not much 2 say yet. hard for me 2 post much except on weekends.
asianinvasion, is that your only win con? what happens if zionite dies, do you just leave the game? seems strange.
i did a trade too. i think its good. even if its a scum, they are giving u true information back! big risk for them. i am suspicious of anti-trading people.
My win condition is not fixed. My survival is not dependent on Zionite's survival.
AI claimed neutral. I don't reaaally buy it but while we all play along with the claim I'm not seeing where this fishing talk is coming from. The question of whether he disappears is valid, unless you think he would be stuck in the game without a win con. Why would we want that hidden, exactly? Would the STOP FISHING party care to explain?
I don't see the immediate 'AI is neutral' conclusion. I've seen roles before where one townie required another to survive in order to win. Multiple times, in fact. And frankly, so as RafK.
He should know better than to do what he's doing here. Vote RafK
I'll decline to elaborate on my alignment for now.
I'm undecided as to whether RafaelK's response is scummy, though if Cyan's correct then something's amiss here.
I'm going to ask Guardman to clarify my win con, as it's a bit ambiguous a la my role in Heroes Mafia.
I think that's rather important. If Zionite later comes under heavy suspicion, I would be much more leery about lynching him if I knew doing so would cause AI to be upset with the town for making him lose and willing to work with the scum, rather than just make him disappear. He could essentially say "Ha-Ha, I'm helping the scum now, and if you want to stop me, you'll have to waste a lynch on it."
"Unless Zionite dying causes him to switch sides. Then we would need to lynch him regardless. Although, if it is something like that, I would reckon there is a flavourful reason he would want a specific person to live."
"He never said he would die if Zionite died. Just that his wincon was that Zionite had to live."
No, Gigas did in his post.
Specifically:
Quote from Gigas1 »
if I knew doing so would cause AI to be upset with the town for making him lose and willing to work with the scum, rather than just make him disappear.
Where did AI claim neutral exactly? I reread and I totally didn't see that. I expect an answer to this in your next post.
You expect do you?
He claimed a win condition that is not town or scum. That is the very definition of a neutral in mafia.
Quote from Lost Profit »
By the same token, the mafia would want to know whether they can get a 2 for 1 by killing Zionite.
It's not a 2 for 1 if AI is not town. If AI is being legit here (which I still doubt, but for the sake of argument) then he will happily vote with the mafia at LYLO as long as Zionite stays alive.
Quote from Cyan »
don't see the immediate 'AI is neutral' conclusion. I've seen roles before where one townie required another to survive in order to win. Multiple times, in fact. And frankly, so as RafK.
He purported to QUOTE his win condition. He gave no indication he only quoted part of it. If he wants to say "oh by the way, I also have the town win condition too", then he's free to do that, but he hasn't done that so far and I don't see why you would naturally assume that's the case.
It's not a 2 for 1 if AI is not town. If AI is being legit here (which I still doubt, but for the sake of argument) then he will happily vote with the mafia at LYLO as long as Zionite stays alive.
It is a 2 for 1 as long as he is not mafia. If it is LYLO, then the mafia could have killed Zionite instead of their other target to win the game already.
I don't see why you would naturally assume that is NOT the case, RafK, when such roles in the past have always been town.
Always, eh?
I actually can't remember the last time I saw someone with a win condition that required a second player to survive, so it can't be much of an always. It comes up occasionally with "lovers" type roles, and I can't remember the last time I saw that either. Was there one in A Song of Ice and Fire? It's rare, anyway (and now I've said that, Cyan will probably produce 5 examples from the last year or something....)
Survivor roles are of course much more common, but those are usually neutral. Townies with "you must survive" as an additional win con do happen though.
Regardless, as I said, AI purported to QUOTE his win con. I assumed that was all of his win con, at least his CLAIMED win con. He didn't claim anything else. If he wanted to claim town as well he could do so. But he hasn't. Draw your own conclusions, I've drawn mine: he's trying to draw reactions by being mysterious. BUT if he's not, then he's obviously non-town.
I'm trying to see what I'm actually being accused of doing here, Cyan. Am I being accused of some evil scum advantage here by assuming he claimed neutral when he's right here to say "no I'm actually town" if I have assumed wrong?
I'm trying to see what I'm actually being accused of doing here, Cyan. Am I being accused of some evil scum advantage here by assuming he claimed neutral when he's right here to say "no I'm actually town" if I have assumed wrong?
Without giving away too much, my win condition has enough variance that under certain circumstances, I will win with the town. At the moment, I will win so long as Zionite is alive, but this is unlikely to be my final win con.
The question I asked Guardman is whether I'll win if Zionite is non-scum and scum control the lynch. Apparently, I will.
He claimed a win condition that is not town or scum. That is the very definition of a neutral in mafia.
Yes, I expect people to answer questions that might lead to me voting them.
You elaborate later that we might not know his whole win condition (AI confirms this), and that you were basing your "AI is neutral" idea off of the idea that it was. This is a good enough explanation that I don't want to pursue the case any further.
That being said, certain parts of your posts are coming off sounding forced to me already. It's only suspicion right now, but fyi IGMEOY.
@ Asian Invasion- You dropped one hell of a bombshell on us asked us to discuss and when we need more information as to know what to do you clam up, now I'm not going to fish for information however...
Why should we help you? Are you going to help the town?Why should we believe you?
@ Asian Invasion- You dropped one hell of a bombshell on us asked us to discuss and when we need more information as to know what to do you clam up, now I'm not going to fish for information however...
Why should we help you? Are you going to help the town?Why should we believe you?
I told you everything you need to know for now. If I feel a need to present more information, I will do so.
I really don't care if I get lynched, vigged, NK'd, etc. so long as Zionite lives to endgame. I'll help the town if doing so advances my win condition.
@ Asian Invasion- You dropped one hell of a bombshell on us asked us to discuss and when we need more information as to know what to do you clam up, now I'm not going to fish for information however...
Except that, in that situation, it would not be a wasted lynch as he would be an anti-town neutral.
While true, a scum lynch would be more profitable to the town, and given that this is a mini, at LyoL the odds of hitting scum on any given lynch should be pretty good.
Except that, in that situation, it would not be a wasted lynch as he would be an anti-town neutral. This is what worries me about AIs claim. How are we to know if it does change?
You won't, but I will. If I decide to share, I will.
Except that, in that situation, it would not be a wasted lynch as he would be an anti-town neutral. Maybe I'm missing something, but why wouldn't you?
In most games, the flavor of the game has the scum kill the remaining town at the end, hence my concern. Guardman informs me that I'd win before the sweet, sweet slaughter at the end. (My words, not his.)
EBWoP: I suppose I should make myself plain.
If I think Zionite is town then I will gladly help the town.
If I think Zionite is scum then I will either help the scum (mafia or cult according to the OP) or try to change my win con.
Hopefully class isn't a revelation of your power level, since I shared that one with both people(honestly, I am STILL having trouble making much sense of the my role PM, despite having read it multiple times).
I'm not sure what else it could be. Based on what my class is, it's certainly not class as in 'Economics' or 'Freaks 101'.
@Calvin: The advantage of sharing information is the same advantage a mason pair has over the rest of the town. It's not clear what this advantage is called, but it's there.
The same advantage as an unconfirmed mason pair, yes. And normally, unconfirmed masons don't go spilling their guts to one another on N0 with no good reason.
Probably yeah. More of those people will be townies than scum, though, by weight of numbers.
There's also a potential upside. I could be a townie who needs that information to do good stuff. A random player is around 3 times as likely to be town as scum (slightly less, to account for neutrals, but close enough). That's why it is bad to blind-vig on night 0s but good to blind-motivate and to blind-protect.
I'd disagree with blind-motivating N0, but I see your point.
I think it would be pretty silly not to make the attempt. It's a good reactions test, and the likelihood of accidentally giving away to a scum the exact innocuous information they need is vanishingly small.
We don't actually know what the chance of giving them the info they need is, though. If you're doing it for reactions than you're right, the upsides probably outweigh the potential bad. It seems that you're the only one that passed for reactions though.
Everything in mafia is chancy. The odds on this are better than most.
OK.
I hadn't picked that up, so if it's correct, thanks for sharing (I dunno if in that case "power level" has any bearing on game ability power, but not exactly a topic to dwell on in public). Would you have accepted trade if I'd only asked for your Group Affiliation?
Despite what I said in my previous post, I probably wouldn't have resisted the shiny. On the other hand, I didn't offer to trade any dossiers with anyone.
Yeah, this too. That's why I suggested ya might have something to hide, Calvin
That assumes that scum would need to hide their info. In a game based off of sharing info with everyone and quoting PMs, I doubt that the scum would necessarily be implicated off of role info.
"Class could be type rather than power level. Using Dire Bere here, class S could be reality-altering abilities."
Interesting theory, though I can't see any clear correlation between class and 'type'. On the other hand, seeing Dire have a class of 'S' makes my own theory a little weird.
I don't see the immediate 'AI is neutral' conclusion. I've seen roles before where one townie required another to survive in order to win. Multiple times, in fact. And frankly, so as RafK.
He should know better than to do what he's doing here. Vote RafK
Given the way AI went about this whole thing, 'neutral' was the first thing that came to my mind as well.
Besides, I'm not sure how this assumption makes RafK scum.
Same question as to Cyan: How does this make RafK scum?
@AI: Why would you come forward with your info? We don't know if Zionite is scum or not and are not going to just blindly keep him alive because you say you need that to win. So it didn't accomplish anything. Even worse, if Zionite is town you just increased the likelihood of him being killed by the mafia - it would be a 2-1 for them (assuming you leave the game when Zionite dies, which is a pretty fair assumption).
So given what you've claimed, it really makes no sense for you to have claimed. I'm wondering if you are actually a hitman or something like that and need Zionite dead and are banking on Zionite being town and have the mafia kill him.
This is a question addressed to the player known as Zionite:
If, as you made so clearly obvious, your vote on pg was not a random vote, what was the reasoning for the aforementioned vote?
P.S. These games where you do an action that invites a question and then pretty much ignore the question are pointless and a waste of everyone's time.
You never asked a question regarding the reasoning for my vote, so I never gave you reasoning.
Now that you have asked, I will choose to answer.
I will answer.
Early game he's very focused on finding out as much about other roles as he can. He asks AI several questions which may or may not have town consequences. He then says we need to "seriously open up dialog" on our dossiers, and as previously stated I have game info that says dossier info can be used against you. He claims he doubts AI's claim and says AI is running a scum gambit. If poggy actually believed this his vote should be on AI by this point. His last post casts further doubt on AI with a barrage of worthless questions asking for worthless answers that wouldn't tell us anything.
You never asked a question regarding the reasoning for my vote, so I never gave you reasoning.
Now that you have asked, I will choose to answer.
I will answer.
Early game he's very focused on finding out as much about other roles as he can. He asks AI several questions which may or may not have town consequences. He then says we need to "seriously open up dialog" on our dossiers, and as previously stated I have game info that says dossier info can be used against you. He claims he doubts AI's claim and says AI is running a scum gambit. If poggy actually believed this his vote should be on AI by this point. His last post casts further doubt on AI with a barrage of worthless questions asking for worthless answers that wouldn't tell us anything.
tl;dr: For page 3, this is a good start.
Just for future reference always give a reason for a nonrandom vote, not doing so is pretty awful.
With that said, i will hopefully have a nice, long, content filled post for you guys in the next 24 hours...I JUST GOT SUPER MEAT BOY AND THAT GAME IS FREAKING AMAZING.
"I would also like to add weight to Zionite's point of Dossier info able to be used against one's self." Clasp my hands behind my head, "Since Win Condition is technically part of the dossier, if we really wanted to find out, everyone, or a good chunk of people, could request to exchange a bit of info for his win condition. Or flat out exchange win conditions. Of course, this requires him to accept, and that we have to hit night phase again."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG: The RPG Character: Zenith RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
"I would also like to add weight to Zionite's point of Dossier info able to be used against one's self." Clasp my hands behind my head, "Since Win Condition is technically part of the dossier, if we really wanted to find out, everyone, or a good chunk of people, could request to exchange a bit of info for his win condition. Or flat out exchange win conditions. Of course, this requires him to accept, and that we have to hit night phase again."
Unless guardman is a filthy liar in his pms we cant trade wincon(I asked him
)
I thought about that but Win Condition isn't on the list of things that can be traded. Would make stuff all too easy really. Everyone pair up, selected at random, trade. Repeat the next night. Game.
I thought about that but Win Condition isn't on the list of things that can be traded. Would make stuff all too easy really. Everyone pair up, selected at random, trade. Repeat the next night. Game.
"The obvious way to mitigate this is, obviously, is a scum that can fake parts of their Dossier. Assuming everyone agrees to this, as its a complete shot in the dark- you will end up people calling each other liars since Scum wouldn't admit publicly after exchanging win cons. Then, you have to take into account wincons worded differently or alternate wincons or changing wincons. This makes exchanging win conditions less of an auto win."
Quote from Reply »
Quote from Question »
Question: EVERYTHING in the pm is part of our data dossier, yes?
Yes everything in your PM is a part of your data dossier.
"Since wincondition is in the role pm, it is part of the data dossier. Seems a reasonable assumption considering the answer I got from my question."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTG: The RPG Character: Zenith RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
So mafia will vote and not give reasons so they can try to get other people to say what they want to say so they never have to stand behind their decisions. You presented yourself as a good player so i thought you'd know this. You can roll your eyes all you want fact of the matter is is that I'm right on this and we both know it.
"I would also like to add weight to Zionite's point of Dossier info able to be used against one's self." Clasp my hands behind my head, "Since Win Condition is technically part of the dossier, if we really wanted to find out, everyone, or a good chunk of people, could request to exchange a bit of info for his win condition. Or flat out exchange win conditions. Of course, this requires him to accept, and that we have to hit night phase again."
As is pointed out in the rules by lack of inclusion, you cannot trade win conditions.
So mafia will vote and not give reasons so they can try to get other people to say what they want to say so they never have to stand behind their decisions. You presented yourself as a good player so i thought you'd know this. You can roll your eyes all you want fact of the matter is is that I'm right on this and we both know it.
There are plenty of times when not giving reasons is a valid strategy. As long as this doesn't happen with every vote, there are no hiding spaces created.
So mafia will vote and not give reasons so they can try to get other people to say what they want to say so they never have to stand behind their decisions. You presented yourself as a good player so i thought you'd know this. You can roll your eyes all you want fact of the matter is is that I'm right on this and we both know it.
So tell me why that would be a good strategy for me on page 4 of this game, as mafia?
There are plenty of times when not giving reasons is a valid strategy. As long as this doesn't happen with every vote, there are no hiding spaces created.
i like this guy
calvin no hard feelings for being an anti-trading person. your explanation is ok with me. but i still reckon that scum will totes have stuff in their pms to give them away
btw i traded with miss manders and she was ok. not in the same clubs as me.
So tell me why that would be a good strategy for me on page 4 of this game, as mafia?
Innocent until proven guilty.
So here' my full take on the whole not giving a reason thing: Scum may do it to try to slip in a vote unnoticed, town by the same token may do it as a misplay...I'm not going to hold it against you atm just don't do it again. Here' why welse it sucks: it slows the game down. If you vote for someone you will be asked to explain yourself(most likely unless no one is paying attention), we will have to wait for your explanation before we can move on, it is just frustrating, and considering you seem to have played before you should know better.
With that said, i want to state that that was in this instance a minor aesthetic point, more important and thought out reasoning should be coming tomorrow.
Same question as to Cyan: How does this make RafK scum?
It would be opportunistic as hell for RafK to automatically go to the neutral thought if he's seen several instances of town having this role in the past. However, if Cyan can't produce examples, it's null.
I'm wondering if you are actually a hitman or something like that and need Zionite dead and are banking on Zionite being town and have the mafia kill him.
This is entirely plausible and would be something I could see AI attempting.
There are plenty of times when not giving reasons is a valid strategy. As long as this doesn't happen with every vote, there are no hiding spaces created.
Indeed.
As annoying as it is, there are plenty of players who, as town, routinely vote without reason to garner reactions.
This type of role hasn't been included tons of times or anything. But I've seen it a few times. I know that it was in Greenwood Affair, and in some mini I was in awhile ago..Code Geass, maybe? I feel like RafK should remember them. His mafia memory is generally better than mine(he regularly refers to events from games that happened before I even started playing here).
I don't think that the examples are particularly necessary though. If you look at the tone of RafK's last post, it comes across extremely poorly. Enough so that I think he is unintentionally giving weight to my vote on him, because he knows I'm right. This is particularly in contrast with games where I thought he was scum and he wasn't..in those cases, he was just completely dismissive. But here, he is treading extremely lightly. Such a difference is very noteworthy.
This type of role hasn't been included tons of times or anything. But I've seen it a few times. I know that it was in Greenwood Affair, and in some mini I was in awhile ago..Code Geass, maybe? I feel like RafK should remember them. His mafia memory is generally better than mine(he regularly refers to events from games that happened before I even started playing here).
I don't think that the examples are particularly necessary though. If you look at the tone of RafK's last post, it comes across extremely poorly. Enough so that I think he is unintentionally giving weight to my vote on him, because he knows I'm right. This is particularly in contrast with games where I thought he was scum and he wasn't..in those cases, he was just completely dismissive. But here, he is treading extremely lightly. Such a difference is very noteworthy.
While it is noteworthy, I don't think it's voteworthy. Is this the only reason for your vote?
It was my random vote. No point keeping it on him if he's getting serious votes.
Ah, I see. Apologies, I thought I remembered it being non-random.
Nevertheless, your wording is bothersome. Most people unvote random votes just because they're random, but you go out of your way to comment on him getting serious votes. Overcompensation, maybe? It's baffling, to say the least.
Nevertheless, your wording is bothersome. Most people unvote random votes just because they're random, but you go out of your way to comment on him getting serious votes. Overcompensation, maybe? It's baffling, to say the least.
I didn't unvote because it was random, I unvoted because it was random and he was getting a few votes.
You never asked a question regarding the reasoning for my vote, so I never gave you reasoning.
Now that you have asked, I will choose to answer.
I will answer.
Early game he's very focused on finding out as much about other roles as he can. He asks AI several questions which may or may not have town consequences. He then says we need to "seriously open up dialog" on our dossiers, and as previously stated I have game info that says dossier info can be used against you. He claims he doubts AI's claim and says AI is running a scum gambit. If poggy actually believed this his vote should be on AI by this point. His last post casts further doubt on AI with a barrage of worthless questions asking for worthless answers that wouldn't tell us anything.
tl;dr: For page 3, this is a good start.
Poggydude: In your big content post please include a response to this. You ignored it in your post after it, which makes me see big warning signs.
so obviously tryin to start somethin'. eyes on you dude.
That's cool, people should be suspicious of everyone at this point anyways. Just fyi though...what I said was meant to be very tongue in cheek haha while still calling you guys out for fishing rather then to try and start something.
This type of role hasn't been included tons of times or anything. But I've seen it a few times. I know that it was in Greenwood Affair, and in some mini I was in awhile ago..Code Geass, maybe? I feel like RafK should remember them. His mafia memory is generally better than mine(he regularly refers to events from games that happened before I even started playing here).
I replaced out of Greenwood extremely early when the jester thing came up, so if the role was there and on a townie I certainly don't remember. Don't remember the Geass one, was I even in that game? I don't think so?
And the Song of Ice and Fire one I vaguely remembered earlier was on a MAFIA member (and was a pain in the ass, the mafia member with that extra win condition had to throw themselves under a bus for a fellow mafia member who was completely busted, since they couldn't win if that person died). So Yeah.
My mafia memory tends to be rather good for my triumphs and moments I was wronged. I wouldn't say it's especially good otherwise.
I don't think that the examples are particularly necessary though.
Says the man who moments ago was trying to hang his hat on there being lots of examples.
If you look at the tone of RafK's last post, it comes across extremely poorly. Enough so that I think he is unintentionally giving weight to my vote on him, because he knows I'm right.
Even for you this is bad. You never said what was scummy about me assuming AI was neutral, other than to say I shouldn't have made that assumption because of lots of examples where that kind of win condition has been paired with the town win condition. Except there isn't lots of examples.
If you couldn't tell from the context of AI quoting his win condition and his general behaviour that he was claiming neutral, OK, fine, whatever. You're not good with nuance. I don't think it's scummy to have not spotted it. I don't see how it could be scummy to have spotted it.
Know you're right? Dude. I was right. You are wrong. Not scummy wrong, just trying-too-hard-to-disagree-with-me wrong.
This is particularly in contrast with games where I thought he was scum and he wasn't..in those cases, he was just completely dismissive.
If I had been any more dismissive of you the first time I daresay you would be talking now about a scummy overreaction. You'll see what you want to see. I know you far too well.
Interesting theory, though I can't see any clear correlation between class and 'type'. On the other hand, seeing Dire have a class of 'S' makes my own theory a little weird.
In video games, "S" generally denotes a "special" class higher than A, which is the next-highest class.
@AI: Why would you come forward with your info? We don't know if Zionite is scum or not and are not going to just blindly keep him alive because you say you need that to win. So it didn't accomplish anything. Even worse, if Zionite is town you just increased the likelihood of him being killed by the mafia - it would be a 2-1 for them (assuming you leave the game when Zionite dies, which is a pretty fair assumption).
So given what you've claimed, it really makes no sense for you to have claimed. I'm wondering if you are actually a hitman or something like that and need Zionite dead and are banking on Zionite being town and have the mafia kill him.
I came forward because more likely than not, my win con will change by the end of the game. In such an event, I want there to be a record of its progression so that people can understand the motivations for my behavior. Otherwise, if I were forced to claim later in the game, I would likely be lynched due to an unconvincing claim. Better to be honest about this detail now than leave it up to chance, so that both town and scum can plan accordingly. Now that I think about it, if I were lynched or NK'd ASAP, the odds of Zionite living to the endgame are pretty slim, so I'd really prefer to be alive for longer so as to maneuver into a more promising win con.
Also, I'll reiterate that I do not leave the game when Zionite dies.
Ok, but why was it necessary to state you expected the answer in the next post?
So, you wanted to call them out but didn't want to start anything?
Scummy.
Because I've seen other people do it before in other games and seemed like a good way of making sure it didn't get swept under the run.
And yes, when was the last time you saw a case that was based off of a singular instance of fishing. If I want to start something with someone I'll vote for them at the end of the post.
Speaking of which, if I'm so scummy where's your vote?
LP: I didn't know if that was serious or not either so I didn't answer.
We should be suspicious of everyone since it's the beginning of the game and we don't know anything. Unless your scum. Then you know a lot more about the set up. But you should still be suspicious of everyone at the beginning of the game because your trying to find good lynch targets.
My win condition is not fixed. My survival is not dependent on Zionite's survival.
I'll decline to elaborate on my alignment for now.
I'm undecided as to whether RafaelK's response is scummy, though if Cyan's correct then something's amiss here.
I'm going to ask Guardman to clarify my win con, as it's a bit ambiguous a la my role in Heroes Mafia.
"Unless Zionite dying causes him to switch sides. Then we would need to lynch him regardless. Although, if it is something like that, I would reckon there is a flavourful reason he would want a specific person to live."
"He never said he would die if Zionite died. Just that his wincon was that Zionite had to live."
I smirk; "Do we have a pair of lovebirds in the room?" *Mock air smooching*
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Specifically:
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
You expect do you?
He claimed a win condition that is not town or scum. That is the very definition of a neutral in mafia.
It's not a 2 for 1 if AI is not town. If AI is being legit here (which I still doubt, but for the sake of argument) then he will happily vote with the mafia at LYLO as long as Zionite stays alive.
He purported to QUOTE his win condition. He gave no indication he only quoted part of it. If he wants to say "oh by the way, I also have the town win condition too", then he's free to do that, but he hasn't done that so far and I don't see why you would naturally assume that's the case.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Always, eh?
I actually can't remember the last time I saw someone with a win condition that required a second player to survive, so it can't be much of an always. It comes up occasionally with "lovers" type roles, and I can't remember the last time I saw that either. Was there one in A Song of Ice and Fire? It's rare, anyway (and now I've said that, Cyan will probably produce 5 examples from the last year or something....)
Survivor roles are of course much more common, but those are usually neutral. Townies with "you must survive" as an additional win con do happen though.
Regardless, as I said, AI purported to QUOTE his win con. I assumed that was all of his win con, at least his CLAIMED win con. He didn't claim anything else. If he wanted to claim town as well he could do so. But he hasn't. Draw your own conclusions, I've drawn mine: he's trying to draw reactions by being mysterious. BUT if he's not, then he's obviously non-town.
I'm trying to see what I'm actually being accused of doing here, Cyan. Am I being accused of some evil scum advantage here by assuming he claimed neutral when he's right here to say "no I'm actually town" if I have assumed wrong?
Without giving away too much, my win condition has enough variance that under certain circumstances, I will win with the town. At the moment, I will win so long as Zionite is alive, but this is unlikely to be my final win con.
The question I asked Guardman is whether I'll win if Zionite is non-scum and scum control the lynch. Apparently, I will.
This was the reason that I didn't think it was smart for AI to elaborate on his claim.
Yes, I expect people to answer questions that might lead to me voting them.
You elaborate later that we might not know his whole win condition (AI confirms this), and that you were basing your "AI is neutral" idea off of the idea that it was. This is a good enough explanation that I don't want to pursue the case any further.
That being said, certain parts of your posts are coming off sounding forced to me already. It's only suspicion right now, but fyi IGMEOY.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?u=52729
Why should we help you? Are you going to help the town?Why should we believe you?
I told you everything you need to know for now. If I feel a need to present more information, I will do so.
I really don't care if I get lynched, vigged, NK'd, etc. so long as Zionite lives to endgame. I'll help the town if doing so advances my win condition.
Why so...hostile is, I guess, the right word?
Except that, in that situation, it would not be a wasted lynch as he would be an anti-town neutral.
^This^
This is what worries me about AIs claim. How are we to know if it does change?
Maybe I'm missing something, but why wouldn't you?
This reads as you being very self-aware.
Thanks, Captain Obvious.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Currently, yes. As I said, it is subject to change under certain conditions.
While true, a scum lynch would be more profitable to the town, and given that this is a mini, at LyoL the odds of hitting scum on any given lynch should be pretty good.
You won't, but I will. If I decide to share, I will.
In most games, the flavor of the game has the scum kill the remaining town at the end, hence my concern. Guardman informs me that I'd win before the sweet, sweet slaughter at the end. (My words, not his.)
If I think Zionite is town then I will gladly help the town.
If I think Zionite is scum then I will either help the scum (mafia or cult according to the OP) or try to change my win con.
So I'm done with the RVS, and done wondering what to do with AI.
unvote Cyan
Vote poggydude
I'm not sure what else it could be. Based on what my class is, it's certainly not class as in 'Economics' or 'Freaks 101'.
The same advantage as an unconfirmed mason pair, yes. And normally, unconfirmed masons don't go spilling their guts to one another on N0 with no good reason.
I'd disagree with blind-motivating N0, but I see your point.
We don't actually know what the chance of giving them the info they need is, though. If you're doing it for reactions than you're right, the upsides probably outweigh the potential bad. It seems that you're the only one that passed for reactions though.
OK.
Despite what I said in my previous post, I probably wouldn't have resisted the shiny. On the other hand, I didn't offer to trade any dossiers with anyone.
That assumes that scum would need to hide their info. In a game based off of sharing info with everyone and quoting PMs, I doubt that the scum would necessarily be implicated off of role info.
Interesting theory, though I can't see any clear correlation between class and 'type'. On the other hand, seeing Dire have a class of 'S' makes my own theory a little weird.
Given the way AI went about this whole thing, 'neutral' was the first thing that came to my mind as well.
Besides, I'm not sure how this assumption makes RafK scum.
Same question as to Cyan: How does this make RafK scum?
@AI: Why would you come forward with your info? We don't know if Zionite is scum or not and are not going to just blindly keep him alive because you say you need that to win. So it didn't accomplish anything. Even worse, if Zionite is town you just increased the likelihood of him being killed by the mafia - it would be a 2-1 for them (assuming you leave the game when Zionite dies, which is a pretty fair assumption).
So given what you've claimed, it really makes no sense for you to have claimed. I'm wondering if you are actually a hitman or something like that and need Zionite dead and are banking on Zionite being town and have the mafia kill him.
Basic #10-Town-Win
Sword of Truth-Town-Loss
LOTR II - Town-Loss
Indiana Jones - Town-Win
Manipulator - Town-Win
The Asphodel Meadows - Town-Win
Highlander - Neutral Survivor - Win
And this is not a random vote?
Basic #10-Town-Win
Sword of Truth-Town-Loss
LOTR II - Town-Loss
Indiana Jones - Town-Win
Manipulator - Town-Win
The Asphodel Meadows - Town-Win
Highlander - Neutral Survivor - Win
Nope. Glad you're reading.
Ah. So you're one of those.
This is a question addressed to the player known as Zionite:
If, as you made so clearly obvious, your vote on pg was not a random vote, what was the reasoning for the aforementioned vote?
P.S. These games where you do an action that invites a question and then pretty much ignore the question are pointless and a waste of everyone's time.
Basic #10-Town-Win
Sword of Truth-Town-Loss
LOTR II - Town-Loss
Indiana Jones - Town-Win
Manipulator - Town-Win
The Asphodel Meadows - Town-Win
Highlander - Neutral Survivor - Win
You never asked a question regarding the reasoning for my vote, so I never gave you reasoning.
Now that you have asked, I will choose to answer.
I will answer.
Early game he's very focused on finding out as much about other roles as he can. He asks AI several questions which may or may not have town consequences. He then says we need to "seriously open up dialog" on our dossiers, and as previously stated I have game info that says dossier info can be used against you. He claims he doubts AI's claim and says AI is running a scum gambit. If poggy actually believed this his vote should be on AI by this point. His last post casts further doubt on AI with a barrage of worthless questions asking for worthless answers that wouldn't tell us anything.
tl;dr: For page 3, this is a good start.
Just for future reference always give a reason for a nonrandom vote, not doing so is pretty awful.
With that said, i will hopefully have a nice, long, content filled post for you guys in the next 24 hours...I JUST GOT SUPER MEAT BOY AND THAT GAME IS FREAKING AMAZING.
And you're going to tell me how to play mafia?
Cute.
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
Unless guardman is a filthy liar in his pms we cant trade wincon(I asked him
)
"The obvious way to mitigate this is, obviously, is a scum that can fake parts of their Dossier. Assuming everyone agrees to this, as its a complete shot in the dark- you will end up people calling each other liars since Scum wouldn't admit publicly after exchanging win cons. Then, you have to take into account wincons worded differently or alternate wincons or changing wincons. This makes exchanging win conditions less of an auto win."
"Since wincondition is in the role pm, it is part of the data dossier. Seems a reasonable assumption considering the answer I got from my question."
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
RIP Krensae Fluidtail: Sleep well with the fish
So mafia will vote and not give reasons so they can try to get other people to say what they want to say so they never have to stand behind their decisions. You presented yourself as a good player so i thought you'd know this. You can roll your eyes all you want fact of the matter is is that I'm right on this and we both know it.
As is pointed out in the rules by lack of inclusion, you cannot trade win conditions.
Vote Count:
Calvin (1): RafK
RafK (1): Cyan
Keifru (1): Gigas1
Poggydude (2): Zionite, Lost Profit
AsianInvasion (1): Keifru
Gigas1 (1): AsianInvasion
With 13 alive it takes 7 to lynch.
Unvote
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
So tell me why that would be a good strategy for me on page 4 of this game, as mafia?
Innocent until proven guilty.
hard. don't expect long posts on weekdays. next post is probs on friday.
will try. no biggie. just so used 2, i mean too, doing that ya know?
so obviously tryin to start somethin'. eyes on you dude.
would have been funnier if u said to him "i'm scum help the scum yaaaaaaaar!"
i like this guy
calvin no hard feelings for being an anti-trading person. your explanation is ok with me. but i still reckon that scum will totes have stuff in their pms to give them away
btw i traded with miss manders and she was ok. not in the same clubs as me.
So here' my full take on the whole not giving a reason thing: Scum may do it to try to slip in a vote unnoticed, town by the same token may do it as a misplay...I'm not going to hold it against you atm just don't do it again. Here' why welse it sucks: it slows the game down. If you vote for someone you will be asked to explain yourself(most likely unless no one is paying attention), we will have to wait for your explanation before we can move on, it is just frustrating, and considering you seem to have played before you should know better.
With that said, i want to state that that was in this instance a minor aesthetic point, more important and thought out reasoning should be coming tomorrow.
"Oh, you're one of those players".
He specifically acknowledged it was a legitimate play style. It did not mean I was a) a bad player or b) scum, as you think it means.
It would be opportunistic as hell for RafK to automatically go to the neutral thought if he's seen several instances of town having this role in the past. However, if Cyan can't produce examples, it's null.
This is entirely plausible and would be something I could see AI attempting.
Couldn't have said it any better myself.
Vote: poggydude
Indeed.
As annoying as it is, there are plenty of players who, as town, routinely vote without reason to garner reactions.
Why the unvote?
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
I don't think that the examples are particularly necessary though. If you look at the tone of RafK's last post, it comes across extremely poorly. Enough so that I think he is unintentionally giving weight to my vote on him, because he knows I'm right. This is particularly in contrast with games where I thought he was scum and he wasn't..in those cases, he was just completely dismissive. But here, he is treading extremely lightly. Such a difference is very noteworthy.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
While it is noteworthy, I don't think it's voteworthy. Is this the only reason for your vote?
Ah, I see. Apologies, I thought I remembered it being non-random.
Nevertheless, your wording is bothersome. Most people unvote random votes just because they're random, but you go out of your way to comment on him getting serious votes. Overcompensation, maybe? It's baffling, to say the least.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Not hostile, just didn't want it getting swept under the rug since I thought it was important.
Poggydude: In your big content post please include a response to this. You ignored it in your post after it, which makes me see big warning signs.
That's cool, people should be suspicious of everyone at this point anyways. Just fyi though...what I said was meant to be very tongue in cheek haha while still calling you guys out for fishing rather then to try and start something.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?u=52729
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
I replaced out of Greenwood extremely early when the jester thing came up, so if the role was there and on a townie I certainly don't remember. Don't remember the Geass one, was I even in that game? I don't think so?
And the Song of Ice and Fire one I vaguely remembered earlier was on a MAFIA member (and was a pain in the ass, the mafia member with that extra win condition had to throw themselves under a bus for a fellow mafia member who was completely busted, since they couldn't win if that person died). So Yeah.
My mafia memory tends to be rather good for my triumphs and moments I was wronged. I wouldn't say it's especially good otherwise.
Says the man who moments ago was trying to hang his hat on there being lots of examples.
Even for you this is bad. You never said what was scummy about me assuming AI was neutral, other than to say I shouldn't have made that assumption because of lots of examples where that kind of win condition has been paired with the town win condition. Except there isn't lots of examples.
If you couldn't tell from the context of AI quoting his win condition and his general behaviour that he was claiming neutral, OK, fine, whatever. You're not good with nuance. I don't think it's scummy to have not spotted it. I don't see how it could be scummy to have spotted it.
Know you're right? Dude. I was right. You are wrong. Not scummy wrong, just trying-too-hard-to-disagree-with-me wrong.
If I had been any more dismissive of you the first time I daresay you would be talking now about a scummy overreaction. You'll see what you want to see. I know you far too well.
Oh, and unvote Calvin
Why is it necessary to make that distinction?
Ok, but why was it necessary to state you expected the answer in the next post?
So, you wanted to call them out but didn't want to start anything?
Scummy.
Is this a serious question?
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
I think you need to find better things to do with your free time.
Indeed; I traded this bit of information with someone myself.
In video games, "S" generally denotes a "special" class higher than A, which is the next-highest class.
I came forward because more likely than not, my win con will change by the end of the game. In such an event, I want there to be a record of its progression so that people can understand the motivations for my behavior. Otherwise, if I were forced to claim later in the game, I would likely be lynched due to an unconvincing claim. Better to be honest about this detail now than leave it up to chance, so that both town and scum can plan accordingly. Now that I think about it, if I were lynched or NK'd ASAP, the odds of Zionite living to the endgame are pretty slim, so I'd really prefer to be alive for longer so as to maneuver into a more promising win con.
Also, I'll reiterate that I do not leave the game when Zionite dies.
Yes.
Updated: 05/24/11
[The Family]
Because I've seen other people do it before in other games and seemed like a good way of making sure it didn't get swept under the run.
And yes, when was the last time you saw a case that was based off of a singular instance of fishing. If I want to start something with someone I'll vote for them at the end of the post.
Speaking of which, if I'm so scummy where's your vote?
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?u=52729
We should be suspicious of everyone since it's the beginning of the game and we don't know anything. Unless your scum. Then you know a lot more about the set up. But you should still be suspicious of everyone at the beginning of the game because your trying to find good lynch targets.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?u=52729