Let me elaborate on why no lynching is awful 95% of the time. Town's only reliable way of killing scum is to lynch them. By not lynching, we give scum more time. "but karla" I hear you say "if we lynch town we do scum's job for them" to which I say "ok, try and win a game without lynching". You can't afford to wait until you're absolutely certain someone is scum before you lynch them. No lynching also greatly reduces the information you have available from the votes.
The 5% of the time where no lynching is acceptable is when you have a goofy open/semi-open setup where it can be deduced that it is better to wait for the first night of actions, and not to risk lynching a blue on the first day.
Says it all really, I've never liked no lynch and I don't think its the right way to go. It's easy for mafia to jump on for one also it might be a stab in the dark on day one but not lynchin anyone is letting them slip by, we have a low chance of hitting sick but more chance then no lynch.
Hi guys, sorry for being seemingly inactive, been packing (moving yay) and I work full time. I'm not usually this busy. BUT I AM HERE NOW!
My thoughts on players thus far in order of player list:
oath2order - Reading through his posts, mostly random one-liners and common thoughts/statements. Focused on Sataric heavily for mentioning a possible suggestion to missing KP. Oath doesn't seem to be trying like he usually does in other games, posting, but not drawing any attention to himself.
Cory - In the same boat as Oath, although slightly less mindless posting. I've come to known Cory as the nub of mafia, so it's weird to see him being quiet. Usually he spams quite a bit and has an opinion on everything.
Cory hasn't really been doing "mindless posting" this game. He's actually making a good effort.
ryan88 - Said they think Karla is scum. The fact that Ryan isn't posting makes me raise my eyebrow. He has always flooded games with one sentence/one word replies and has ALWAYS claimed early as town. I don't want to chalk his lack of posting as him learning and write him off. I feel like we need to keep him in the back of our minds. Also his first post kind of rubbed me the wrong way:
Why draw attention to the fact that you're not claiming? idk, seemed unnecessary to me. Again, feel like we need to watch him.
To be honest you could be on to something about Ryan88, it is odd that he isn't posting to the same extent, but I also think that he's probably learned his lesson somewhat and has been yelled at enough to keep quiet.
KarlaKGB - Karla isn't playing like he always has, which could be attributed to either the new fluffy rules or him taking a break. I feel like he's significantly less aggressive with accusations and not bringing much to the table. I remember him getting quite angry at players that posted silly things and derailed the thread. His new... passive? approach has me sort of scratching my head.
I think people are grilling Karla without any real reason. It's day 1 so I don't know what exactly everyone expects, he may be good, but he isn't some kind of mystic fairy princess that has x-ray vision and can use his laser eyes to kill scum during the day. If anything people should be looking at Lauren for being contradictory.
Trundle - Trundle sucks as scum, plain and simple. He was painfully obvious in all previous games where he was scum. Has easily contributed the most out of all players. I believe Trundle is town.
I agree with this. I can tell when my brother is scum. (lelelelelelelelelel)
C r y s t a l - All for lynching inactives when it is usually proven that all that does is kill townies. Harping on killing inactives for a lot of the game. Makes me suspicious that Crystal is steering towards VERY easy lynches instead of actually doing anything.
I suppose you share the same opinion as Superpenguin seeing this comment and the fact that you didn't mention much about him.
No lynches are completely useless and honestly I don't see why C r y s t a l shouldn't bring that up. I would have brought it up except we had quite a bit of time to talk so I figured I'd leave it until later. She tends to copy what others say and post whatever makes her seem Town, although I find it doesn't always work in her favour. She always seems to quick to jump on any mention of scum.
Yui-Z - Yui hasn't been talkative as she has been busy, so I can't get a read on her.
Kinda confused because I thought Yui was actually posting a decent amount at least, I could be wrong, but she has definitely contributed.
alise - Where are you? Alise hasn't said anything that has contributed so far. Was being silly on N0 and hasn't done much else. Wanting her to post more.
I know she's been in IRC and probably viewing the thread, so not sure why she hasn't posted much. To be honest, this strikes me as odd because she generally at least tries to contribute.
alise/elise was also very avoidant towards the end of the last mafia game (Birds 2). And the same thing happened: chatting in IRC a lot, maybe even playing IRC mafia, but not posting in the forum game. This is certainty a criticism not a defense, but I'm just pointing this out to state that it's not necessarily unusual.
I wasn't being comtradictory? I said i was a little fishy and had a tiny bit of suspicion which wasn't the best word to use, he posted and proved me wrong? I admitted that, it's more than most. Others such as cory said stuff about karla.
I agree and to Superpenguin, who mentioned it, what are you thinking??? No lynches happened in the last two games and I would say it definitely did not help. On top of that, we had a Night 0! And double on top of that, it's a 48 hour day! So proposing a no lynch at this point is very unreasonable, and in my opinion it might even make those who proposed it look a bit scummy.
Let me elaborate on why no lynching is awful 95% of the time. Town's only reliable way of killing scum is to lynch them. By not lynching, we give scum more time. "but karla" I hear you say "if we lynch town we do scum's job for them" to which I say "ok, try and win a game without lynching". You can't afford to wait until you're absolutely certain someone is scum before you lynch them. No lynching also greatly reduces the information you have available from the votes.
The 5% of the time where no lynching is acceptable is when you have a goofy open/semi-open setup where it can be deduced that it is better to wait for the first night of actions, and not to risk lynching a blue on the first day.
- - - Post Merge - - -
Sure, you could have just said that you wanted to hear what I had to say.
Your post still sucks in my eyes, I would still have called it out, even if you didn't say you were suspicious of me.
I just brought it up for Day One because all anyone ever wants to do on Day One is lynch an inactive or someone annoying despite names like oath2order and Sataric being mentioned. And that really doesn't tell us anything anyway, because they most likely won't have any good posts to go off of after they die, so the only thing to really look is at who voted for them. But on Day One, there is enough Town to the point where we'd all bandwagon on the inactive without scum votes.
I really would like to lynch oath2order or Sataric right now as they both have justifiable reasons to be lynched and can give us a good read on the other. Also wouldn't mind C r y s t a l since she's been mentioning the common easy lynch targets and no one else.
I'm in class right now but I will post later, Lauren has been posting weirdly imo from my experience with playing with her. When I was mafia and she was town she was a lot less aggressive, instead sitting back a bit more and making interesting posts every so often. That was a while back though and I don't know if her playstyle has changed or something but I will be keeping an eye on her.
- - - Post Merge - - -
Also. A bunch of people haven't posted for a while. I think that's Cariad, jello, alice and alise? Please post your thoughts about what's going on
Well thank you for giving reasons for being against no lynching instead of being an ass about it... :}
I just brought it up for Day One because all anyone ever wants to do on Day One is lynch an inactive or someone annoying despite names like oath2order and Sataric being mentioned. And that really doesn't tell us anything anyway, because they most likely won't have any good posts to go off of after they die, so the only thing to really look is at who voted for them. But on Day One, there is enough Town to the point where we'd all bandwagon on the inactive without scum votes.
I really would like to lynch oath2order or Sataric right now as they both have justifiable reasons to be lynched and can give us a good read on the other. Also wouldn't mind C r y s t a l since she's been mentioning the common easy lynch targets and no one else.
The same could be said for you. Sataric and I are very easy lynch targets, all things considered. If you want to lynch Crystal for only mentioning easy lynch targets, then I'd be up for you to be lynched under that same logic
The same could be said for you. Sataric and I are very easy lynch targets, all things considered. If you want to lynch Crystal for only mentioning easy lynch targets, then I'd be up for you to be lynched under that same logic
How are you and Sataric easy lynch targets? Everyone's been making sure they say in their posts regarding you two that they only find you suspicious and not want to lynch you yet because they know you aren't easy to lynch.
Hmm some people took my statement the wrong way. I'm guessing no will slip so and I'm don't want to do no lynch. These "easy lynches" are also non contributors and even some times, distractions. I was trying not bandwagon on the lynch and bring up my own ideas.
Now that you mention Cariad, when I was reading through posts something went off in my head for him/her (please inform me gender, I assume female?).
First post of the game was an odd one.
I have no idea what was going on here, although I'll assume she was just joking around? To me it looks a bit like a scum member trying to play dumb. The ultimate Dumb Scum tactic. But this suddenly changes. Everyone was saying silly roles and I was going to say 'why have I always got the boring ones, I'm detective' it was also pre game so...
Cariad in this post seems to shift her intelligence upwards a few levels and mentions 4 things which I will lay out.
Calls out Sataric for using Feloreena late death in previous games to hide for killing her early this game
Comments on the Third-Party possible roles
Mentions that she thinks Sataric is scum
Talks about possible doctor and roleblocker roles
These things really show that Cariad is looking past basic posts into what people are doing, but as I read this post I found it odd how fast attitudes changed When it was time to accuse someone of being scum. While all I posted was a suspicion, she has jumped on it and, to me, it looks like it's a push for a Sataric lynch while no near enough evidence is gathered up yet. The facts that her two posts share completely different style from this and she is thinking and acting smart but still for some reason is already considering Sataric scum is raising red flags in my head. I'll leave the rest of you to dissect what I've wrote and share your thoughts. I wasn't pushing for a Sataric lynch, that was my suspicion. It may have sounded like a push but I didn't mean it like that.
GG Italics. I think I read most of what you put down, and to be honest, it's just a suspicion. I'm just throwing out names for day one that caught my eye (like you should all be doing, you poo heads). Although your responses sound like those of a guilty conscience, there's really no way to prove anything any which way. I appreciate your response though.
Natty - Kind of passively point out Karla, but back off in the post to not draw attention? Has posted bland statements and appears to be contributing while trying to stay out of the spotlight. Not 100% certain on Natty as of right now.
As I said, it was open observation. Also, what do you mean by bland?
I really don't have anything to add to the discussion right now. The only thing is I agree with people about Alise. It's almost annoying she's been soo active in the IRC and has posted almost nothing. Sometimes I want to coax her to post but I probably shouldn't because no outside communication rule. ;_;
As I said, it was open observation. Also, what do you mean by bland?
I really don't have anything to add to the discussion right now. The only thing is I agree with people about Alise. It's almost annoying she's been soo active in the IRC and has posted almost nothing. Sometimes I want to coax her to post but I probably shouldn't because no outside communication rule. ;_;
I did it in the last game (with elise too). Since it's not discussing the game exactly, I figured it would be okay. Tina would have the final day on how strict it's supposed to be though.
As I said, it was open observation. Also, what do you mean by bland?
I really don't have anything to add to the discussion right now. The only thing is I agree with people about Alise. It's almost annoying she's been soo active in the IRC and has posted almost nothing. Sometimes I want to coax her to post but I probably shouldn't because no outside communication rule. ;_;
To be fair, I've only seen Elise come in the IRC a couple of times but I don't think she's stayed too long. I don't know if she's got her own reasons for not being able to post, or what but I can't really tell if she's being less active than usual.
I'm not exactly defending her since I haven't really been paying attention to the IRC completely, and it may be that she's just inactive or purposely not posting.
To be fair, I've only seen Elise come in the IRC a couple of times but I don't think she's stayed too long. I don't know if she's got her own reasons for not being able to post, or what but I can't really tell if she's being less active than usual.
I'm not exactly defending her since I haven't really been paying attention to the IRC completely, and it may be that she's just inactive or purposely not posting.
Hi guys. Sorry for inactivity. I've always said I ALWAYS forget about mafia at the start. Plus I really shouldn't have joined this, because my computer is still broken. |:
It depends on the setup imo. No lynch is usually a good option when there's a jailer that's still alive and when there's a smaller amount of players (and thus a smaller amount of mafia KP). I think Oath's last game was an exception in that no lynch was actually a better idea than it would have been if you couldn't steal roles from other players. This game isn't one of those games at the moment so I am very much against a no lynch.
Anyways, I'm not going to make a list on everyone in this game, but I'm going to namedrop a few people starting with somebody who has most of my attention at the moment (I'll get to others later, but this post is going to be a little exhausting).
Oath2Order
I'm going to start with the person I believe is coming off as the scummiest in this game (I use scummy and not 'odd', I ain't afraid!). And this is the person I'm considering voting for at the moment. Before I begin to make a case on him, let me point out that I am not wanting to suspect him simply over his being against Sataric's (and other's) theory about the arsonist role, but the way in which he is responding to me and other people and the overall content of his posts. The three things that I am considering in this case are the content of his posts, what he seems to be focused on in this game, and his reactions to my posts against him.
Content: First off, Oath's posts are doing either one of two things this game: questioning and keeping people in doubt about their own analysis of what is happening in this game, or trying to put town on the track of lynching an inactive (and thus probably mislynching). While both of these things could mean he's using this as his playstyle as town, I can see them being used by a member of the mafia. In a no PM game, mafia can't figure out who could be who through circles of PMs and try to throw people off with PMs as well, so one of the next best things to do is get mislynches on people and make sure that town can't come up with a strong case against anyone on the mafia team. Below in the spoilers are the posts I categorize according to what he's doing with them.
On Trundle's note, that is a very good point. I hate to bring this up but in Mafia VI, you did mention you "would know if Ashtot was scum". In IRC Mafia, if I'm mafia in that, I target Crystal night one because I know she'll somehow find a way to call me out. Trundle's theory does make a bit of sense. Sataric would want to kill off the people he knows would call him out.
Going off that though, I wasn't targeted since I'm sure he knows I would call him out on behavior so maybe that's not the entire mafia strategy.
The same could be said for you. Sataric and I are very easy lynch targets, all things considered. If you want to lynch Crystal for only mentioning easy lynch targets, then I'd be up for you to be lynched under that same logic
While some of his posts also have what you might call 'filler', I think they tend to fall into the category of him trying to question people rather than analyze people's posts.
What he seems to be focused on this game: I don't have too much to say here because it's explained in my analysis of the content of his posts, but as I mentioned there, Oath seems focused on generating doubt rather than analyzing anybody's posts, which I think he could be capable of if he wanted to actually be pro-town. Although he's doing this far less than being questioning, Oath is also interested in lynching an inactive, or at least somebody who might be easy to lynch. You can argue that he isn't (and I might even be partial to that), but I just get this feeling that he'll want to based on his one list of inactives and avoiding talking about something else (in reaction 5 down below, I'll explain it more there).
His reactions to my posts against him: Here's where things get interesting for me. If you haven't read into our previous interaction in this game so far, I can summarize it as being an argument about him calling Sataric odd for bringing up the arsonist role theory. As I said before, I am more interested in how he responds to me when asking him about these things than any kind of clarification he could have made for me, because despite his little quip about me not being able to read into the game, I understood from the get-go that what he was curious about why this was brought up in this game and not past games. But at the same time I didn't forget that he called Sataric odd for trying to figure out what happened today, which is one of the few things that we can do tbh. Anyways! His reactions, let me get around to pointing them out.
And Oath, I don't know why you're trying to discredit the possibility of arsonist, because the lack of kills might mean we have one and that's Sataric's point. It's simple and it's a very logical theory. If anything, you trying to make town believe that Sataric having this theory makes him 'odd' (*cough* you mean scummy? *cough*) makes you seem odd.
I'm not trying to discredit it, I just think it's odd how in this game when there's a lack of kills, arsonist is brought up, but in past games when there has been a lack of kills, arsonist isn't brought up. Little odd, that's all.
He seems harmless enough with this reaction: he's claiming that he wasn't trying to discredit the theory, even though from his strong focus on being Sataric's devil's advocate, I don't think this is true. He does seem to want to discredit this, or at least create some doubt about it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that the arsonist theory is the best and most important one in this game, because the one death today is likely a result of a combination of things, but what I have a problem with is that in trying to discredit the arsonist theory, Oath is creating a distraction for town and drilling somebody on pro-town behavior: trying to figure out the death.
So apparently people not bringing up a theory with possibility in past games makes bringing it up in this game (where anti-town killing roles was actually specified) is odd? Okay. It's called reading into the game, which is what you're supposed to do in mafia. But apparently that's odd behavior now.
Here it's pretty clear what I was grilling him on: him calling Sataric odd. But his reaction is questioning what I was even talking about when he clearly knew what I was talking about in following posts: he thinks Sataric had been behaving 'oddly'. But here he's just repeating what he said earlier because he thought I didn't get it. But the point wasn't about me getting what he was talking about, it was about his calling Sataric odd. Which I keep focusing on in this next exchange.
But you were using the word odd against the idea. Odd is often used against people in this game as a synonym for scummy, and I think that this is how you were using the word when addressing Sataric. And this is my entire point in that first paragraph of my previous post. But now you're suddenly changing this to just you being 'curious as to what has changed' rather than another person being odd for an idea.
I'm not trying to discredit it, I just think it's odd how in this game when there's a lack of kills, arsonist is brought up, but in past games when there has been a lack of kills, arsonist isn't brought up. Little odd, that's all.
Again he seems to still want to argue that the only thing he's pointing out regarding Sataric's arsonist theory is that he was simply curious as to what has changed between games. But what I wanted to know is why he called Sataric odd, and as I specified, using it as a synonym for scummy. Of course, there was more to why he was calling Sataric odd than just the arsonist theory, which I'll finally bring up in my Reaction 4 spoiler.
I agree with Dad. Oath does seem odd, fixating on Sataric merely for mentioning the possibility of the arsonist role being used due to the lack of kills seems suspicious to me. Then you change your reason to that in past games, when kills were missing, arsonist wasn't brought up, an entirely bogus reason in my eyes and easily explainable if it's legitimate, the closed set-up
And if my "fixation" is odd, then I can easily look at other people. You, for example, popping up suddenly to jump on the "Oath looks suspicious" bandwagon.
Here is where some flags were really raised for me. While I didn't fully agree with what Dolby had to add, the fact that Oath's only reaction to Dolby here is that he turns it around and just points a finger back, claiming that he's bandwagoning and is behaving oddly seems like something a member of the mafia would do: trying to spin gold from straw, suspecting somebody over something as simple as 'bandwagoning' when it's clear that they didn't just jump onto the bandwagon and read into what was being said between us. Mafia like to do this because it causes mislynches when town is too weak to read into things themselves and are the true bandwagoners.
I understand that you were saying that the arsonist theory being used in this game but not previous games is weird, but the point that you seem to be avoiding is that I'm calling you out for calling Sataric odd for bringing it up in the first place. Here, I'll quote it:
But oh! You're right, I'm not great at reading into things. How could I miss that you're also saying that him bringing up the arsonist theory instead of talking about mafia also played a part in him being odd. But was not talking about mafia for just a moment really his intention or are you just trying really hard to make other members of the game agree that Sataric is acting weird? And to add to this, your reaction to Dolby is that he is also behaving odd for 'jumping on a bandwagon' when in reality he's just reading into one of the more active chatters in the game and also making a slightly different conclusion than I am.
Well, it's hard to read into Sataric, at least for me. So it's hard to make any definitive statements, but it did look to be as if he was trying to avoid discussing the mafia team.
In the first part of this spoiler is the quote of a post when I finally bring up that Oath is saying Sataric is suspicious here because he's 'avoiding talking about mafia'. Again this just seems like another case of him trying to spin gold out of straw, because even the least analytical people in this game could probably tell that it wasn't Sataric's intention to avoid talking about mafia. But Oath was still trying to point sus at him for that anyways, and I pointed this out to Oath himself in this exchange. In doing that, I hope he would have caught onto the fact that I'm accusing him of 'spinning gold out of straw' as I'm calling it here, something mafia does to get mislynches on little things that people have done or said. He then goes on to say that he doesn't think it's reason to lynch Sataric over by itself, which makes me think that he actually did catch on to me thinking he's trying to drive mislynches and backs down about it. I mean, why would you bring these things up in the first place if you didn't want to collect a body of evidence to use later as a reason to lynch somebody? That, or you're just posting to seem like you're acting pro-town and in a sense fillering. In this final reaction, there's more avoidance.
So it's hard to make definitive statements but you saying it did look to be as if he was trying to avoid discussing the mafia team isn't definitive? But this is day and we need to decide on who we want to lynch, and if there are no inactives then the town has to see somebody as weird enough to lynch, right?
In my first sentence I was accusing him of lying about his statement on Sataric avoiding talking about mafia being definitive, to which he replies that he wasn't 100% sure that this was Sataric's intention. If he was, it'd be pretty hard to run with, so it makes sense not to consider it definitive. In my second sentence what I'm actually saying to Oath there is that I think that he wants to use little pieces of evidence and 'weird' behavior to lynch somebody since there aren't that many inactive people in this game. Instead of actually addressing this (here's the avoidance), he goes on to list a couple of people that he considers inactive. A list which aside from elise and Alice wasn't very accurate.
For all of these things put together, I am voting to lynch Oath2Order.
It's called reading into the game, which is what you're supposed to do in mafia. But apparently that's odd behavior now.
