MAFIA 77: RETURN TO THE WEST [GAME THREAD] - [HIDDEN]

[Chaqa]

@ghug, what do you think of my night voting gambler plan?

Pardon me, but I'll chime in since I just saw this on my way out. I was reading the Gambler stuff last night and had mixed feelings. Like, what a very unpredictable role.

However...and this is copying and pasting your plan:
Let’s do a binding vote during this night phase about who we chop tomorrow. Then we end hammer tomorrow the leading vote getter (narrow exception here if results of night actions reveals a wolf).

This way, we ensure that our gambler (if we have one) gets their items, and we vote to kill at a time when a greater majority of the game is Town.

I really like this given the hour and my level of substance toxicity. It didn't occur to me last night how to make this role work, but I think you're on to something.

Now...hear me out here, is there a benefit to having someone volunteer to be axed? To get a vote (randomly, or whatever...maybe I am missing something in your use of the word 'binding'...) might wind up pulling up a town PR, which would not be good.

So what is the alternative? I know what I think it would be but I don't want to lead anyone. It's a good idea requiring further conversation.

No

[Chaqa]

Ah, shit...gambler needs to post to GMs at night, right?

Cripes, that changes things, but I don't know how much.

So then the hypothetical:

Say Chaqa volunteers to be the sacrifice on D2.
Gambler puts chip on Chaqa.
Mafia are like, "Screw that, Gambler ain't getting no item." and kill Chaqa.

Result will be...? I am guessing the chip is lost and Gambler is down to two chips.

"Each day you must vote for a suspect. You start the game with THREE gambling chips. At night, you may wager one chip to place a bet on who will be voted out the next day. If you win your bet, you win one item from the list below (determined at random). Each item is a one-use item and may only be won a single time. If you run out of chips, you may spend an un-used item to place a bet instead. "

Wait, if it involves me dying, I'm in.

[Chaqa]

Half of you will sus me anyway, so using me for this idea is going to safe some headache later.

[bozotheclown]

Which questions?


##VOTE bozotheclown

For being a koala-killer – see above post, Google photos of koalas, look at them, now imagine somoene killing one... whoever kills one has no soul, and therefore is Mafia

Also for a super vague reference to "one of the questions" without a link to confirm it exists and give me a chance to rectify. Suspicious.

I only asked 2 questions, you answered the first, here was the second:

Did you have any trouble finding the game thread?

Ah, I see! Apologies, the answer is "no" and I though it was implied by the rest. Thanks for asking though.

To elaborate, how the game goes is clear to me now – but I do have trouble keeping up with myriads of posts throughout the day (working, meetings, etc) ... and when I come back to a dozen pages of posts, I end up skimming quickly and might miss things. I love the http://mafia.peterlund.se page it helps a ton to catch up on key actions. But I wish there was like "a summary of quotes of your posts or mentions of your name" :) ... Either way, thank you to whomever coded that thing up!

I'm also not sure what's best to do in the situation where the day ends while I'm in meetings. For instance, you addressed my suspicion and I would have changed the vote away from you, but I wasn't here.

So I guess here is a PSA on myself: I catch up maybe a couple times a day, so if I don't respond for a while it's simply NAI for real life reasons.

Thank you for responding, I asked because sometimes new players do not realize the game thread is hidden.

The bot has a search function labeled "Search among all messages" that can provide a summary of posts mentioning your name if you enter your user name under "words". You can also use it to list all messages by one player, but I am not sure if there is a way to list all messages that quote your posts.

[bozotheclown]

Pardon my formatting; I did this on a google doc so it might not be seamless. I'll try to make sure the post is clear.

Voting Tracker Day 1
At 4:56 remaining, Bunny moves from Chaqa to Pyxxy

At 4:47 pyxxy moves to Bunny as first vote making it tied:
2 lfischl, 2 worcej, 2 bunny, 1 hamilton

Worcej to ghug, still 2, 2, 2, 1

3:13, bozo moves from Koala to pyxxy
2 pyxxy, 2 lfischl, 2 worcej, 2 bunny (4 tied wagons) (Bozo effectively brings pyxxy along)

3:02 Chaqa moves to ghug from worcej to then make it
2 pyxxy, 2 lfischl, 2ghug, 2 bunny (static votes, no real movement)

2:22 Rivera votes for first time for Damo

2:10 Yav votes from Hamilton to Damo
2 Damo, 2 pyxxy, 2 lfischl, 2 ghug, 2 Bunny

1:44 Chaqa moves from ghug to worcej
2 Damo, 2 pyxxy, 2 ilfischl, 2 worcej (ease up on ghug, worcej now in the mix)

1:21 I move from ilfischl to pyxxy (this really looks bad on me because it puts pyxxy in the lead)
3 pyxxy, 2 damo, 2 worcej, 2 bunny

0:37 ilfischl votes first vote for worcej (There’s the vaunted FIRST VOTE Chaqa alluded to)
3 pyxxy, 3 worcej, 2 damo, 2 bunny (How big of a tie is this? Is this now TvM or still TvT)

0:20 bo moves from lfischl to pyxxy (Bo kills the tie, but still 20 minutes left)
4 pyxxy, 3 worcej, 2 damo, 2 bunny

0:02 yav moves from damo to pyxxy (but this doesn’t alter outcome)
5 pyxxy, 3 worcej, 2 bunny, 1 ghug (makes worcej out of reach)

It is interesting how long the day went with no wagons above 2 votes, but I do not think there is much to conclude yet.

[bozotheclown]

Our Day 2 chop vote ends in a little under 13 hours. Let's make this real. I feel like it's worth it to get our gambler a gun.

There is a 50% chance of us having a gambler (less than that from your perspective if you are the CWV), so there is approximately a 10% chance of getting a gun if this plan is executed successfully. I prefer a real D2, so I will see if there is a consensus supporting this plan before participating.

[Balki Bartokomous]

Our Day 2 chop vote ends in a little under 13 hours. Let's make this real. I feel like it's worth it to get our gambler a gun.

There is a 50% chance of us having a gambler (less than that from your perspective if you are the CWV), so there is approximately a 10% chance of getting a gun if this plan is executed successfully. I prefer a real D2, so I will see if there is a consensus supporting this plan before participating.

1. The other items that the Gambler gets are not bad.
2. When you consider that our ratio of town:scum is almost certainly better now than it will be on Day 2, there really isn’t any downside* to this plan if we support the exercise and do it.

*Except for scum. There are downsides if you are scum.

[ghug]

@ghug: what about Balki's play has been townie and/or positive mechie play? Do you honestly think this night vote is pro-town and being driven by a town player?

I think it's pro town if we actually do it, and I townread Balki for other reasons.

[ghug]

I still think ghug's assessment on pyxxy was flawed but more about that later.

I just now caught the "Chaqa J has been consistently..."

In the forum, with my failing eyes it really looked like the letter I. And someone else used one of those letters. Just caught it on the bot.

You can think my analysis was flawed, but it was a weak gut read and it turned out to be correct, so you're either going to have to live with my unparalleled awesomeness or tell us why I was intentionally giving a flawed townread on a townie as scum.

What do you make of the J?

You know this is the whole concept of buddying, don't you. I didn't get why you where defending pixxy over nothing and thought it was scummy. I didn't want to insist on it at the time as I considered you might have seen something to point he's a PR, which is not the case. So, I a not giving you town points for defending a town with a flawed argument.

I'm not asking for town points. I think scum points for it would be silly given that I did it at a time when he wasn't under much pressure.

[worcej]

Here is a thing:

Only Town can benefit from correctly guessing the next daychop. Plus, we likely have a higher ratio of Town:Scum in this night phase than we will during the day phase.

So…

Let’s do a binding vote during this night phase about who we chop tomorrow. Then we end hammer tomorrow the leading vote getter (narrow exception here if results of night actions reveals a wolf).

This way, we ensure that our gambler (if we have one) gets their items, and we vote to kill at a time when a greater majority of the game is Town.

##vote BunnyGo

With little change in narrative and information at this point (still catching up), I'd go with a ##vote lfischl because he voted for me to tie the top wagon without really saying that as a reason why he did it originally.

[worcej]

Super lame post from bo.

What would be nice, and less lame, is a reason why you think it's a "super lame" post. What stinks about it from your perspective? Because maybe when you clarify THAT, people will have a better read of your observations. I don't see ANYTHING in that post that smacks of lame or...being untruthful. So what is it you have a problem with?

It's easy to sit here and type, "Ghug's response is super lame," but no one would give a shit since there's no weight behind it. All it is, is taking up air.

Respectfully.

Paragraph one is a long-winded quibble over semantics, and it's the sort of post that's very likely to start a hotheaded argument that's low on substance. It's also a "don't kill people who aren't around" argument, which is one of my least favorite sorts of arguments.

Paragraph two is fine enough, but it's not like worcej and Bunny were doing much of note with their activity. Compare Bunny's response to my pyxxy thing, where he harped briefly and let it go, to yours, where you keep coming back and chewing on it. Or look at how much worcej is commenting on individual things without trying to tie them into any greater picture.

Paragraph three is again heavy on hotheaded bloviation and it's a bad take to boot. The characterization of his Chaqa read is unfair and the focus on "shitposting with [bo]" is laughably hypocritical self-aggrandizement in the face of his bad earlier complaint about people focusing too much on interactions with themselves. It's also substituting its bloviation for any actual conviction, which could just be bo being bo or could be a cover for the emotional disengagement scum feel towards solving the game.

Am I odd for not being able to paint a grand picture (aka draw possible connections) on D1?

[rdrivera2005]

You can think my analysis was flawed, but it was a weak gut read and it turned out to be correct, so you're either going to have to live with my unparalleled awesomeness or tell us why I was intentionally giving a flawed townread on a townie as scum.

What do you make of the J?

You know this is the whole concept of buddying, don't you. I didn't get why you where defending pixxy over nothing and thought it was scummy. I didn't want to insist on it at the time as I considered you might have seen something to point he's a PR, which is not the case. So, I a not giving you town points for defending a town with a flawed argument.

I'm not asking for town points. I think scum points for it would be silly given that I did it at a time when he wasn't under much pressure.

You have a point, I thought you said that when he was a wagon, but looking at the bot only Chaqa was voting him at the time.

[ghug]

What would be nice, and less lame, is a reason why you think it's a "super lame" post. What stinks about it from your perspective? Because maybe when you clarify THAT, people will have a better read of your observations. I don't see ANYTHING in that post that smacks of lame or...being untruthful. So what is it you have a problem with?

It's easy to sit here and type, "Ghug's response is super lame," but no one would give a shit since there's no weight behind it. All it is, is taking up air.

Respectfully.

Paragraph one is a long-winded quibble over semantics, and it's the sort of post that's very likely to start a hotheaded argument that's low on substance. It's also a "don't kill people who aren't around" argument, which is one of my least favorite sorts of arguments.

Paragraph two is fine enough, but it's not like worcej and Bunny were doing much of note with their activity. Compare Bunny's response to my pyxxy thing, where he harped briefly and let it go, to yours, where you keep coming back and chewing on it. Or look at how much worcej is commenting on individual things without trying to tie them into any greater picture.

Paragraph three is again heavy on hotheaded bloviation and it's a bad take to boot. The characterization of his Chaqa read is unfair and the focus on "shitposting with [bo]" is laughably hypocritical self-aggrandizement in the face of his bad earlier complaint about people focusing too much on interactions with themselves. It's also substituting its bloviation for any actual conviction, which could just be bo being bo or could be a cover for the emotional disengagement scum feel towards solving the game.

Am I odd for not being able to paint a grand picture (aka draw possible connections) on D1?

The greater picture doesn't need to be connections. It can be a pattern in one person's behavior or even an attempt at finding meaning or motivation behind something you're commenting on. Your whole approach to this game is very drive-by.

[worcej]

Because at this point, it just seems to me like Balki is PR hunting--nothing he's done this game has been anything but tunnel on me, bait a CC, try to get a sense if there's a gambler somewhere, and push a mech play that isn't going anywhere.

FWIW, you're not alone in seeing this. Balki is growing in my scum pool for his play as I've been catching up.

[worcej]

Paragraph one is a long-winded quibble over semantics, and it's the sort of post that's very likely to start a hotheaded argument that's low on substance. It's also a "don't kill people who aren't around" argument, which is one of my least favorite sorts of arguments.

Paragraph two is fine enough, but it's not like worcej and Bunny were doing much of note with their activity. Compare Bunny's response to my pyxxy thing, where he harped briefly and let it go, to yours, where you keep coming back and chewing on it. Or look at how much worcej is commenting on individual things without trying to tie them into any greater picture.

Paragraph three is again heavy on hotheaded bloviation and it's a bad take to boot. The characterization of his Chaqa read is unfair and the focus on "shitposting with [bo]" is laughably hypocritical self-aggrandizement in the face of his bad earlier complaint about people focusing too much on interactions with themselves. It's also substituting its bloviation for any actual conviction, which could just be bo being bo or could be a cover for the emotional disengagement scum feel towards solving the game.

Am I odd for not being able to paint a grand picture (aka draw possible connections) on D1?

The greater picture doesn't need to be connections. It can be a pattern in one person's behavior or even an attempt at finding meaning or motivation behind something you're commenting on. Your whole approach to this game is very drive-by.

I would argue I've been consistent with my style and approach to any game and people have chosen to not engage in the ideas I've presented, or at least the dialogue has been fairly curt - such as the Balki initial claim.

Your position is at least a position worthy of commentary - Chaqa is being worthless in actual content generation but just happens to agree with you to kill me and the australian bear person meme is just OMGUS'ing me. This isn't substance - it's just I am the next name on a random list of players.

[worcej]

My honest opinion atm is we should hammer Balki Day 2

[worcej]

Half of you will sus me anyway, so using me for this idea is going to safe some headache later.

When is the old Chaqa who was fun to play mafia with coming back?

This shell of low energy and meh engagement is growing old.

[ghug]

Am I odd for not being able to paint a grand picture (aka draw possible connections) on D1?

The greater picture doesn't need to be connections. It can be a pattern in one person's behavior or even an attempt at finding meaning or motivation behind something you're commenting on. Your whole approach to this game is very drive-by.

I would argue I've been consistent with my style and approach to any game and people have chosen to not engage in the ideas I've presented, or at least the dialogue has been fairly curt - such as the Balki initial claim.

Your position is at least a position worthy of commentary - Chaqa is being worthless in actual content generation but just happens to agree with you to kill me and the australian bear person meme is just OMGUS'ing me. This isn't substance - it's just I am the next name on a random list of players.

You're not Chaqa. I expect different behavior from the two of you anyway. I also don't particularly townread Chaqa.

[Balki Bartokomous]

My honest opinion atm is we should hammer Balki Day 2

Awesome!

How come?

[worcej]

My honest opinion atm is we should hammer Balki Day 2

To expand on this, in my eyes:

1. If Balki is town and is the CWV, then his claim was more beneficial for scum then town. Your only power (that is to help your team) in that role is to kill an accidental scum player and the scum's power against you must be chosen to activate once per game. By flagging your existence, you're now providing even more information to the scum team to plan their attack and push to the victory.
2. The more impressive play, that I 100% believe Balki is capable of executing, is fake claiming the role as scum because it will stop any town PRs from targetting you and creates a "shield" of town players refusing to flip him because he could be telling the truth.