40kforums: A Tale of Woe [Internet Mafia] (Game Over)

[Andon]

Guys, THINK!

There is no reason to reveal your role like that this early in the game, especially if you're not under any suspicion!

I think that he wants us to get off of Sohungry. He is probably some form of mafia as well. And if he is mafia, then his role would let him know who the innocents were. Pick a random one and there you go. Perhaps Sohungry is the 'Mafia Leader' as there have been a few times in the past. By changing your vote to him, you could easily be doing what he wants! Have you ever considered that he might have a suicide role? There have been a few of them before as well, and there have also been talks about putting them in by the game moderators - Mozzie could easily have put one in. IF he is a mafia suicidee, he could easily put the blame off of Sohungry and onto an innocent, like Cubez, because he said not to vote for them.

I am staying with my vote.

[Tarion'Maseth]

He could be a suicide role... Which would suck. But I don't see any reason to be less suspicious of Sohungry. We have time to decide if he's a bad guy or not. Besides, if there are any genuine investigator roles, odds are, they'll be looking into him.

[Subzero]

I think it's a bluff of some sort. Cubez has barely been under any suspicion since the game started, so there would be no need for a Cop or Mason to reveal their investigation or association like Foamy did. There're also very few, if any good reasons for role-claiming out of the blue like that when there's no attention on you and you're not close to being lynched or under any other pressure. I think we should see what Cubez has to say about this before switching all of our votes to Foamy.

Additionally, Foamy must be claiming Mason here because there'd be no reason for him to only have one investigation result at this point, after both night 0 and night 1 have passed.

[Tarion'Maseth]

Unless he investigated one of the people who's already been killed with his first use of the ability.

[sammy2028]

Ok so after Foamy666's post the shit has hit the fan this is now really confusing since he could be bluffing or telling the truth but to be honest their's no reason to just give your role out like that when no heats on you. I'll have to think a little more.

[Doohicky]

There are two other possible reasons that Foamy said what he did which no one has mentioned yet.

I don't want to say what they are though, because if it's what I think it is, then it is a good plan which will help the town in the long run. I am sure some others know what I am getting at.

I'm sorry if this sounds a bit cryptic by the way.

[Magnus777z]

Foamy666 might just be trying to sow confusion. He now bears looking into, but for the time being I'm stiking to my vote.

[Mozric]

Votes:
sohungry (5): the cow, Subzero, Andon, sammy2028, dreadknot10
the cow (2): Cubez, Spam-Robot
Magus777z (1): sohungry
Tarion (1): Crimthaan
Subzero (1): Magnus777z
foamy666 (2): p3990013, Tarion'Maseth
Not currently voting (4): lefthandedyeti, yWizePapaSmurfy, foamy666, Doohicky

Number needed for majority: 9
Current vote leader: sohungry (5)

Just two things I'd like to say here...

(1)

You are also not allowed to quote your role pm to anyone else. You may explain what your role is (you can lie, of course) if you so wish, but if you directly quote anything that I PM to you, I reserve the right to remove you from the game suddenly and unexpectedly. The reason for this is that in past games people have compared the wording of their pms to try to verify their truth, and this is a quite bastardly metagaming type thing to do.
This applies both in topic and via PM. Of course, I can't directly access your PMs (or can I???), so I'm mostly relying on you to play in the spirit of the game.

(2)
It's getting up to the 1 week mark, but there really has been a lot of good discussion, so I'm going to allow the day phase to continue without a lowering of the majority. I'll use my judgement to decide when the majority will start to be lowered. I'll probably let the weekend take its course (hopefully people will be online more often then) and then on monday start speeding things up.

[cubez]

I have just noticed that i have been absent for nearly a week now. and still day 2!

omg lads hurry it up!

gona read up, not tonight tho, i need to work, :)

just letting ya all no im alive, :)

[Magnus777z]

Is cubez really that busy? Does he not take the game seriously? Or is he just trying to avoid having people think he was lurking?

[cubez]

ouch allow, im working 8-4, dont get home till 6, got a gf, need to go band pratice,

sorry i cant sit at a computer all day!

anyway, iv got some free time at work so i will read up.

[cubez]

corr,

just looked though it all, ignoring subs HUGE posts because i cba, and no time, anyway

yeah foamy is innocent,

but im really confused to why he told everyone that, i think that was kind of silly,

anyway
unvote the cow

and i think that


Is cubez really that busy? Does he not take the game seriously? Or is he just trying to avoid having people think he was lurking?

was unpresidented, so

vote magnus

jsut for being an ass, also he got very defenceive over very little. i feel.

[Magnus777z]

Being an ass? I feel I made a valid point.

You post out of the blue saying that you haven't been on, yet the post post comes soon after foamy drops your name. It's possible sure, but convinent as well.

I'm just saying it could be a phasad, and that you could have just been lurking this whole time but after foamy spoke up you felt compelled/pushed to make an appearance.

[p3990013]

keep it civil people...

if we manage to lock down a mafia thread for flaming...DOH!

[Subzero]

Some theorising on Cubez and Foamy's possible roles:

To me, it seems like there are four important points to remember here:
1) There is confirmation of innocence.
2) Neither player was under suspicion.
3) The claim was not direct, but implied in an unrelated sentence.
4) Both have stated that they have confirmation that the other is innocent.

Now, the confirmation of innocence (1) leads us towards 2 main role types: Cops and Masons. The fatc that both have confirmed each other's innocence (4) and that Foamy specifically mentoned that Cubez was the only player he said was innocent means it's very unlikely that Foamy is a cop (it could be that he investigated someone who died in night 1, but if Foamy were a Cop then it's extremely unlikely that Cubez is as well and already investigated Foamy, so that means that Foamy would have to have claimed to Cubez privately, and there would be no way for Cubez to know whether his claim was true or not unless role PMs were quoted). As many people have said previously, the Mafia know who the pro-town players are, so it's very easy for them to claim Cop with supposed innocent results on players they already know to be pro-town (or very likely pro-town).

That means that the most likely role, assuming they're telling the truth, is Masons. That isn't too helpful, because one of the few helpful things I can see happening after Masons claiming is that one is lynched to prove the other's innocence (and then the other gtets nightkilled immediately after due to being threatening as a confirmed innocent, thus preventing the Mafia from killing a power role), but that's an extremely costly tactic (both in terms of losing two pro-town power roles and in ending the day quickly without any more discussion and completely derailing previous discussion) and I can't quite see why they'd do it so suddenly (2).

Lastly, the fact that it was stated indirectly (3) (it seems that Foamy tried to slip it into his post more discreetly than an actual claim) means that there probably wasn't any particular altruistic purpose to it (otherwise they would have made it clear what roles they had and what they wanted to do).

Overall, I see three possibilities:
1) They're Masons.
2) They're Mafioso.
3) One is a Jester who has somehow contacted a Mafioso with a plan to get themselves lynched and throw a little suspicion of the other player. I'll admit that this is a lot less likely than the other two, but it's still plausible.

[Tarion'Maseth]

1) They're Masons.
2) They're Mafioso.
3) One is a Jester who has somehow contacted a Mafioso with a plan to get themselves lynched and throw a little suspicion of the other player. I'll admit that this is a lot less likely than the other two, but it's still plausible.

The town only lose out on number 3. 1) has been killed now that it's been announced. 2)'s a fantastic opportunity for us. 3) would be an issue, but it's the least likely.

Foamy is hugely suspicious to me right now.

[sohungry]

here's how I see the faomy situation.

it makes no sense for them to come forward if they were mafia, as there was no suspicion on them and they could have saved it for later. but similar tactics have been used in the past, where mafia does something SO un-mafistic that it makes them seem innocent.

here's how i say we approach it: we dont lynch either of them, and wait til the night phase. Mafia is probably going to go after them (assuming they aren't mafia) because they are likely some kind of pro-town power role.

there is no use lynching one, proving thier role, and then losing the other to mafia in the night phase. We'd be out two potentially powerful pro-town roles.

if one of them isn't murdered by morning, well then i'd be very suspicious of them....but of course, there is a chance mafia doesnt murder them to make them seem more like mafia. But i think it'd hurt the mafia more to leave them alive for an extra night phase.

[the cow]

hmmm it just gets harder to figure out doesn't it :roll:

Like everyone else I think that they are either

1) masons
or
2) Mafioso

the Jester/Mafioso idea seems a bit far-fetched but I supose anything is possible isn't it?

I want to wait to see what happens after night, then I'll form a real oppinion.

[Mozric]

Okay peoples, I'm going to start to enforce my time-limit system, meaning that each day from now on the majority needed to force a lynch will go down by 1.
Number needed for majority is now 8 not 9.

Votes:
sohungry (5): the cow, Subzero, Andon, sammy2028, dreadknot10
the cow (1):, Spam-Robot
Magus777z (2): sohungry, Cubez
Tarion (1): Crimthaan
Subzero (1): Magnus777z
foamy666 (2): p3990013, Tarion'Maseth
Not currently voting (4): lefthandedyeti, yWizePapaSmurfy, foamy666, Doohicky

Number needed for majority: 8
Current vote leader: sohungry (5)


And since I only got online late tonight (my time, the voting majority will be reduced after a bit less than 24 hours from now, probably about 18 hours after this post. After that I'll try to keep it pretty regularly every 24 hours.

[Subzero]

I'm going to read through the topic again before I make my vote.

I also recently received a PM from a player who I won't name where they tried to convince me that Foamy and Cubez are innocent and gave an odd explanation for Foamy's role which didn't logically fit with current events (and which would coincidentally mean that a very suspicious event which could happen in the future could instead 'prove' Foamy's innocence, according to their theory. Depending on what I think when I re-read the topic I may reveal more of this PM and maybe also the name of the person who sent it, but at the moment I'm just treating it as a suspicious message.

[Subzero]

There’s a summary near the bottom of this for anyone who wants to skip over the main argument.

Case against Foamy

I don't think they all are P3 but at least one of them is which one I'm not sure yet but I definitely think one of them is a hacker as I doubt 3 innocents would try and kill another someone so quickly. I'm holding my vote off for now as I don't want to end up killing an innocent but I'm definitely keeping an eye on you 3.
Early on he gave excuses for not committing to anything or voting for anyone. A single vote won’t make that much of a difference that early on in the game, yet he didn’t for the hugely overblown reason that he ‘[didn’t] want to end up killing an innocent’ which also raises the question as to why he would consider all people to be innocent to him near the beginning of the game, and why he specifically brought up ‘killing an innocent’.


As I said earlier I was suspicious of him when he jumped onto get rid of Kilroy so early in the game and he's done nothing really to change my suspicions.
So why didn’t he vote for Chris earlier (and why did he refer to lynching Chris as ‘killing an innocent’) if he was just going to vote for him a while later for exactly the same reason?


Kilroy the way your acting you might as well have big flashing sign saying "I am anti-town" over your head the way your going.
Both Kilroy and Warlock Chris did something to make Foamy suspicious of them, but Foamy explicitly stated that he didn’t want to lynch Warlock Chris because he was afraid of killing an innocent (early on in the game when a lynch would have been frowned upon), yet states here that Kilroy is pretty much absolutely guilty (later on when people would be more inclined to lynch).

That was all he posted on day 1 (his last post was on page 5, I think, whereas the lynch was on page 9). His next post was a little into day 2:

I've only had a quick flick through of whats happened so far this day phase and yeah I'm leaning towards cow but I'm going to read through the rest of this day phase more properly as some interesting points on others have been made as well.
Basically, another excuse for not committing himself to anything or making a vote which could draw attention to himself. The language itself is all very non-confrontational – ‘leaning towards’ The Cow, saying that ‘interesting points have been made’ but not really specifying anything or going into any great detail. In short, trying to avoid making anyone look his way.


I honestly have no clue who to vote for anymore I mean out of the 3 I find suspicious The Cow, Sohungry and Subzero I've got no clue which one I should vote for
Again, avoiding voting for anyone, avoiding committing himself to anything, giving crappy excuses for not doing so (‘I’m not sure out of these few people who I should vote for’ – and? Can it really be that hard to just put your vote on someone?) and also pretty much covering everyone’s suspicions (saying that he suspected the vote leader, The Cow, at that time, then cap’n, she cannae take nae more both me and Sohungry to make himself seem like a potential voter to people on both sides of the argument between me and him, thus neatly managing to not actually oppose anyone or find anyone suspicious to any degree and fading back into the background again).

Case against Cubez

oi oi oi im here, i just have nothing to add,

im gona stick, with spam, he normaly alot more noisy.
This is the second post he made in the topic. The first was on page 3, this was on page 6. This was shortly after Sohungry commented that he hadn’t been posting in the topic for a while. If that hadn’t happened, he probably would have gotten away with lurking for the entire day. Additionally haggis ‘I have nothing to add’ is a very flimsy excuse to lurk. By that point the discussion was really picking up – anyone who actually said that they had ‘nothing to add’ despite that fact is probably anti-town trying to make up an excuse for not posting.

The next post of his:

see you shoulda listened to me, spam!
Spam had nothing to do with the lynch of Kilroy and I can’t recall anything that Cubez said which had any relevance to the bandwagon on Kilroy that he said to Spam, so it seems that he’s just trying to give the impression of being someone who advised against the Kilroy lynch (which he wasn’t) as well as randomly blaming someone else (who may or may not be guilty).

So on day 1 he got away with doing pretty much nothing except voting once for Spam in the random voting stage and giving a crappy, suspicious excuse for lurking.

On to day 2:

i just think that hes makign sill mastakes, the same as i did when i was bad for teh first time,
“I did this when I was anti-town, The Cow did the same thing therefore he’s also anti-town”.

Then, a lot later:

I have just noticed that i have been absent for nearly a week now. and still day 2!

omg lads hurry it up!

gona read up, not tonight tho, i need to work,

just letting ya all no im alive,
The same thing as that post he made on day 1 to make the flimsy excuse for blatant lurking. However, this time there’s something else as well – he asks us to ‘hurry it up’. Basically, he wants purple monkey dishwasher us to end the day phase as soon as possible regardless of who dies. He didn’t even seem to have realised that the vote had changed from The Cow to Sohungry. The fact that he’s urging people to end the day when he’s not even voting for the vote leader at the very least makes him extremely suspicious to me.

He then gives this excuse for not posting:

ouch allow, im working 8-4, dont get home till 6, got a gf, need to go band pratice,

sorry i cant sit at a computer all day!
And? I don’t have access to a computer from 8-5 and I usually have a lot of work to do outside of school, but I still manage to spend maybe half an hour a day or more reading the topic and posting in the topic. Thus your excuse that you have too much to do isn’t very good (and is just an excuse for blatantly lurking as I mentioned before).


just looked though it all, ignoring subs HUGE posts because i cba, and no time,
I don’t see how ignoring the most intense discussion (which coincidentally focuses on Sohungry, who I find particularly suspicious) is going to help you make a well-informed vote. Additionally, in the rest of this post he doesn’t make any references to previous posts – his vote is based solely on one single post that Magnus made at the end of the previous page. I very much doubt that he actually read through the topic, and he probably just said so to give the impression of being active and to make his vote for Magnus seem more reliable (after all, he went through the entire topic and found Magnus to be the most suspicious person based on that one post there, his decision must be reliable if he waded through so much discussion...right?). In fact he freely admits that his vote (made after supposedly reading through the entire topic) was made almost entirely on the basis that he felt Magnus had insulted him.

To Summarise...
Both Cubez and Foamy have gotten away with lurking extensively, having made about than a dozen posts between the two of them, including random voting and a few meaningless posts. Their excuses for doing so are unreliable and prone to changing. They’ve been extremely averse to committing themselves to anything or voting for anyone seriously, preferring instead to make flimsy excuses for not voting for anyone and trying to make themselves seem very neutral. Their suspicions so far have frequently not been backed up by anything at all and have been made purely to make it seem like they could be helpful to anyone. Overall, they’re done nothing helpful for the entire game, barely contributed at all and when they have decided to post it has frequently been meaningless.



Oh, and a few more things on Sohungry:
There’s also the post Sohungry made just after Kilroy was lynched:

goddamnit....

i have a feeling im not going to live til morning.
Here, I get the feeling that he was saying this just so that he could say after the night was over (when he survived) that not being killed meant that the Mafia were framing him. Now, that’s a possibility, but to outright state the above post makes me feel that it’s much more likely that this was some kind of a set-up, where Sohungry (or someone else) could point to the fact that he survived as ‘evidence’ of his innocence.

Oh, and one more thing I’d like to say about Sohungry is that he lied when he was trying to get The Cow lynched. He said that The Cow was the first to vote for him even before I suspected him, but that’s completely untrue. In fact The Cow hasn’t posted all that much, so I can’t really see how he’d confuse something like that. If Sohungry meant that The Cow made the first post on day 2 and voted against him then I can’t really see exactly why The Cow should be suspected for something like that. It's not as if suspicion of someone completely evaporates overnight.



Lastly, I'd also like to see what Foamy and Cubez have to say about all this theorising on their roles, and I'd like to see it soon. Not in a week's time when the game has already gone to day 3 because of the deadline because they couldn't get onto a computer for ten minutes just to explain this. I don't see why people should be allowed to get away with blatant lurking especially when it comes to something as important as explaining an implied roleclaim, and I certainly don't want three more people to die before Foamy and Cubez post again.

The game has gone on for about 3 days and between them, Foamy and Cubez have only made a post every 2 days. At least a half of their posts were made in the random voting stage, or during night 1, or were excuses for lurking. Combined, they've barely managed to post once every 4 days, and on their own they've each made about one game-related post a week.

I'll finish this with the following:

Vote: Foamy

[Tarion'Maseth]

Majority will now be down to 7.

I'm going to Unvote.
Vote: Sohungry

After consideration, it seems a bit odd that Foamy jumped in in a way that gave Sohungry such an obvious life raft.

[Subzero]

Ah, I'd been wanting to say that since last night but the last two posts were mine and I didn't want to turn that into a triple post...

To start off: Vote: Sohungry

Anyway, I'm going to analyse Foamy's most recent post a little more.


hell the only person I know I shouldn't vote for is cubez due to the fact I know he's innocent thanks to my role apart from that your all a threat until I can proven otherwise.
As Tarion said, it's very convenient that Foamy should stir up something big when Sohungry was in trouble. If we look at this in more detail, Foamy said the above shortly after Sohungry went up to 7 votes out of the required 9 to lynch (at the time). Not only that, but he said it immediately (in terms of posts) after Sohungry made another post to defend himself against his accusations, and what Foamy said has completely obscured the previous discussion about Sohungry. In fact, it was Sohungry himself that called Foamy out on the point above.

Basically, the sequence of events is:
1) Sohungry goes from 6 to 7 votes, when 9 votes (shortly 8) are required to lynch him.

2) Sohungry posts a large post to defend himself against previous accusations.

3) Foamy then makes a small, near-contentless post which is completely neutral but which also could be used to make him look very suspicious and lynch-worthy.

4) Sohungry quickly calls Foamy out on that post.

5) Everyone switches from Sohungry to discussing the other two. Several people (myself included) switched their votes off of Sohungry, who would have been extremely close to lynch by now (and probably already lynched at that time), as a result of the discussion.

It also seems odd that Foamy would just so happen to make a completely meaningless post with no relevant information at that particularly convenient time when he has barely been able to contribute anything for most of the game.

Lastly, Sohungry himself has been quick to defend Foamy and Cubez and try to convince people that they're probably innocent, or that it isn't worth lynching them and that if they do survive the night phase it might be that the Mafia planned it that way. Additionally, the way Foamy phrased what he said and the fact that he implied his role rather than claimed it makes me even more suspicious. Why would you half-claim? I mean, it's not as if you're going to accidentally mention that you have a role which confirms someone else's innocence, particularly when you've been very inactive. If you don't plan on claiming then you'e not going to explicitly mention your role and if you do plan on claiming then you'd claim properly. This half-claim, though (and the fact that Foamy hasn't yet arrived to explain it) makes me feel that this was staged to be suspicious enough for suspicion to move from Sohungry to Foamy and Cubez, but confusing enough that it could be reliably claimed that it would be better to not lynch them. Note that two people in particular have been eager to defend Foamy and Cubez: Doohicky and Sohungry. They don't see anything particularly wrong with this suspicious half-claim, the fact that Foamy has been lurking (as has Cubez) and yet claims out of the blue for absolutely no reason (I don't buy theories such as that they wanted to draw the Mafia's attention to themselves, because otherwise they wouldn't have been lurking for so long and they wouldn't have done this so suddenly when it was completely unrelated to the discussion at hand).

At the moment, I would say that, to me, Sohungry, Doohicky, Foamy, Cubez and The Cow are the most suspicious people.

[sohungry]

so did anyone bother to read my post defending myself?

was that a waste of my time to write?

or does it just inconveniently get in the way of your argument against me?

and i was not "defending" foaming and cubez. I was just letting everyone know what I thought of the situation.

lastly,

vote: subzero

you are starting to stretch more and more with your "logic". your posts have been swaying the game since the start. It's gotten to the point where you just make these long ass posts that no one can be bothered to read. Your logic doesnt even make sense to me anymore.

[cubez]

ohh god,

foamy you really are a prat,

i cant explain why foamy did that, he hasn't replyed to any of my messages,

Now i can see what sub is saying, it is extremly random, stupid and very uncalled for.

I havent been lurking, i cant think of anyway to prove it.

now, i what to change my vote, to tarion because he is now trying ot get this day over, i only said that before because its has been a very long day,

if theres anything you what me to answer sub, just ask, :D

[Dark Lord Foamy]

You know what I say to these accusations about me DO IT kill me you'll just be signing Cubez's death over to the mafia in the nightphase or if you kill him mine and you'll gain nothing out of it bar 2 dead innocents.

Now I can also tell you what will most likely happen if you don't and kill someone else which is the mafia will all most certainly target sub, sohungry or cow. Why? Simple I've said I'm suspicious of them so they'll use that to try to get you to kill me and then cubez dies nightphase. However that can be used against them as they'll be some of the first to vote for me using that excuse making it easier to figure out who they are. They could also do another member and find a way to pin it on me but it's quite unlikely.

The final scenario is you don't kill us but one of us is killed by the mafia either way you find out the other is innocent which is helpful as you know they can be trusted and any suspicions they have could be better to follow then others who are still in the dark on whose side there on.

Well thats my 3 cents and no I'm not going to go over my old posts I see no reason to as I know I'm innocent, I know Cubez is innocent you don't want to believe me fine you'll just be screwing yourselves over if your town but if your mafia go right ahead your meant to kill me it's your objective after all.

[Mozric]

Well, guys, I'm reducing the majority to 7.

Sohungry now has 7 votes for him.

Sohungry has been lynched.

Death scene coming shortly. It is now Night 2.

[Tarion'Maseth]

Moz, you sure? By my count, it's still 6. I fear you counted Subzero twice...

[Mozric]

Oh, my bad. Subzero confusing me by bolding his vote when he had already voted.

I'm going to put the majority down by one again in about, oh, 6 hours (technically it should be down to 5 or 6 by now, but you've got a little extra time). So things aren't looking too good for our sohungry regardless.

Votes:
sohungry (6): the cow, Subzero, Andon, sammy2028, dreadknot10, Tarion'Maseth
the cow (1):, Spam-Robot
Magus777z (2): sohungry, Cubez
Tarion (1): Crimthaan
Subzero (1): Magnus777z
foamy666 (1): p3990013
Not currently voting (4): lefthandedyeti, yWizePapaSmurfy, foamy666, Doohicky

Number needed for majority: 7
Current vote leader: sohungry (6)

[sohungry]

maybe if subzero cast yet another vote for me it'd help move things along?

[Tarion'Maseth]

maybe if subzero cast yet another vote for me it'd help move things along?

:roll:

If you hadn't noticed, in between he switched his vote for Foamy. It just happened to go back to you.

[Subzero]

As Tarion said, I voted for Foamy, then voted for you again. The vote for Foamy happened about two thirds of the way down the page.

In response to Foamy:

You know what I say to these accusations about me DO IT kill me you'll just be signing Cubez's death over to the mafia in the nightphase or if you kill him mine and you'll gain nothing out of it bar 2 dead innocents.
Guilt tactics and emotional tactics are used here.


Now I can also tell you what will most likely happen if you don't and kill someone else which is the mafia will all most certainly target sub, sohungry or cow. Why? Simple I've said I'm suspicious of them so they'll use that to try to get you to kill me and then cubez dies nightphase.
Why that's quite a bad idea has already been explained previously, near the beginning of day 2 when The Cow was almost lynched. Additionally, you're saying that if someone kills any of those three people you're more likely to be innocent. Using that excuse (on people who would be gullible enough to believe it) the Mafia would conceivably be able to kill any of those people with impunity.


However that can be used against them as they'll be some of the first to vote for me using that excuse making it easier to figure out who they are. They could also do another member and find a way to pin it on me but it's quite unlikely.
"Keep me around, because this plan I have to reveal one or more of the Mafioso is foolproof and certainly not a repeat of the events at the beginning of day 2 which ended with The Cow generally being thought of as probably innocent despite doing the same thing I say will reveal the Mafioso as guilty".


The final scenario is you don't kill us but one of us is killed by the mafia either way you find out the other is innocent which is helpful as you know they can be trusted and any suspicions they have could be better to follow then others who are still in the dark on whose side there on.
This lends itself well to one of you being pro-town and the other anti-town, and then the pro-town one being killed off by the Mafia (including the anti-town one) to 'prove' the other player's innocence. There are a number of ways that situation could arise.


Well thats my 3 cents and no I'm not going to go over my old posts I see no reason to as I know I'm innocent, I know Cubez is innocent
"I say I'm innocent, therefore I don't have to defend myself or explain my actions no matter what I do."


you don't want to believe me fine you'll just be screwing yourselves over if your town but if your mafia go right ahead your meant to kill me it's your objective after all.
Guilt tactics against pro-town players and baseless accusations against anyone who accuses him, on the basis that because he says he's innocent anyone who accuses him must be guilty.

Overall, this is one huge meltdown. You haven't bothered to defend yourself or your actions, you haven't answered any of the questions that people want answered and you've almost immediately resorted to guilt tactics and manipulating other emotions. You've also been massively overstating your position in terms of votes in your most recent post, acting as if you're on the verge of being lynched when you're on the level of almost everyone else who has a vote against them.

[the cow]

maybe if subzero cast yet another vote for me it'd help move things along?

:roll:

If you hadn't noticed, in between he switched his vote for Foamy. It just happened to go back to you.

*laugh*

nice one :lol:

*zing!*

[sohungry]

subzero, just because you can determine which "tactics" a person is using to defend themselves doesnt make them guilty.

like i've said before, innocents dont like being lynched, just as much as mafia dont like being lynched. therefore, both mafia and innocents will use whatever tactics they can to avoid being lynched when suspicions fall on them.

I see no reason why the defence tactics of mafia and innocents would be different when suspicion falls on them. As such I find it to be a foolish reason to suspect someone.

[sohungry]

well odds are im going to be lynched before I will be around to post again. So i guess these are gonna be my final words.

after im gone the innocent:Mafia ratio isn't going to look too good from the towns perspective.

so far everyone who has fallen under suspicion has turned up innocent.

As crazy as this sounds, i think we need to be voting for people who aren't suspicious at all. Whoever the mafia are, they are doing a damn fine job not looking suspicious. so I'd look for who you find to be the most innocent, and vote for them.

I would also be suspicious of subzero for the fact that he is basically running the game. For someone who seems to be leading the voting he certainly has found very few actually guilty people. He's good at throwing out suspicions, but not at finding the right people to aim them at.

hopefully after im gone everyone will finally stop listening to him.

that's about all I have to say. Subzero will likely use this post as a sure sign of my guilt, so im basically signing my death sentence with it.

goodluck to the innocents who are left.

you'll need it

[Mozric]

Well, I forgot again, but finally, I'm going to have to call a lynch on Sohungry.

Details up shortly. It's now night 2.

[Subzero]

subzero, just because you can determine which "tactics" a person is using to defend themselves doesnt make them guilty.
Yes, but it does make them suspicious to me. Additionally, I reserve the right to find anyone suspicious if the cornerstones of their defence are "I'm innocent so your accusations are false" and "You'll be sorry when I'm gone!". Especially when they've done something as suspicious as implying their role and then completely refusing to explain what they're talking about.


like i've said before, innocents dont like being lynched, just as much as mafia dont like being lynched. therefore, both mafia and innocents will use whatever tactics they can to avoid being lynched when suspicions fall on them.
Mafia and Innocent are two very different roles. What you're saying is that the uninformed majority will behave in exactly the same way as the informed minority - essentially that playing the game by trying to find people you find to be suspicious according to what they say is useless.

Allow me to be the first to say that that makes no sense whatsoever.


I see no reason why the defence tactics of mafia and innocents would be different when suspicion falls on them. As such I find it to be a foolish reason to suspect someone.
So you seriously don't think that a person's role has even the slightest effect on how they defend themselves?

after im gone the innocent:Mafia ratio isn't going to look too good from the towns perspective.

so far everyone who has fallen under suspicion has turned up innocent.

As crazy as this sounds, i think we need to be voting for people who aren't suspicious at all. Whoever the mafia are, they are doing a damn fine job not looking suspicious. so I'd look for who you find to be the most innocent, and vote for them.


I would also be suspicious of subzero for the fact that he is basically running the game.
Perhaps you should be more consistent. You seem to alternate between saying that nobody listens to me and that everybody listens to me (or at least, you aren't taking into consideration the fact that several people have said that they don't read most of my posts). I've also been arguing that you're guilty for most of the game, so I don't quite see how I'm 'running the game' when it took this long for you to get close to being lynched.


For someone who seems to be leading the voting he certainly has found very few actually guilty people. He's good at throwing out suspicions, but not at finding the right people to aim them at.
Oh, really? Leading the voting? I had barely anything to do with the bandwagon against Kilroy. During the first half or so of this day phase you were the one leading the very fast bandwagon against The Cow. It's only very recently that people have actually started voting in the same way that I do. You're also painting me in a light where I should be held up to extremely high standards by people. Do you honestly expect that everyone's suspicions in every game will turn out to be correct? Of course they won't. People can get things wrong, particularly on a day 1 without any prior information. Additionally, if I'm to be held up to standards where I must be absolutely correct all of the time then everyone who voted for Kilroy should also be held up to those standards.


that's about all I have to say. Subzero will likely use this post as a sure sign of my guilt, so im basically signing my death sentence with it.
Well, yeah, I will, if it contains reason enough to find you suspicious (which it does). Basically, you've tried to present me as so me kind of puppet master who's controlled the entire game from the beginning to the present page despite the fact that people only started properly listening to my suspicions about a page or two ago.

[Mozric]

Death Scene
Sohungry got mightily pissed off when he found all the forumers voting against him. What did he do wrong?
The forum member clamoured and shouted for his blood. They were mad as hell and they had the rocket propelled chainsaw lauchers out.
Before he died, Sohungry posted one last picture of himself posing as Jack Sparrow. It was a good picture, and serves as a fitting memoradum to a fine member, SonsOfStalingrad.

Sohungry has been banned. He was SonsOfStalingrad.

It is now Night 2

[Doohicky]

Hmmm... I had really thought he was guilty. Not good at all.

How sure are you of that Troll claim being real Subzero? If it's another innocent killed by him tonight I would consider revealing their identity. The more innocents he kills the closer we get to a Mafia majority.

[sohungry]

oh Noes!! i was innocent?

with all of subzero's convincing evidence, i thought for sure i was guilty!

[Tarion'Maseth]

Oh bollocks. Wish I'd stuck to my defence of you from earlier. Sorry Sohungry.

[Subzero]

oh Noes!! i was innocent?

with all of subzero's convincing evidence, i thought for sure i was guilty!
I fail to see how it makes me a bad player if a player who is pro-town acts in a way which makes me think they're anti-town. All your contradictions, suspicious moments, bad wording, diversions and attempts at discrediting me and others (as well as the practice of reading what other people say and basing your suspicions off of that) made me see you as a very suspicious person.

[Andon]

It's the night phase! I'm pretty sure we shouldn't be talking in the night phase!

[Subzero]

In the first post Mozric said that talking inside the thread at night is fine.

[Crimthaan]

well....shit.

[lefthandedyeti]

Yeah, this isn't good.

Subzero's logic is, well, logical. We're lynching the most suspicious people, and they're turning out to be innocent. However, voting for people who are less suspicious will probably get us even less ground. The mafia will be allowed more slip-ups that way, since thus far the mafia have been playing very well, and if we keep up what pressure we can, they will most likely slip up.

[Tarion'Maseth]

In the first post Mozric said that talking inside the thread at night is fine.

Two reasons for this post - Bump, 'cos I'm not liking the lack of conversation
And second, I do prefer the mechanic that allows nightchat. Mainly because the other way of doing it (No PM during the day, no topic at night) just causes extra hassle. I prefer to be able to discuss in the thread as much as possible.

[Mozric]

Ahem,

CAN THE PEOPLE WHO NEED TO PM ME CERTAIN THINGS SEND ME THEIR "REQUESTS".
You don't want me to get bored and forget about you, do you? Please, try to remember if you have a role.

[Andon]

Who's been away from this?

[Subzero]

Are you trying to get people to reveal information there Andon?

[Tarion'Maseth]

Not exactly the most subtle way of going about it. We find out that some people with roles have been away, Andon asks who's been away. Ergo, Andon wants to know who has roles. Since it's likely that it's not the Mafia (They're not going to forget) it's a good chance Andon is fishing for pro-town roles.

Andon for Mafia?

[Andon]

oop... missed the second half of the post. Was meant to be 'Who has roles? Get with the game!' or similar.

There are 20 players originally. That would place roughly 5 at Mafia, as is the usual proportion. It may be greater, may be lesser.

We can find out who likely has what role by comparing who has been active which nights.

[cubez]

well osfrry i havent been on to say stuff, but woo sub ahs got another one killed

<_<
>_>

O_o
are you thinking what im thinking?

[Subzero]

Don't act as if it was solely my action that led to Sohungry being killed. Yes, I was the one who suspected him the most and yes I was the one arguing for him to be lynched. Feel free to scrutinise those if you wish. However, acting as if I was the sole cause of his death is ridiculous. If you say that then you might as well argue that the person who put the most effort into the Kilroy bandwagon was the only person who had anything to do with Kilroy being lynched.

Andon, I also doubt that you actually missed off the second half of that post. Speculating on the number of Mafia also makes me suspect you a bit. Lastly, you constantly trying to find out people's roles makes me even more suspicious.

[Subzero]

Oh noes, another mega-post (sorry for the double post as well). This week we'll be taking a look at Andon.


I am in no way affiliated with Chris. I just was checking people's reactions.
Early on you voted for the same person that yeti voted for - this was the first time in the game that someone had more than 1 vote against them. When Chris voted against the same person and came under suspicion, you quickly backed out and unvoted. Howeer, why exactly did ou feel the need to inform us that you were 'in no way affiliated with Chris'? That just made him sound very guilty, and also it seems odd that you'd be relatively sure of someone's alignment at such an early point in the game.


I figured that 'starting a bandwagon' would get people really thinking, especially if I knew that the bandwagon wouldn't really go anywhere. bandwagons also can help reveal mafia/hackers - They don't want to do anything suspicious, so they could logically join one. Thus Chris is suspicious in my eyes.
Later, you posted the following. Note that the firts sentence, where you give your reason for voting in the first place, which is exactly the same as Chris'. I don't see how that gives you much of a leg to stand on when you immediately back out (as you can see above) and find him suspicious (at least, suspicious enough to act as if he's probably anti-town).

The second part of that post is pretty much some really dodgy logic (there are some things the Mafia typically do, so the Mafia could do those things to lose suspicion, which doesn't make sense because then anyone who does something which the Mafia wouldn't typically do is both to be suspected and appears to be a little more innocent).


He's a bit too eager. Sohungry looks a bit suspicious as well, but he's not likely to be lynched

Here Andon specifically votes for someone out of the two people he finds suspicious becase he thinks they're more likely to end up lynched than the other player.

After this, you didn't even post until the end of day 1, where you pretended to lament Kilroy's death. That's a period of 5-6 days that you didn't post in.

Later, a fair bit into day 2, he posts the following:

And your other argument makes perfect sense. Too perfect sense. You can easily say 'If I was mafia I would...' and insert something logical. But you would know that would be something you could do, and if you were mafia or troll, you'd not do whatever that was so you could pull that line. It's one of the worst mistakes that can be made in this kind of game.

Here he votes for The Cow because of The Cow's logic that there are some things the Mafia wouldn't do, so the Mafia would do them to avoid suspicion (or something very similar with the same principles), an argument which Andon coincidentally used earlier to suspect Warlock Chris.


There is no reason to reveal your role like that this early in the game, especially if you're not under any suspicion!
Later, after unvoting The Cow, he posts this [Note: I'm not actually talking about the above quote. that's just a quote from the whole post that Andon made. The actual post is about 2/3rds of the way down page 13].

In the post he basically says 'Sohungry's quite suspicious, Foamy is very likely to be Mafia, so let's lynch Sohungry instead of Foamy'. Personally, I could have gone with lynching Sohungry or Foamy, but I chose Sohungry because I suspected him a little more. However, Andon pretty much tried to divert people's votes away from Foamy and onto Sohungry. I'm not sure what that says about the situation, but the theory I have should be fairly obvious (what with Sohnugry being innocent).

Andon then didn't post again until the night phase.

Additionally, all of Andon's votes so far have been 'me too'-votes tacked on to votes against the previous candidates for lynching. So far, he's done these small, non-contributing votes for Warlock Chris, Kilroy, The Cow and Sohungry. In between these votes, for most of the time he's been lurking. Note that 3 out of the 4 people above are now confirmed as innocents (by virtue of being dead) and the fourth (The Cow) is generally assumed to not be guilty.

I'd say that, to me, Andon is moderately suspicious, but first I'd prefer to hear some answers to the as-yet unanswered questions posed to Foamy and Cubez, rather than just an indignant reply to the effect that they're innocent so nobody should suspect them.

[Mozric]

*has had 3 hrs sleep last night and has just come off a 4 hour work shift so sorry if i'm pissy*


Ahem,

CAN THE PEOPLE WHO NEED TO PM ME CERTAIN THINGS SEND ME THEIR "REQUESTS".
You don't want me to get bored and forget about you, do you? Please, try to remember if you have a role.

And i go away for two days and still this hasn't really be done. Don't worry people I'll use PM. If necessary i'll just move straight to day. talk to you guys laters

[Andon]

Andon, I also doubt that you actually missed off the second half of that post. Speculating on the number of Mafia also makes me suspect you a bit. Lastly, you constantly trying to find out people's roles makes me even more suspicious.

I was posting from school, and the time is about right for when the bell rang to change classes, so I could have hit 'submit' and ran out of the classroom.

Also - I've been playing these games for quite a while. Do you really think I'd make a blunder like that?

I am going to read your large post now and reply to that;

For me being inactive; I have just recently finished marching band season - I have had little time to post anything, let along in this topic. Also, you should know by now that I have a habit of not being a leader in lynching. It makes perfect sense to me - You usually end up dead after the first few days because you lead the pack of voting. You rack up a huge amount of suspicion that override the suspicion of the little guys that agree with their own reasons 'tacked on' as you put it. The people that give no reason and the people that give unique reasons are at the most suspicion. Everyone needs to avoid suspicion - that's what I'm trying to do. Everyone is suspected, but everyone wants to be suspected less than the other person.

[Subzero]

Also - I've been playing these games for quite a while. Do you really think I'd make a blunder like that?
See my previous post, the point about bad logic. 'Mafia make mistake x, so anyone who makes mistake x is probably innocent' and all the variants thereof are bad forms of logic that just form a vicious cycle of 'they're mafia' - 'but what if they've made a mistake?' - 'but what if they want me to think they've made a mistake?' etc..


Everyone needs to avoid suspicion - that's what I'm trying to do. Everyone is suspected, but everyone wants to be suspected less than the other person.
The mafia want to avoid suspicion. The town wants to find the Mafia. People in the town shouldn't care about how suspected they are in comparison with other people because that has no relation to finding the Mafia (and if the town are doing a good job then they don't need to worry about being suspected). The theory that the town and the mafia will behave in exactly the same way makes no sense and only gives the Mafia a greater ability to blend in with the rest of the town, an ability which they don't actually deserve from a logical viewpoint.

[Tarion'Maseth]

Sorry Sub, I'd disagree with the second bit. As this game has proven, townfolk do come under suspicion. And if we're hunting townfolk, we're not finding mafia.

So, in the case of Sohungry for example, of course he wanted to avoid suspicion - It would
a) Kill him
b) Not kill Mafia

[Mozric]

Well, I'm about to fall asleep, so I'll make this brief...
“Oh my gawd!” the people cried! “How could it be?”
Oh yes. We lost one of our finest. The man oozing bass wisdom himself, foamy666, who was apparently CitizenErased.
“How did he die!?” the people cried!
Well, witnesses have made up a sketch of the perpetrator:
http://40kforums.com/imageupload/images/img473fcc375f41f.jpg
“A FATE WORSE THAN DEATH!”

But that was not all the carnage for one night. Another well loved member was banned just as he returned from a bit of a hiatus. We will miss their posts with their distinctive colour...
Like with Foamy, we had some eyewitnesses. They say this happened:
http://40kforums.com/imageupload/images/img473fd1bbe09ec.gif
We, however, think that those witnesses were most likely stoned off their face. What really happened seems far more mysterious and it's too early to say for sure.
It was Subzero who was banned so dastardly. Of course, he was The Grand Beef.

Foamy666 (CitizenErased, the Californian) has been banned by flaming troll, Night 2.
Subzero (The Grand Beef) has been banned by mysterious means, Night 2.

It is now day 3.

[cubez]

ok woo, not dead, but fomay is, which is poo, but now proves me good :)

and sub is dead too, and he was good, which i was suprised about.

ok time to be loud,,

we have lost 6 innocents, which is not good,

so just for teh fact that sub was going on at andon before he died,

vote andon

(btw dead and died mean banned)

[Tarion'Maseth]

Vote:Andon

I already mentioned my suspicion, although our dearly departed Subzero said it better.

[lefthandedyeti]

I for one would like to continue what Sub Started. He said we should try to compile a list of who is least suspicious and go from there.

[Andon]

Why would I do anything to Subzero? It would be stupidly obvious and would get me killed.

It is perfectly possible that someone killed him to make me look guilty. Not saying how likely that is, but it is possible.

[Magnus777z]

I'm not willing to commit my vote yet.

I don't think that Andon is that foolish. Unless he counted on getting out of it by tossing out a "Do I look that stupid??" play.

[Doohicky]

Okay. Looks like the only way forward here is to go back and read the entire thread from start to finish.

I'll get back to you all sometime next week when I finish it! :P

Anyway, Went to first page to see who was still alive and noticed a mistake.
SoHungry is listed as both alive and dead, but the number of participants seems to add up (We started with 20 didn't we?) If so then someone has been taken off the alive list by accident. Just thinking you should check it out Mozric

[Tarion'Maseth]

I believe we started with nineteen, so that should be right.

[p3990013]

Come on guys! It's our last chance to make a stand vs the mafia! Sub knew sth and died for this!

Vote: Andon

[Doohicky]

Okay. After reading some of subzero's arguments against Andon, I came upon a tidbit which I think really throws suspicion on Andon.


Additionally, all of Andon's votes so far have been 'me too'-votes tacked on to votes against the previous candidates for lynching. So far, he's done these small, non-contributing votes for Warlock Chris, Kilroy, The Cow and Sohungry. In between these votes, for most of the time he's been lurking. Note that 3 out of the 4 people above are now confirmed as innocents (by virtue of being dead) and the fourth (The Cow) is generally assumed to not be guilty.

The rest of Subzeros post is, in my opinion., simply a case of him wanting Andon to be guilty and hoping that he can find something to stick. The above quote, however, is an excellent point and makes me think Andon is guilty.

vote: Andon

[the cow]

Vote Andon

for all the above reasons which to sum it up... *ahem*

[list]
1 voting against 3 confirmed inocents and mwa
2 lurking for all of the time that you are not voting
3 well i'm sure that most of you read subzero's *momentary sob* posts
4 what can I say i like lists that go to 4 :D

[sammy2028]

Well after reading the quote doohicky quoted it has aroused my suspiciouns of andon i believe the logic in it to be sound so vote:andon

[lefthandedyeti]

Whoa! Wait!

These are all "Me, Too" votes. I know for a fact that if Andon was mafia he would keep Sub alive to avoid cases like this. As for the "Do I look that stupid?" play, well, he isn't that stupitd.

[Andon]

Vote Andon

for all the above reasons which to sum it up... *ahem*

[list]
1 voting against 3 confirmed inocents and mwa
2 lurking for all of the time that you are not voting
3 well i'm sure that most of you read subzero's *momentary sob* posts
4 what can I say i like lists that go to 4 :D

Your vote is about as sound as, well, an old turd. May look nice and solid on the outside, but when you really get into it, it holds together like crap.

Counter-points:

A) You give no reasons of your own. You simply go 'Oh, look at everyone else voting, I'm going to join in!

1) The majority of the people have voted against three confirmed incidents. And voting for me because I voted for you is very bad skill. No one knew who the innocents were until after they were killed. Subzero voted against them as well!
2) As I said before, I have been busy IRL. Also, I haven't noticed you doing much posting either.
3) Again, using other people's points as your own doesn't make you look very well. It's very easy for Mafia to just tag along.

[the cow]

yes we have heard your "I haven't been here" excuse but you continue to be unable to give any real defence for yourself.

yes it is true that a majority of people voted against innocents but you indeed voted for these people and can not be ruled out since as a mafia member you know who the innocents are and can easily slide in to votes for innocents who are under fire.

also I do not see why I should have to write out points that other people made for them to be valid. Subzero made several good points about your possible guilt and no matter how much you want it downplayed it is still there.

[Andon]

You don't need to make better points - you need to have your own reasons.

Also - Using that I voted for innocents is a very flimsy argument, as it can be applied to anyone equally.

[Tarion'Maseth]

Two things.

One, I think I may have jumped on Andon too quickly. I was throwing ideas out there. Sub had a fairly tenuous post against him, with only a little bit of circumstantial evidence.


I'm not willing to commit my vote yet.

I don't think that Andon is that foolish. Unless he counted on getting out of it by tossing out a "Do I look that stupid??" play.


Why would I do anything to Subzero? It would be stupidly obvious and would get me killed.

It is perfectly possible that someone killed him to make me look guilty. Not saying how likely that is, but it is possible.

It's true guys. Subzero's death there was too coincidental. Especially considering the Mafia should have been trying to keep him alive - He'd been killing a fair few innocents for them, and we were foolishly following him.

Let's follow the logic here.

(1) Subzero was directing people's suspicions.
(2) Subzero's suspicions have found no Mafia, but instead lynched multiple innocents
(3) It is impossible to be both a threat to the Mafia, and yet help them
(4) Subzero had helped the Mafia
(5) Therefore, Subzero was not a threat to the Mafia.

Why kill him then?

(1) If Subzero was not a threat to the Mafia, killing him must lead into their eventual goal
(2) Mafia aim to draw suspicion away from themselves, and to kill innocents
(3) Since Subzero was not a threat to the Mafia, they must have killed him in order to draw suspicion away from themselves/kill innocents

Furthermore, why kill him when Andon had just come under suspicion?

(1) A Player's innocence can only be determined after they are dead (Excluding other abilities)
(2) A Player's suspicions cannot be trusted without being able to trust their innocence.
(3) In order to trust a player's suspicions, they must be killed after voicing them.
(4) If you want to misdirect the majority, it is clear that the easiest way is to kill a player, after they have voiced their decisions, but before they are able to be questioned.
(5) Sub was killed in such a manner.
(6) Can it then be said that Subzero was killed in order to direct suspicion at Andon?
(7) If this is so, it stands to reason that Andon is innocent.

Sorry, there are a few intuitive leaps at the end, I'm about to go to bed. Needed to hurry slightly. I can elaborate further, but I'd assume most people can follow.


ok woo, not dead, but fomay is, which is poo, but now proves me good :)

Not necessarily. It proves Foamy believed you were good. But without knowing more about his role, it's impossible to say.

In short, Andon's guilt hasn't been proved. Indeed, I would say the timing is in his defence, rather than his prosecution. Cubez's innocence hasn't been proved either.

[lefthandedyeti]

It's true guys. Subzero's death there was too coincidental. Especially considering the Mafia should have been trying to keep him alive - He'd been killing a fair few innocents for them, and we were foolishly following him.

Let's follow the logic here.

(1) Subzero was directing people's suspicions.
(2) Subzero's suspicions have found no Mafia, but instead lynched multiple innocents
(4) Subzero had helped the Mafia
(5) Therefore, Subzero was not a threat to the Mafia.

Why kill him then?

(1) If Subzero was not a threat to the Mafia, killing him must lead into their eventual goal
(2) Mafia aim to draw suspicion away from themselves, and to kill innocents
(3) Since Subzero was not a threat to the Mafia, they must have killed him in order to draw suspicion away from themselves/kill innocents



I like your reasoning, and most of the evidents points to a "shoot the officers" strategy.


(3) It is impossible to be both a threat to the Mafia, and yet help them

Not necessarily. The Troll thus far is a threat to everyone with his killing ability, but is helping the Mafia with his killings.

[Tarion'Maseth]

OK, I'll rephrase.

It's unreasonable to assume that since Subzero was a greater help to the mafia than he was a threat, that they would kill him, without good reason.

But yeah, I realised that was shaky, and meant to go back and fix it. I just couldn't figure a concise way of doing it.

"shoot the officers"? Care to elaborate?

[lefthandedyeti]

Well, Subzero was guiding us in our voting. He's shooting down any opposing arguement fairly easily and has lynched a fair few people in the process.

Now, even though sohungry opposed him, he was killed off quite soundly. Imagine what the mafia would think of someone like that if they had deduced whom the mafia were. I think they're shooting the leaders to try to break us apart.

[Mozric]

Votes:
Andon (6): Cubez, Tarion'Maseth, p3990013, Doohicky, the cow, sammy2028
Not currently voting (7): lefthandedyeti, yWizePapaSmurfy, Andon, dreadknot10, Spam-Robot, Crimthaan, Magnus777z

Number needed for majority: 7
Current vote leader: Andon (6)

Andon is one vote away from being lynched.


Anyway, Went to first page to see who was still alive and noticed a mistake.
SoHungry is listed as both alive and dead, but the number of participants seems to add up (We started with 20 didn't we?) If so then someone has been taken off the alive list by accident. Just thinking you should check it out Mozric

Thankyou, and fixed. Yes, we had 19 people to start with.

[Crimthaan]

Son of a bitch...I really do hate you guys. Last game this happened to me THREE DAMNED TIMES! THREE!

Alright..I really hate to do this but...
VOTE: Andon
*Andon, dont hate me*

1) As was stated earlier by other people his voting has been mainly "me too votes". From what I've seen of his reasoning behind those votes, there really wasn't a whole lot of original ideas, but more elaborating slightly on what others have said and making a slight twist here and there.

2) He'd voted for SubZero, failed to lead a majority vote against Sub, and than had him killed. Yes, the whole "do I look that stupid" play is obvious, since many of us that have played these games would know that is suicide. However, I believe Andon is also skilled enough to, and did, use that play in reverse psychology on us. Perhaps he gambled this time and really thought he could get away with it. He failed with voting to kill off a townsfolk, one that was already regarding him with suspicion, and therefor just killed him off in the night phase. Thinking he could get away with it because he knows people know he's skilled, and hoping that he could convince people of that whole "i'm not that stupid" play.

3) Those are my reasons. I'm sorry Andon, I really am, but your reverse psychology didn't pay off this time.

I'd like to point on one thing in this whole affair. People are blaming Andon for lurking and therefor voting on him simply because he's lurking. Guess what, he's got a life. If you want to kill someone for lurking you might as well vote for me as well. Do I purposly try to lurk on this game? No. I simply do not have a crap load of time to read every single post and summerize wtf is going on. Between working a fulltime job, fulltime stupid, and the US Marine Reserves I am just swamped. However, school is cooling down so I am gonna catch a bit of a break that way. All I'd like to say is please dont vote for people simply because they have a life outside of the mafia thread, it's not fair and not fun.

[Magnus777z]

I think Andon is being persecuted in an overly agressive manner.
That said I believe that Crimthaan's, and Tarion's arguements are well stated.
However more convincing to me is the cow's aggresion, and poorly formed statements.
Which leads me too:
Vote: The Cow

[Mozric]

Andon has been lynched. Death scene appearing shortly. It is now Night 3.

With Subzero recently banned, the members of 40kforums were looking for retribution. Andon tried to diffuse the situation with his characteristic witty sarcasm and outlandish statements, but to no avail.
Kicking and screaming, Andon was dragged to the ban poll.
“You're making a mistake, you know,” Andon said with certainty.
“Don't try that sort of reverse psychology!” the angry mob shouted.
Andon held on for dear life to the forum but in the end the power of the ban poll prevailed and he was banned.

Andon has been banned. He was DURENDIN, 40kforums fanatic. It is now night 3.

[Tarion'Maseth]

Oh bollocks. I meant to unvote >_<

That was a mistake, to say the least :(

[Magnus777z]

Well that was fast. Another band wagon that got us.....F!@#$%^ Nothing. Great job guys, really.

[p3990013]

We're doomed. DOOMED I tell ya...

[Crimthaan]

ok...wtf?! c'mon man, throw us a frick'in bone here! Normally by now we've got one if not a few of the fraggin mafia! This is gettin bad, like...super bad.

[cubez]

corr bish bash bosh!

@ tarion it was in his role that i was so :P

i have a majorly bad feeling about tonight, :(

[Spam-Robot]

Oh SHIIII... sorry guys, site has been down for me for a week or two now, surprised I didn't get lynched.

[Magnus777z]

So any ideas? I've msg'd a couple of people so far, and each of them has drawn a blank.

I mean it's night 3 now, and we have yet to find a mafia killed in any way what so ever. From talking to other more experienced player's I've gathered that that is absolutly horrid.

We can only hope that the Troll manages to snag someone tonight.

So Idea's?

[Tarion'Maseth]

So any ideas? I've msg'd a couple of people so far, and each of them has drawn a blank.

I mean it's night 3 now, and we have yet to find a mafia killed in any way what so ever. From talking to other more experienced player's I've gathered that that is absolutly horrid.

We can only hope that the Troll manages to snag someone tonight.

So Idea's?

There's an unspoken rule of Mafia, that Subzero once brought up. He who is first to praise an unknown party is normally either opposed to the party and trying to divert suspicion, or the party themselves. He mentioned it in reference to the doctor - Anyone who jumps in to say "Well done for saving X" is normally either the Doctor, or the person who tried to kill X.

Not saying you're Mafia, or that you're the troll... I'd just be careful as it's easy to get people on at you over something minor. See... well, every lynch we've had so far.

[Mozric]

Death scene.

It was a dark day for 40kforums.
First, there was a troll. He moved quietly, lurking, looking for a target to pull down. The troll waited and plotted, as wary of the hackers as any other 40kforumer.
Sitting silently, the troll heard the sound of another forumer posting. The sound seemed familiar. A fellow troll?
He looked on in amusement as somebody logged in as “Marneus Calgar”. This post shortly appeared:

Come on guys lets try and get our acts together. We've got to think about who started each badwagon and who is currently looking suspicious. I personally think that P3990013 is looking pretty suspicious. he hasn't conrtibuted anything at all really and just comes in and posts silly posts just lke the one he's recently posted (about We're Doomed)
Somebody nefariously using a pre-made account (with 0 posts to the name) in order to help the town? Put up with this the troll could not.
Using ancient troll magic, the troll, adding the power of username:Judaismfordummies to his already formidable abilities, tracked down the ip of the mysterious poster. What he found surprised him.
He had created a few spare accounts in his time, but nothing like this poster, the infamous forumer known sometimes as Kill to thrill!
The troll knew what to do. He stuck swiftly and brutally with flames and trolling and suggestive comments about the questionable sexuality of the forumer.
Sammy2028/Killfrenzy lay banned, struck down violently by the force of the trolling.
But the troll's actions had brought the attention of another group.
http://40kforums.com/imageupload/images/img4744c64324a08.jpg
Out of the shadows stepped Anonymous. One was wearing a fedora in respect to the dark gods of mafia, but the other four appeared as dark blank suits.
“We've come for you,” said Anon. “Your trolling will come to an end before you, by sheer fluke, manage to hit one of us. We will have control of this forum, Tarion.”

Sammy2028 (Killfrenzy the Zerger) has been banned by flaming troll, Night 3.
Tarion'Maseth (Touchingcloth) has been banned by Anonymous, Night 3.

Hackers are now in the majority. The town lose. Winners are Spam Robot by survival, and Magnus, Crimthaan, Dreadknot, Doohicky and Yeti, as members of Anonymous, the hackers.

With a dark laugh, 40kforums fell into darkness. Not Darkness, but darkness, the darkness of Anonymous. When Mozric and the moderators left there was nothing but a barren wasteland. Wardenhammer cursed. Blackduck weeped. Darkness looked a lot like this. (http://donotwant.ytmnd.com/)


Postgame

Okay, the game was a little broken towards the mafia, but you guys had your chances and screwed it up. The troll didn't manage to kill any mafia and none of the pro-town roles helped you at all.

Here are the roles for those interested:
http://40kforums.com/imageupload/images/img4744c7c8a3944.jpg

Congratulations to the evil ones.

[Tarion'Maseth]

Oh bollocks. One round away from winning myself. Damnit.

Also, everyone. I was pro-town. I tried, I really did. On the other hand, I was only pro-town by fluke. I kept trying to contact Mafia to make an agreement. But I kept finding innocents >_<. Still, I had a good chunk of the Mafia pegged, but there was this nagging feeling that they could be the best of the pro-town players.

Well done guys. You kicked my arse :wink:

[dreadknot10]

good work my fellow mafioso, im surprised that no one questioned my sudden posts about nothing, except voting

[Subzero]

About half an hour ago in MSN Mozzie told me that the game was pretty much over and allowed me to guess who I thought the Mafia were. I guessed all of them correctly. Ah well though, you can't win them all, and my main suspicions whilst I was alive all turned out to be incorrect - but then again, lurking Masons aren't very helpful, for example. I think that the town had the potential to be really strong, what with there being 2 Cop equivalents (who I think were confirmed sanity), 2 Masons (essentially close-to-confirmed Innocents if one died or if one or both was investigated) and the Announcer. If one or both of the Cops had proven the innocence of the Announcer and possibly the Doctor then the Doctor could have protected the Announcer, who could then have kept on announcing the investigation results and that sort of thing. However, I guess that kind of tactic would have relied on the investigations being on most of the right people.

Despite that, the roleset was a bit unbalanced, as Mozzie said and as we discussed on MSN. Less than two thirds of the players were pro-town, there were 5 Mafia and there was another killer killing each night. The town pretty much needed to lynch Mafia as soon as possible, but with no way of knowing that there was so little leeway we couldn't do anything.

But oh well, I managed to survive for most of the game so for me it's a personal victory (2 out of 3 days ain't bad). Congratulations to those members of the Mafia who actually posted regularly.

EDIT: I also just noticed that I'm actually a role as well (Spam, the Survivalist). In that case, seeing as Spam won I claim a psuedo-victory. *Manaical laughter*

[Spam-Robot]

W00t! I see I wasn't a role :(. Oh well.

[Magnus777z]

Well Sub if I had, had my way you wouldn't have made it past Night 1. But there was some miscommunication, and a random person was killed as a result (Gnomesbane).

A strategy was formed in the mafia, and executed. I don't feel it had a huge impact, but if the game had lasted longer I think we would have won anyway.

The town didn't lose because the deck was against them, they lost because they failed utterly to work together.

1 in 3.8 were mafia, if nothing else that should have made it easier to find us not more difficult.

I think that this game only proved that you can form an arguement against anyone with nothing. Add in mob mentallity, and someone who makes an arguement, and you find witches if they exist or not.

[Gnomesbane]

Haha, speaking of mafia miscommunication, yeti pm'd me the morning after I was dead, as part of some mass message to all the mafia players, apologizing for his actions and clearly stating he was mafia. Oh how lucky he was I had died that night.... :evil: It was pretty hard watching this game go downhill so quickly, and sitting on such valuable information. Oh well. Better luck next time.

[Subzero]

The town didn't lose because the deck was against them, they lost because they failed utterly to work together.
Both were factors in the town's loss. Having 5 Mafiosi, one of whom was a Godfather (in a game with 2 confirmed sanity Cops) and then another killer on the side who didn't ever cross-kill the Mafia helped the Mafia considerably. When almost a third of the players are all members of the same Mafia group, all have the ability to kill and all know who the other Mafia members are then the town has quite a big problem, especially when it's possible for the town to lose after day 3.


1 in 3.8 were mafia, if nothing else that should have made it easier to find us not more difficult.
If Mafia was a statistical game where we voted randomly then yes. However, it isn't, as I explained earlier. Increasing the number of Mafia has almost no positive effect for the town in an actual game (and still only very little positive effect in a theoretical game).


I think that this game only proved that you can form an arguement against anyone with nothing. Add in mob mentallity, and someone who makes an arguement, and you find witches if they exist or not.
Personally, I think it also proves that lurking should never be allowed to be thought of as a viable strategy. Mafia is a game built on people talking to one another; removing that element has a detrimental effect.

[Tarion'Maseth]

You say the town failed to work together... Not true. The only problem was, when groups of them worked together, they screwed up horribly.

I had an alliance with Subzero until his death. And Andon, shortly before his (When I realised he was probably pro-town). We had a Mason group. If Subzero and I had connected with the Mason group, we would probably have won. Especially since Subzero had other contacts.

On the other hand, if the Masons hadn't foolishly flashed their power, they might have been useful.

[Spam-Robot]

Oh, sub, you might want to know what your role pm was.

It basically said "I can't be lynched". Quite fitting,

[lefthandedyeti]

Haha, speaking of mafia miscommunication, yeti pm'd me the morning after I was dead, as part of some mass message to all the mafia players, apologizing for his actions and clearly stating he was mafia. Oh how lucky he was I had died that night.... :evil: It was pretty hard watching this game go downhill so quickly, and sitting on such valuable information. Oh well. Better luck next time.

Yeah. That would've killed us if you were still alive. I was surprised that nobody suspected me for lurking, since I only voted in one day phase. The other two I simply added to the discussion.

[Crimthaan]

i take offense to Sub's little comment of "congrats to you mafia players that posted regularly". We had a strategy and it worked. We lurked. Too bad you didn't pick up on it and actually vote for us....oh wait, you were too busy voting for the innocent people that WERE posting regularly.

[Subzero]

Lurking isn't a viable strategy. Like I said before, the game is built on discussion. If you take that away or refuse to take part in it then it affects the game significantly. Mafia is also a game of skill, not chance or statistics. Avoiding having to test your skill doesn't make the town bad players. Additionally, several of the people I suspected were infrequent posters (Foamy, Cubez and Andon) - unfortunately they were innocent. The only person who I actively got killed who was involved in discussion was Sohungry.

[Doohicky]

Heh, I was a frequent poster and apart from an isolated instace, I wasn't suspected at all (much)! Wooo..

To be fair I haven't been lynched in about 4 or 5 games. It's all been night kills.

[Magnus777z]

I was trying my best not to be a lurker

[Kilroy]

I shake my head at the townspeople who succeeded at killing themselves.

[Tarion'Maseth]

Can I get more info on Statistician, and Announcer please? And Redirector Survivalist for that matter.

EDIT: Sorry, they're covered by the Mafia thread. Looked them up.

Also, I killed as many "town" players as the town did. :wink:

It's not all their fault.

[Spam-Robot]

Tarion my Redirector Survivalist made me unlynchable.

[Kilroy]

So I'm guessing that all the non-mafia names were/are members. So who is touching cloth and why is his name so weird?

[Mozric]

touchingcloth was an infamous troll


Tarion my Redirector Survivalist made me unlynchable.

Not true. It just meant that you survived the first lynch/nightkill directed at you.

If something in the game would normally ban you (eg daytime lynch), you survive that attempt and may choose who gets banned instead. This ability may only be used once, the first time an attempt is made on your life.

[Spam-Robot]

Ah. Forgot exactly, luckily nothing tried to ban me.
I guess not being there for a game is the easiest way to win.

I was dissapointed in myself, Usually I attract enough attention to at least lynch myself.

I shouldve just posted" IM MAFIA! LYNCH ME!!!"