Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
charms
Oct 14, 2012




Sign me up for the conquest of Europe

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

charms
Oct 14, 2012




IllegallySober posted:

Welcome to the Council of Nations.

I have identified the entirety of the scum team:

-CPig
- xiw
-Eat the Rich
-RF

You’re welcome.

##vote CPig

Very cool, thank you!

charms
Oct 14, 2012




IllegallySober posted:

I would like to hear more from charms, AA, and Humalong please.

Sorry for lurking, I can't keep up with the D1 mind games. Mr. Steak gave us something concrete, lie or not, but everyone's shut up about it at this point.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




IllegallySober posted:

What do you think about that interaction between Lumpen and Steak? Do either look more towny or scummy to you following that exchange?

I think Lumpen is trying to throw people off until one of them panics. It's annoying but it gives us info. I'm suspicious that Steak is lying about the extent of his power, but depending on what he's covering up it could be for town reasons. If he actually could double stack votes, that allows a double hammer - better not to reveal that until we know we can get at least one scum.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




IllegallySober posted:

I would agree with your assessment of Lumpen’s style. I’m not sure I read Steak the same as you do right now. Steak has claimed essentially their entire role minus their own country. That would be a bold play to open the day as scum.

I see this appears to be your first game in Votefinder. Are you a rereg, or are you new?

This is my first game of Mafia on SA, but I'm familiar with the game. I've played it online as a browser game with matchmaking where you knew the distribution of roles beforehand (forgot what it was called, it was a while ago).

charms
Oct 14, 2012




That power really does suck. My condolences.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




There might be something going on with the Content Game vs. Joke Phase factionalism. This post is suspicious:

Hal Incandenza posted:

Put me on the “vig Sal” team, he’s twitching my feelers

I would give the vig to... b-, I trust that guy

It looks like you're showing up from out of nowhere to declare your allegiance to the Content Gamers by participating in the game and then hypothetically shooting a known Joke Phaser for arbitrary reasons.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Hal's at the top of my list for ignoring my callout and not posting anything substantial, and for the reasons I posted the callout in the first place. RF for trying to turn a bunch of experimental votes into a bandwagon. Nobody else on the same level as these two.

##vote Hal Incandeza

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Lumpen posted:

I note that you chose to put a lone vote on Hal, rather than a third vote on RF, although you said you suspect both. Would you talk a little about your thought process behind that choice? Would you consider switching yur vote to your other top suspect to help get closer to an actual viable majority for a weekend deadline?

It's because I have more reasons to suspect Hal than RF, and ideally I'd like to coax some answers out of them before switching.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Hal's left the browser list :negative:

I'm still pushing Hal but nobody else is admitting any suspicion of them and my gambit is being no-sold. If I'm just wasting my vote...

##unvote
##vote Retro Futurist

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Hal Incandenza posted:

is there something wrong with being pro-content gamer and anti-sal?

Specifically it was the way you did it. You suspected the same person that everyone else who took the Content Game seriously did, but gave as little explanation as possible. It's like you were trying to subtly slide yourself into that "faction".

charms
Oct 14, 2012




The scum could exploit a rift like that by splitting their goons between both sides. Being associated with one of the sides would be read as more scummy further into the game, which takes some heat off the scum on the other side.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




2 penny bottle imp posted:

Alright gonna throw this out there - I am a survivor. my flavour is 'pirates'. I hinted this earliwr when I said I got a Destiny's Chikd song (im a survivor) off napster (pirates). On death, I revenge kill someone who votes me. I have no target country to gain power, meaning the revenge kill is just pure dickishness. Pretty funny.

I will happily push to win with town.

I would prefer to make it to the end and win myself. As is, I will go down in flames with someone near and dear to my heart...

If you don't have a target, then what triggers your powerup?

charms
Oct 14, 2012




2 penny bottle imp posted:

i dont have a target. no chance of powerup. and my country title is just pirates. i assume no one has me as a target but i dont really know for sure.

I'm going to take Amnistar's word over yours. I don't know if it would violate the rules to quote this directly, but this was covered in the pre-game channel announcement. It's given that everyone has a power upgrade.

##vote 2 penny bottle imp

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Leith Maclaine posted:

Charms is right,

OP does say each player represents a county and has a power up condition.

Pirates are a country in EUIV, though (if you pay $14.99 for the right DLC)

charms
Oct 14, 2012




hambeet posted:

it’s lucky that not a single one of steaks three votes were on Penny the flipped scum with a revenge ability.

Yes, because if Mr. Steak is town then he would've had a chance at getting shot by 2PBI

charms
Oct 14, 2012




xiw posted:

makes me think the scumteam are inexperienced or inactive otherwise they would have called these out.

so I'm going to ##vote charms

You didn't see me catching them contradicting the premise of the game just before the hammer?

charms
Oct 14, 2012




I don't like any of the votes going on right now. Mine for obvious reasons, b-1's for being the first one on that lynch, and Sal's and ETR's because it seemed liked things were sluggish enough that if they were scum they could've gotten away with not voting and preventing the lynch that way. The last two are assuming that just a plurality vote wasn't enough to lynch, if it was then someone please clear that up.

My main read is on RetroFuturist, for still trying to make b-1 happen even after 2PBI's flip - b-1 should've gone down a few pegs on everyone's list after that. I'm suspicious about Lumpen for the same reasons, but him being apparently jailed makes that less likely from a purely probabilistic standpoint. Them both being scum would elegantly explain their actions on D1 - getting into a fake rumble over the Content Gamer vs. Joke Phaser puppet show before coalescing to vote against b-1.

This could always be a misread, but as said I don't like any of the votes right now and if I know if I want to change that I have to bring up an alternative sooner rather than later, or you pitiless jackals will just mock me again.

##vote RetroFuturist

charms
Oct 14, 2012




SalTheBard posted:

##vote Lumpen

Or this

I need to write faster.

##vote Lumpen

charms
Oct 14, 2012




hambeet posted:

what? why? i don't get how you write up a case on retro, then switch to lumpen?

what changed here outside of you quoting sal and apparently just copying them?

I didn't see Sal's vote until after I posted that diatribe. Since my case for Lumpen is virtually the same as my case for RF, after I saw Sal's post I thought it made more sense to double up on Lumpen rather than solovote again.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




As said, I don't like either of these finalists, I don't really get what's driving them. But if I had to pick one it would be ETR, since Sal was latest on the D1 hammer and had the most control over whether or not 2PBI would get it, Sal claimed Jailer but we don't know what ETR is, and this:

Eat The Rich posted:

Since I'm at -4 and we have an hour left, I'd be willing to take the cuddle. I'm not scum but it might be a net gain for town.

Eat The Rich posted:

I wouldnt surprised if everyone voting for me right now was scum

##vote Eat The Rich

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Mr. Steak posted:

for two, if the cpig vig targeted someone besides the 3 i guarded, they could counter my claim, with 0 risk because they dont even have the vig anymore.

I'm having trouble with this one. If CapitalistPig gave the vig to someone, and that got ironically turned around on them... what exactly does that give the shooter on you?

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Mr. Humalong posted:

That explains my action failing on beet

Someone else's action would have failed, too. But he forgot to mention it.

##vote Mr. Steak

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Retro Futurist posted:

Not necessarily. Some jailers will cause all actions to fail on the target, some will only cause kills to fail.

Okay. So which kind is Sal then?

Retro Futurist posted:

My action failed but I also targeted lumpen so I’m guessing he got jailed.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Mr. Steak posted:

hmmmm, humalong is the one who was jailed. not hambeet. its apparently really easy to coast by putting a vote on me for whatever drat reason

Sorry, got them mixed up.

##unvote

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Mr. Steak posted:

listen, i didn't get a message "your action was successful" OR "your action was unsuccessful" all i was told is two of my votes are gone. my guard on lumpen may very well have failed and the triggered ones were the other 2

Nobody's brain is working today. Lumpen was jailed N1, Humalong was jailed N2.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Lumpen posted:

Day3 LumpenList
...

If you're considering both of them to be scum, it'd make more sense as a townie to stay on SalTheBard instead of switching to Mr. Steak. If you're right and Sal flipped scum, it would pretty much confirm the jail targets on N1 and N2, as well as cast a ton of light on the D2 lynch, and deprive the Allies of a power role. Mr. Steak's power is useless now (unless there is someone who really needs to not die tonight), but that goes both ways, and I'm not sure what information we'd gain from a Steak scum flip but it probably wouldn't be as decisive as in Sal's case.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Here, let me get the ball rolling for you.

##vote SalTheBard

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Lumpen posted:

I’d be happy to vote any of my top suspects. Sal should have been voted out D2 and would have been I think if ETR didn’t modkill himself. The push on ETR to save Sal was terrible and there was never a case on him.

Charms, you’re talking about “Steak’s power” like you believe he’s telling the truth (which would suggest you think he’s Town), but then also talking about “information we’d gain from a Steak scum flip”. I find that... odd.
If he’s Secret Alliance then we have no idea about what his upgrade actually did or can still do. Maybe he can stack 3 votes on one person now if he wants to. He has refused to demonstrate that his extra votes don’t work. Maybe his extravotes D2 became 1-shot Poisons and hambeet and I will die tonight, and the talk about “extra kills prevented” is a smokescreen for the upcoming Poison deaths.

Unless you know something about Steak that I don’t...

So Charms, please answer the 2 Questions about Steak for the record while you’re around, and a full List from you would be awesome to see where you stand .

I think Mr. Steak's claim is plausible. If he flipped scum but was also 100% telling the truth about his ability, it'd be much less valuable than if we lynched Sal and he turned up scum, but if Mr. Steak was lying than what we'd learn would depend on whatever his power actually is. I was guessing it'd be less because he wasn't the subject of a contentious vote. That's what I was trying to get at.

But you do have a point about him refusing to demonstrate his power today, but he thinks that will get him modkilled. Is it against the rules or spirit of the game to try and force someone to do that?

charms
Oct 14, 2012




I have an idea.

Mr. Steak posted:

here:

##vote 2penny
##vote leith
##vote sal

Couldn't he go back to using this syntax to confirm? Using the command extravote should get him modkilled if he's telling the truth and no longer has extravotes, but this should just resolve to a vote on sal now, in light of this:

Mr. Steak posted:

lets clear this up now.

##vote charms
##extravote 1 RF
##extravote1 charms
##extravote2 RF
##extravote2 charms

we will soon see firsthand if my votes can stack. if my 2 extravotes resolve on charms, we know i can stack. once they resolve on RF, it'll be confirmed that they cannot stack.

And we all know he wasn't smote for pretending to have extra extravotes.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Lumpen posted:

This makes no sense to me at all. Sal claimed Jailer and his targets (me N1 and Humalong N2) have been corroborated (by me and RF for N1 and by Humalong N2) so flipping him Secret Alliance Jailer wouldn't give much info at all. Finding out what Steak's power really was would be much more valuable. You are defending Steak out of proportion with the evidence, I note.

I mean it'd give info about their alignments, not what actually happened. Unless there's some really good meta strategy involving locking up your fellow conspirators at the start of the game.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




My action failed too.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Hal Incandenza posted:

I mean Sal claimed Uber jail to me and said he was considering using it last night. Multiple people come into thread claiming failed actions and I mention sals Uber jail. Sal comes into thread and immediately votes xiw because he jailed xiw and there was no night kill. Conclusion... Sal is scum who is already drunk for the super bowl

If they jailed everyone, that implies they jailed xiw? That's the most charitable way to interpret what Sal's saying.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




My target was Leith Maclaine, twice, both successes. Third was Humalong.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




xiw posted:

Imagine being cpig here you've given hambeet a gun and received it back. That's super weird, you got redirected. It'd be useful for everyone to know that! So instead he posts about Byzantium.

That would make sense, though. He had a nightkill, he just needed someone to use it on.

Flushing out Byzantium by lying about his role seems like a bad move whether he had the nightkill or not, but that's what he was doing, so I don't think it's right to assume optimal gameplay from CapitalistPig.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Let's say that CapitalistPig got his own vig returned to him by hambeet's ability. He tries to out his upgrade target, but that goes nowhere, so he has to come up with someone. Unless there were four or more kills in play, or the magic of Role Madness caused him to target himself twice in a row, he would have had to go after either Mr. Steak or one of his charges...

CapitalistPig posted:

I would vig lumpen and hand my friend hambeet the vig

This theory is convoluted, and I think the "Allies got the first vig" scenario is more likely. But it all fits.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




The best reason I can think of for scum doing the mass roleblock is if they wanted to stop the last CPig vig from happening. It goes with either theory about what happened to vig - either they got the first but not the second, or they just learned about it with the CPig flip and wanted to shut it down. Because of Sal's claimed ability, that puts them in the spotlight. If Sal's scum and gets lynched, it'd ruin the entire point of that move to stop an ally from being killed and would actually leave the secret alliance in a worse position than if they didn't do the omni block. So a Sal lynch is not an option for me today.

I'd be okay with doing b-1, going all in on hambeet even before xiw (the one who actually laid out the case) even cast a vote was weird. They were the first vote on 2PBI, but if the Allies had to choose one of their own to risk being lynched it'd probably be the guy whose ability only triggers in that event. I'm not sure what to think of Leith, but they were both pushing 2PBI early on, which would be really risky if they were both scum. So if one flips scum, the other shouldn't.

charms
Oct 14, 2012




Retro Futurist posted:

Except again, we know we had 3 kill attempts N2. So how do you guys reconcile that with this track? Scum would have to know the vig was still out, but not have it themselves. How does any of that work with Pig dead and 2 kill attempts according to flipped town Steak?

I don't understand your point. The Alliance would either learn about the vigs on either D1 or N2 if they received it on N1, or D3 when CapitalistPig flipped and we all learned what his ability was. When they would know if they didn't have the second vig depending on how the ability works - if the recipient learns about the vig when they receive it, the Secret Alliance would know whether they have it or not at the end of N2. Otherwise, they'd be able to deduce that none of them have the vig at the end of D3, whether they know how the notification works or not. The fact there was a third kill is important, but I don't see how it specifically contradicts this. Am I missing anything?

charms
Oct 14, 2012




My target was CapitalistPig.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

charms
Oct 14, 2012




b-minus1 and Leith are not on the same side, so I think we should get one of them. But b-1 is more suspicious, and has a less useful ability as I understand it.

##vote b-minus1

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply