|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Your case on Somber yesterday was bad. The fact that you're sitting on a meta case and won't answer today is scummy. I like you and Exact for scum and will vote either of you. I'm here and I'm answering, what's the problem? Unlike you, who still haven't answered my question. Do you think scum players never aggressively scumhunt?
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
Okay, time for the big reveal... I am the doctor!My flavor name is Arby. I protected fiery_valkyrie last night. This implicates EXAKT, who fiery_valkyrie voted for yesterday. ##Vote EXAKT_Science For his buddy, I feel most confident voting gamerofthegame, but it could also be Rarity. If there is a Scum Roleblocker and that's the one we lynch today, I am confident that I will also prevent the kill tonight ;-)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
That absolutely clears myself and fiery_call as Town, and I'm pretty confident from his posting that wall monitor is Town too, since Scum have certainly known what I was hinting at from my first "hand tipping" post when I thought I was -1 (that I'm doc, and they know who they tried to kill). Gabriel is pretty clear too I think. That narrows the possible Scum in mind, in order of likelihood, to EXAKT, gamerofthegame, Rarity, and Somberbrero. I believe the game is pretty solidly cracked open.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Rarity posted:I'm here and I'm answering, what's the problem? Unlike you, who still haven't answered my question. Do you think scum players never aggressively scumhunt? How is answering that question helping us scum hunt?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
Thanks for the protect Lumpen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:How is answering that question helping us scum hunt? I think it's key to understanding why Somber's comment isn't possible if he was town. I don't see this as a meta case. Meta cases are 'so-and-so acted like this in previous games therefore their actions in this game means X'. This case is based on my read of Somber as a person and not related to how he has acted in previous games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:Okay, time for the big reveal... Doubt it. Let's see where this goes tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
mafia edit: that is not me claiming, that is me waiting warmly for the actual town-powerrole to do so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Rarity, who else do you think is scum?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Okay,  theory time!Lumpen posted:Okay, time for the big reveal... I'm calling fakeclaim. Either someone else is the doctor and you're taking credit, or, and I know this might be a bit but I like this theory better:There may or may not actually be a doctor, and scum chose not to nightkill N1 to make us think there was one so that Lumpen could claim and then possibly then finger EXAKT as above If Lumpen is telling the truth and is in fact the doctor though... well, let me think on this a bit. You've convinced me not to try hammer today till I see other people's reactions at least, so good job(?)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Rarity, who else do you think is scum? I was thinking you up until Lumpen's claim. Assuming that's true, I also feel good about Exakt being town in which case I'd say WM > Pope > Gamer
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
There will be no counterclaim. Keep thinking it through and weighing the possibilities, though. It's always good to see engagement and the thought process posted in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Rarity posted:I was thinking you up until Lumpen's claim. Assuming that's true, I also feel good about Exakt being town in which case I'd say WM > Pope > Gamer EXAKT was the clearest person in the thread to have a reason to target fiery_valk at night. fiery voted him and actively sought opinions on him to push for his lynch, nobody else voted him. Rarity and wall monitor are other top possibilities to push for Nightkilling f_v, but I'm pretty convinced wall monitor is Town. Rarity's got a very low postcount suspicious posting and voting interaction around EXAKT. Gamerofthegame's reaction to my claim actually seems a bit newbie-Townish... However he has several super Scummy posts, and also a very wishy-washy read offered on EXAKT D1. Gamerofthegame posted:Reading over his poo poo, he doesn't really strike me as anything one way or the other. He's poking at posts D1 to see how people react, which could either be scum-hunting townie or bandwagon-leading scum. I'm ambivalent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:How do you get to EXAKT being Town from my claim? Oh that part wasn't based on your claim, I think Exakt is town regardless of that. I didn't word it very clearly, sorry about that. I disagree that Exakt would be the most obvious scum candidate because of that motive, there are so many reasons scum NK people that such a reading is very narrow-minded.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Lumpen, are you always this abrasive when you play mafia? I was away from a computer for most of yesterday and so haven't gotten a chance to do much more than skim, but I'll post some content in a bit once I've reread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:That absolutely clears myself and fiery_call as Town, and I'm pretty confident from his posting that wall monitor is Town too, since Scum have certainly known what I was hinting at from my first "hand tipping" post when I thought I was -1 (that I'm doc, and they know who they tried to kill). Gabriel is pretty clear too I think. I really don't like this post. It seems very premature to declare yourself and valk cleared. The timing smells of desperation play, and I don't like Lumpen's continuing fixation on Gamerofthegame. On the other hand... wall monitor posted:If Lumpen is telling the truth and is in fact the doctor though... well, let me think on this a bit. You've convinced me not to try hammer today till I see other people's reactions at least, so good job(?) EXAKT was one of our leading lynch candidates at the end of D1 and has not exactly covered himself with glory so far D2. Even before the claim I would already have been satisfied with an EXAKT lynch today (although Rarity is quickly rocketing to the top of the scummiest players list) and now lynching EXAKT also gives us an opportunity to test Lumpen's claim. If he's lying, we've only lynched someone we might have wound up lynching anyhow and we'll have confirmed Lumpen is scum. If he's telling the truth, we'll have nailed scum and confirmed a doctor. I don't want to lynch EXAKT just yet, though. I'm pretty confident in the prospect of lynching EXAKT to test Lumpen's claim, but there are three possible pitfalls: 1) Lumpen is the doctor, but misinterpeted the nightkill. We lynch EXAKT, get a townie flip, and have to either trust Lumpen at his word (yeah right) or lynch a doctor. 2) Lumpen is scum... and so is EXAKT. They knew they were two of the leading scum candidates and now Lumpen is hard bussing so that at least one of them can survive unscathed. 3) Lumpen is scum and has reason to suspect EXAKT is a power role or is otherwise somehow dangerous to scumteam. Lumpen knows he's going down so he sacrifices himself in order to take out EXAKT or at least draw out a counterclaim. There's a fourth possibility we may be led astray here, if Lumpen is town and fakeclaiming to avoid being lynched, but from what I've seen of Lumpen I think we can rule that one out. Nothing about Lumpen/EXAKT's posting makes me suspect scumbuddies, so we can probably set aside #2. #3... If Lumpen was scum, and somehow suspected EXAKT was the doc, this claim would be a brilliant move. That could be where he was trying to lead people with his thought experiment yesterday. That seems farfetched, though. Which mostly leaves #1, EXAKT is random town and scumteam targetted valk for unrelated reasons. This... is possible, although overall I'm comfortable with lynching EXAKT. I already thought EXAKT was a better scum candidate than Lumpen, so this doesn't even change anything. Still, I think we should wait for EXAKT. I also feel remiss pushing for a lynch before Somberbrero says anything for D2--my case on him has coolled a bit but there could still be something up there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:If he's lying, we've only lynched someone we might have wound up lynching anyhow and we'll have confirmed Lumpen is scum. If he's telling the truth, we'll have nailed scum and confirmed a doctor. I know you've already pointed out the potential flaws in this plan yourself but I wanted to reiterate how totally nuts making these assumptions is. Have you played much mafia before?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Exact, why is certainty scummy? Because certainty implies some sort of information. Especially this early in the game, the only ones with information are the scums.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Check votefinder Rarity. The newbie conspiracy posts are highly amusing 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
EXAKT Science posted:Because certainty implies some sort of information. Especially this early in the game, the only ones with information are the scums. Ok, so what is your opinion on Lumpen now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Rarity posted:I know you've already pointed out the potential flaws in this plan yourself but I wanted to reiterate how totally nuts making these assumptions is. Have you played much mafia before? No, and if Lumpen had fingered someone more reputable I would not be advancing the idea of lynching them to test a scummy doc claim.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:No, and if Lumpen had fingered someone more reputable I would not be advancing the idea of lynching them to test a scummy doc claim. Unless someone counter claims it's not a scummy claim.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Well, in the absence of a counterclaim, I'm inclined to believe him. I don't see any reasonable rationale for a fakeclaim d2 when he isn't immediately under the hammer, unless he's pulling an insane scumgambit (unlikely, imo). So, I do think Lumpy is town, but I don't really like how much he seems to be reading into the nightkill, which tends to be a dangerous practice in my experience. ##unvote That said, the posts from the newbies look super weird to me. Both Pope and WM have some off the wall conspiracy theories going on: Gabriel Pope posted:I really don't like this post. It seems very premature to declare yourself and valk cleared. The timing smells of desperation play, and I don't like Lumpen's continuing fixation on Gamerofthegame. wall monitor posted:Okay, This is also ridiculous. I'd vote either of these two.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
Can you explain why you think those posts make them scum?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Because they're trying to cast doubt on an unCC'd doctor, and going about it by way of arguments that are crazier than pretty much anything I've seen in any mafia games I've played. It's like they've never heard of Occam's Razor and are just trying to complicate the discussion to distract from scumhunting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:Unless someone counter claims it's not a scummy claim. It's smells fishy enough that I wouldn't stake a vote on Lumpens hypothesis if it wasn't someone I'd already been leaning towards voting for. It's not "scummy"in the sense that it implicates Lumpen as scum, though. EXAKT Science posted:I don't like the reasoning here at all. He'd apparently be comfortable cuddling me, but isn't willing to rule out the possibility of a ~crazy scum gambit~ from Lumpy. All in all, this post is a whole lot of words that aren't saying very much, and look fake to me. I apologize, I know it's a really sloppy post. I've been away from my computer all day and my fiancee needs the computer tonight. Phoneposting sucks and it's hard to look things up when you need to. I don't really believe in any ~crazy scum gambit~ theories, I just think it's premature to lynch you on Lumpen's say-so. I think we should have a measured, reasoned debate and then lynch you, because I think a strong case for lynching you can be made independently of Lumpen's claim. Confirming a doctor claim is just the cherry on top. (It's possible that another, even stronger candidate could emerge, and Rarity seems to be doing their best to jump in front of the grenade for you, but the next scummiest player after you was Lumpen and even if his claim seems dubious an uncontested doc claim is not on the table for lynching.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:I really don't like this post. It seems very premature to declare yourself and valk cleared. I protected fiery_valkyrie. Nobody died. Therefore you can reasonably conclude that the Scum targeted fiery_valkyrie. Therefore you can also reasonably conclude that fiery_valkyrie is Town. Knowing that fiery_valkyrie is Town, you may then examine the question of who would most likely choose fiery_valkyrie to kill. Since as far as I can see she did not appear to give any hint of being a power role, it's likely that she was targeted because she was a threat to someone. Who was f_v pushing and pressuring yesterday? EXAKT and Rarity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:I am the Doctor. There is no counterclaim. Of course there was no counterclaim at the time you made your claim. That said, yeah, outside of WM's scenario I guess a scum player would know that they couldn't safely fakeclaim doc after N1. And everybody bar Somb has seen and responded to your claim now anyhow. So yeah, I guess the claim can be taken as settled now.That still does not prove EXAKT is scum based on your protect. It is likely, and I assume we are lynching EXAKT anyhow, but I'm not voting to end the day early based on it. As Rarity said, there are other reasons scumteam might have targeted valk. Although the fact that Rarity specifically has made that argument makes me suspect you actually are onto something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
If turns out to be right I will laugh and laugh and laugh That said, realistically I still think Lumpen is scum
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
EXAKT Science posted:Lumpen, are you always this abrasive when you play mafia?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Lumpen posted:Yes, and please don't take it personally. Don't worry, we cool
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
I've been trying to think about the mindset I would have if I was a fairly new player to mafia. Gamer, WM and Gabe were all suspicious of Lumpen today before his claim. They also all seem a bit tunnelly and conspiracy focused, both of which I think are common reactions for newbies (or at least I know that's how I used to be when I started playing). The reaction of Gamer and WM is to immediately not believe Lumpen's claim. I'm not sure I can believe that a newbie scum player, who would know that Lumpen has no reason to lie, would continue to pursue what is clearly about to become a very bad case. Gabe on the other hand posts this: Gabriel Pope posted:I really don't like this post. It seems very premature to declare yourself and valk cleared. The timing smells of desperation play, and I don't like Lumpen's continuing fixation on Gamerofthegame. Gabe seems to both believe and disbelieve the claim. I think a scum player would be concerned about ending up on the vote of a town power role and would be more likely to back off after a claim. I'm not 100% convinced that this post means anything, but I think if Exact flipped town that this post makes Gabe very scummy in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 11:11
|
|
|
I still want to lynch Exact or Rarity most though. ##vote exact
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
Good morning, game! If you not inclined to vote EXAKT today, let's talk it over. EXAKT, mount your defense! What say you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
Votecount for Day 2  EXAKT Science (2): Lumpen, fiery_valkyrie Lumpen (1): EXAKT Science, Gamerofthegame, wall monitor, Not Voting (5): EXAKT Science, Gabriel Pope, Rarity, Somberbrero, wall monitorWith 8 alive, it's 5 votes to lynch. The current deadline is February 10th, 2015 at 10 a.m. GMT -- that's in about 19 hours, 38 minutes. Tonight's the deadline! (Well, 5am EST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
Sorry, I don't really play mafia on the weekends. Exakt seems like a fine vote to me. I could also go for Gabe. I'm going to read through today again and see where I stand.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:I still want to lynch Exact or Rarity most though. Do you think there's any reason to lynch Rarity over EXACT? I'm suspicious of Rarity but that largely rests on how buddy-buddy Rarity and EXACT have been. Other people have picked up on how Rarity seems to have softballed the Somberbrero vote on to EXACT; they've also been pushing WM together, a case that no one else is seriously pursuing, and seem pretty confident in each other's towniness despite everyone else's suspicions. I'm not seeing much that's outright scummy from Rarity other than a possible scumbuddy tie to EXAKT.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
Oh, right. ##unvote Guess Lumpen isn't scum, just the scummiest townie. Whatev. I'll most likely jump on the bandwagon if I don't get time to review everything today, been pretty busy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
I super don't care for the post right above mine, but I agree with Lumpen that Exakt makes the most sense. Exakt's response so far hasn't been terrible, but unfortunately I think it's important that Exakt attacked both Wall Monitor and Pope instead of just Pope. Monitor's post was nuts, but it makes sense from a town perspective. The way Gabriel expresses the same idea is much scummier. Wall Monitor is clear, concise, and open. Gabriel's post is full of obfuscation and hedging. My call would be Exakt, Gabriel, and then maybe Gamer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:Do you think there's any reason to lynch Rarity over EXACT? I'm suspicious of Rarity but that largely rests on how buddy-buddy Rarity and EXACT have been. Other people have picked up on how Rarity seems to have softballed the Somberbrero vote on to EXACT; they've also been pushing WM together, a case that no one else is seriously pursuing, and seem pretty confident in each other's towniness despite everyone else's suspicions. I'm not seeing much that's outright scummy from Rarity other than a possible scumbuddy tie to EXAKT. If you don't want to lynch Rarity over Exact then why are you asking this question?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2015 21:11
|
|