ignored him, but that is not my general style)

By the time it was (somewhat) dropped, I was done and ready for bed.

I really want to spend today on something else. If I have to keep going back to this, it takes time from being able to move on to new things.

What we really need is thoughts elsewhere. this keeps on coming back up because this is about the only thing we have to judge you on. (ok I myself cant comment on content)

Who are your suspects?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we really need is thoughts elsewhere. this keeps on coming back up because this is about the only thing we have to judge you on. (ok I myself cant comment on content)

Who are your suspects?

pot/Kettle much? Who are yours? We have equal time here and need other thoughts from you as well.

Did you really find me guilty? If so why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, out of time and nothing more is happening, so I'll vote Ashford. Like I said, I still don't have anything to go on from him, but I know I'm not guilty so I should at least go for someone who might be guilty. Fossoway still rings my alarm bells. I don't understand Tarth wanting to keep around active players and voting for someone less active when an active player might be guilty. And I don't like Connington disappearing for most of the day, then coming in last minute once people notice he's gone and getting the lynch train on me up to full speed (hard to be objective on that one though! :) )

I hate having to leave, especially now that more of you are here and things are finally heating up, but I'm about to be late for work. I probably won't be back until Day 2 unless it's a long night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is day 1.

10 players remain: Estermont, Tarth, Connington, Frey, Westerling, Fossoway, Ashford, Reed, Vance, Bolton.

6 votes are needed for a conviction or 5 to go to night.

4 votes for Ashford (Estermont, Tarth, Frey, Vance)

4 votes for Vance (Fossoway, Connington, Westerling, Ashford)

1 vote for Westerling (Bolton)

1 vote for Fossoway (Vance)

1 vote for Bolton (Reed)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't find anybody really guilty but I do find you worrying. I don't find you mistake and confused post concerning given the circumstances, just your reaction. you have not mentioned any thing else. So yes I do find you suspect, and you have been arround more than me.

As for others. Something bugs me about Bolton, his earlier posts more than his latter ones. It may just be his playstyle (but I'm a gut driven player)

Vance I liked when I read him, but I can understand the case against him, so I'm unsure.

Connington hasn't done much, I got the impression he was arround a bit but not posting anything of value until just recently when called out on it - his cross posted case on Vance - which I can understand and has made me re-think about Vance.

Estermont, Fossaway and Reed I have good feeling for right now.

Who have I missed? I should probably be concerned about them?

eta response to Ashford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is. It says it is 21 days, 7 hours, 58 minutes and 30 seconds since Wednesday, 10 November 2010, 06:54:00 (UTC time), which is correct.

Maybe it's not what you were expecting, though.

Evil mod, evil mod...

:P

(In all seriousness, Mina set it up, I don't know if it's supposed to be an elaborate joke, but I'm guessing yes. Mina is so funny!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...