BloodyC0bblers's Mafia XVI

On January 19 2010 15:08 BloodyC0bbler wrote:


We dont control the site layout, and as annoying as it can be to have a "hidden" forum. Its fairly easy to overcome. I personally just keep a tab open in the mafia side for quick reference during games, as well as purely using the forum index. I would recommend if you are having trouble with using the index, just do what I do and create a seperate tab. It will keep you active, and skip the trouble of learning a new way of browsing TL.

On January 20 2010 13:52 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
As a note Quickstriker. Voting on who to kill doesn't happen day 1. The mayor makes the day 1 lynch. So all of day 1's voting is purely for who to have as mayor/sheriff.

On January 20 2010 14:06 Qatol wrote:

Actually, double and triple posting is just fine in mafia games. In Mini Mafia II, RebirthOfLegend had 6 posts in a row I think. The TL staff allows that kind of posting behavior in mafia threads. In fact, SemiOldGuy endorsed it in Mafia 4.

On January 20 2010 23:50 dozko wrote:
Alright day 1, here's my take on the situation: [BTW i've spoilered these since they turned out quite long]

Firstly the method of picking the sheriff and mayor. + Show Spoiler +

Secondly no_re's fine analysis of the connection to Quick(Attack)Striker and his subsequent replies make me feel a bit suspicious. Let me put some additional stuff forward for consideration:

Before no_re posted his analysis placing some suspicion on QuickStriker, he had made a total of 9 posts in the thread. Of those only 2 are edited. i.e. 2/9. However once the analysis was posted all of his subsequent posts, until some other member pointed this out to him, are edited, and one is edited more than once. Couple this with the fact that he is an old TL member, with around 1500 posts, and so should be familiar that Tl.net and other forums frown on post editing. Therefore his edited posts after the analysis by no_re could hint that he got a bit uneasy. Its hard to tell whether he got uneasy because he's mafia or because he's nervous for being called out so early, but the narration seems to point to the former.

On January 21 2010 00:27 d3_crescentia wrote:

I like to shower myself with compliments. If you took offense to that, then I apologize.

Two things: I don't think QuickStriker is mafia, but I'm not 100% sure. His posting behavior is pretty similar to the last game he played in.

I do think, though that he has the right idea - we should investigate and dissect whatever clues we have right now for the DTs to check at night. In one of my earlier posts I recommended checking the bodies, especially since there weren't two but THREE deaths. We don't know how the first person died, and that in itself might be a clue.

On January 21 2010 00:55 d3_crescentia wrote:
Checking up on people with large postcounts for veterancy using the search feature...

~OpZ~ - TL Mafia II, III
JoxxOr - TL Mafia II, Ace's Mafia World
decafchicken - TL Mafia II, III
l10f - Pyrry's Mafia Game
Fishball - a lot of them (II, III, V, VII, and more)
QuickStriker - TL Mafia VII

I know there are plenty of people who have played mafia with relatively smaller postcounts. I'll come up with those as soon as I feel up searching through 29 more names.

At any rate, these are people with posting histories that we can maybe sort of guess about their posting history/behaviors.

Also... a discrepancy (for the lulz, I'm guessing):
+ Show Spoiler +

On January 21 2010 02:06 haster27 wrote:
First day clues should NOT be used to lynch a person unless the day progresses, so that they correspond with the other day's clues. Moreover, I am really wary of the fact that two obvious clues pointing to single individual appeared within a single day. That is generally sign of the unintentional red herring.

On January 21 2010 02:01 RoyW wrote:



I know it's too soon, but it seems crazy that someone who is mafia could be that prominent in his posting. He has about 15% of posts in a 34 player game.

Mods, for future reference, can we ask for a current vote count at any stage?

On January 21 2010 02:19 Bill Murray wrote:
789 my theory is not thrown out the window... it is correct
town wants player A lynched tonight
mayor lynches player B instead
Player B and mayor are either friends or mafia, and are going against the town's wishes.
We should then lynch the mayor, as he has 3 possible votes per voting window. Him saying "i vote for [NyC]Hobbes" = 3 votes. We can't have someone doing that and going against the wishes of the majority of the town.

i suppose the mayor could do this just on a whim, but would we want someone like that as the mayor even if they arent mafia?

On January 21 2010 02:26 d3_crescentia wrote:

I like the way you think.

The DT can only check one person's clues rather than a list of clues made by more than one person, so what we need right now to maximize DT's ability is to have a single person to compile all the clues into one post and stating that it was based on his thinking which the DT can take advantage of that and exploit it where he can use his ability on that single post to the OP in which the OP has NO CHOICE but to give its answer.... that is one method I would go for to further help the DT..

On January 21 2010 02:30 tree.hugger wrote:


Get used to seeing this, this is excellent.

Taking this in a vacuum, note that outright denial is always deemed suspicious. If this had started with personal attacks against the accuser, and then vehement denials, they'd be headed off the gallows immediately.

This post pulls off a clever switch. It acknowledges that the poster could be mafia, in fact it refuses to debate the point entirely. This is clever, because the easiest people to decide to lynch are those who put up the biggest fight. By conceding the point immediately, this post makes it very hard to take issue with his character.

But it does, in fact, defend itself. Quite strenuously at that! See how swiftly it moves on to plant the seed of reasonable doubt in the mind of the reader, by lecturing us on the hazards of killing someone who is not mafia. Of course, the chances of randomly killing a mafia are greater than killing the medic or the detective, but since the chance exists, the post abuses the probability of first decision. Moreover, the post actually then outright implies that the poster is a medic or detective, something that (to me, in my experience) seems to almost ludicrously eliminate the poster from occupying either of these roles. Few people would ever be so careless with their positions if they actually were that position.

The final point of interest in this post is a corollary to the first clause. I'd call the technique 'martyrdom' because the poster professes to not mind dying if only to prove a point to all the noobs in this game. Of course, there are a mix of veterans and noobs here, and of course, the poster is playing to win. But by offering himself up for sacrifice, the poster knows full well that we will not pick such low hanging fruit. The post then, protects the poster by doing the exact opposite of what you might expect, by actually encouraging critics of the poster.

Be wary of these.

On January 21 2010 02:44 d3_crescentia wrote:

Positive-emotion trading aside, I'd also like to point out that we should be wary of you for kindly analyzing the thought process behind this post.

I'm glad we can all be intellectual here.

On January 21 2010 02:49 XeliN wrote:
Quick what are you saying? It is these kinds of unclear lines of reasoning where you don't specifically lay out your argument that are suggestive of purposefully creating confusion amongst the townies.

You mention me by name, why? am i more likely to be a mafia because of that clue than any of the other people with blank profiles, Does my editing and explaining why afterwards make me more likely to be mafia?

Neither of those two assertions has any merit and i challenge you to make a clear and logical argument as to why.

That leaves me with possibilites then, you are annoyed that I have openly stated that i find you very suspicious and a possible mafia and in light of this have decided to name me as a kind of "i know you are but what am i" kind of defence. Of course you could have this reaction if you are a townie and upset about having suspicion cast on you this early because obviously no-one wants to die but for the record, with every post you make I consider you more and more red.

Also you and cresentia seem exceptionally like minded and supportive of each other and as such if one of you is red i would be inclined to believe the other one is as well.

But anyway my main point is this, I have provided clear reasons as for why I have named you as a suspicious person. Likewise please provide clear explanation for everyone to see and assess as for why you have named me, otherwise i suspect they may draw similar conclusions that i have.

On January 21 2010 03:03 SagaZ wrote:
Also, when some1 die, do we get to know his role?

On January 21 2010 06:04 DoctorHelvetica wrote:


we're superior

On January 21 2010 08:14 ShoCkeyy wrote:
O_o we haven't started yet right?

On January 21 2010 08:21 ShoCkeyy wrote:


Well I posted in the voting thread already since I couldn't find it till now ._.

On January 21 2010 08:32 Iaaan wrote:


I like this, and not just because I don't have anything in my profile ;p but that said, I think the clues are the most important for the detectives to make choices about who to role check, obviously its going to be hard to be sure about what the clues are, and what they mean, so they aren't really grounds for lynching someone. What people actually post is far more important

On January 21 2010 08:43 ShoCkeyy wrote:
hasn't* jesus, this editing rule is killing me.

On January 21 2010 09:15 flamewheel91 wrote:


Oh yes.

On January 21 2010 09:49 SagaZ wrote:
And I don't like the idea of not lynching ayone until we're 100% sure.
The thing is, we're never going to be, the game will revolve around making guess and playing a bit with each others to try to get the maximum info for the big guess.
Basically, not lynching anyone sets the town back and gives the iniciative to the mafia players since I guess the mafia is more likely to target the most active posters. So hopefully the medics are good at guessing who's going to be attacked.
First day is more likely to lynch an honest civilian, but it almost always does.

On January 21 2010 10:08 Iaaan wrote:


If he were a Mafia, he would want to get townies on his side, as not to get lynched. There is what, a 1/5 chance for any person to be Mafia? There are no ground to rule anyone out yet. Everyone should be aware of accusations of peoples roles and the meaning behind them, weather the poster has a good basis behind their judgment, or if they have another purpose for posting, to stir townies up and set them against each other, or any other reason.

On January 20 2010 12:32 QuickStriker wrote:
My only concern here is that a mafia sneaking in to be a mayor/sheriff which can allow a bit of chaos and the game may destroy us from the inside out...

Let's look at some basic simple statistics here though. We have 34 players, 27 of which are townies where the other 7 are mafias... so by using simple basic math, we get:

Mafias - 20.6%
Other (Non-mafias) - 79.4%

These 2 positions (mayor and sheriff) comes up to about 6% of our population. As 20.6% may seem small or a lot to some people, I believe we really need to be cautious here to make sure that within 20.6%, they won't spread and expand their territory to be of the powerful 6% which makes up mayor/sheriff......

On January 21 2010 10:45 citi.zen wrote:
Let me throw this out there: we all agree an elected position benefits the mob, if they can get it. Also, the mob is organized and know each other, so they are likely to pre-determine who will run from their camp.

So my conjecture is this: one and only one of the candidates is a mobster.

On January 21 2010 10:46 Fulgrim wrote:
Ok this is kind of sad, I read the last few pages that I missed and it seemed like the same 4 people were posting for like the whole day.... Where is everyone else? (this could cause major problems, imagine if half of our game was modkilled...) Quick, d3 and tree, you guys have all been posting a ton, and I'm having trouble deciding who to vote for, have you guys all played before?

On January 21 2010 10:48 SagaZ wrote:


okay, this is quite an interesting post actually.
QS make this post about why should detective stay hidden, it's well explained but it's all comon sense and the conclusions are what anyone should see with a minimal thought process. detective and medics stay hidden to the mafia blablabla.
Everything is nice and helps newer player in the case they haven't seen it.

Now comes shockeey's post, basically saying how great QS is for saying what should be common sense. That makes me think about three case senarios.

1) QS and shockeey are mafia, they set up behind the scene the act. This goes well with QS's post activity to make people trust him, the intent of this tutorial would then be to try to earn some trust of newer players. Shockeey's post would only be to reinforce this and creat a bandwagon.

2) Shockeey is mafia, QS isn't. Shockeey, seing how QS posts alot wants to try to get in his good side and possibly misslead him. if someone says good things about you, it's harder to say bad things about them.

3) Neither are mafia, Shockeey just didn't saw how blue roles in general should play on his own and is impressed at how a mafia game works.

These maybe are very far away from truth of course.
About the first lynch, right now, killing the most inactive seems the safest choice, but maybe we could play around with the idea of killing shockeey.

On January 21 2010 10:59 XeliN wrote:
As to the post above, I personally believe that the Mafia will not have planned to simply put one person forward, It would be extremely risky, and an exceptional gamble to do so. I am leaning more towards a "swamp" strategy wereby the mafia would but 3 or possibly more candidtaes forward in the hope that either way they get someone elected.

Unless you can provide a better argument as to why the Mafia would only put one person forward for election I am inclined to think they are far more likely to put many people forward to be elected.

On January 21 2010 11:02 johnnyspazz wrote:
sorry i havent been active much, first time playing and i dont really know how to respond heh
just so clear things up, DT stands for detective right?

On January 21 2010 11:10 XeliN wrote:
That is an interesting question Quickstriker, The reasons i consider you suspicious are mainly due to the nature of your posting, although i certianly think the "Quick attack" potential clue that no_re highlighted oh so long ago is both plausible and telling.

In that hypothesis i feel i would have achieved something as it would lend itself very well to helping me evaluate other players who would be inextricably linked (in my mind) with the outcome if you turned out to be non-mafia. I do however feel out of everyone so far that you are the most obviously Mafia and if I am wrong i would have to do alot of inner thinking and possibly some meditation.

It's nothing personal btw so please don't take it as such this is just honestly my opinion on the matter as of this moment.

On January 21 2010 12:01 QuickStriker wrote:
Updated list of candidates and votes:

Fulgrim - 2
d3_crescentia - 1
laaan - 1
QuickStriker - 1
tree.hugger - 1
Man.magic - 0
Xelin - 0

Abstain votes: 4 (I also abstain my vote until tomorrow to make my final decision)

Total Votes so far: 10

On January 21 2010 12:30 XeliN wrote:
and i bring up i was//am drinking because, I AM! its not a tool to make people not read into my posts quite frankly i hope people do as i think they in themselves show me to not be mafia and instead trying to be involved and instrumental in this game.

However if i do die and Im gonna put it out there i think i might, have a glance towards the people accusing me and take that into consideration townies.

also the skype offer was genuine if you think i am lying then come online and chat to me lol, im pretty sure that would get accross my innocence of being red far better.

On January 21 2010 12:35 XeliN wrote:
WHAT? seriously what? "Of course you are currently defending yourself explaining your posts after they had absolute unnecessary purpose into the thread in the first place."

what do you even mean by this? seriously explain yourself more clearly. And furthermore if my posts had "absolute unneccesary purpose into the thread in the first place" how on earth does my post just above provide purpose for them?

You literally are making no sense to me.

On January 21 2010 13:01 gaizka wrote:
I didn't finish somethings...

For now I choose the first



If I am a candidate, can I vote for someone else?
If not I quit the race, If so, then it's on.

Modkills:
Inactivity has been a problem in every mafia game so far. It works as such: players are allowed to safely miss the lynch vote(s) (fail to either vote or abstain) for one day over the course of the game. If you fail to vote on a second day, I will use my discretion about modkilling you based on how active you have been and any excuses you might have. If something comes up and you know you will miss the vote, PM me in advance about it to let me know and you will be spared. Abstaining votes will be allowed, but don't do it just because you don't want to read the thread.

On January 20 2010 13:09 QuickStriker wrote:
Now, I also want to just to throw out another simple facts out there:

List of names who have absolutely nothing on profile (meaning no pics and sig) :

Xelin
RoyW
ItsPaul
dozko
laaan
Rainbow
Jadefist
7Strife
no_re
Gaizka
Man.Magic
johnnyspazz

That is 12 people total out of 34 people. That's quite a bit of nothing on profile compared to the other game that has 6...

*edit* Now mind you that if according to the rules of this game, it is sorta illegal to switch and edit your profile the moment this game started.... so I have complied this just to imply that if any one of the 12 changes their profile, they will and can be automatically marked suspicious....

On January 21 2010 13:41 johnnyspazz wrote:
Too be fair, magic.man posted in the voting thread although it seems like his account was created for the sole purpose of playing mafia lol

On January 22 2010 12:27 d3_crescentia wrote:

None of these have posted in the Mafia 16 thread and can be regarded as most inactive.

On January 22 2010 12:58 l10f wrote:
Finally caught up with all the posts >_> took so long T____T

I'm busy with a few things so I won't be super active (see: QuickStriker).

I haven't played mafia that much, just like all of you. But I will give my current opinion. I don't think we should be pointing fingers just yet, with so little clue. Also, I came in too late to influence the sheriff vote in any way, but hopefully we won't get a red in the office

Most of the analysis has been already done I see, and I hope everyone has a great time in this game

On January 22 2010 13:29 d3_crescentia wrote:
Here's the other thing though, their vote ended at 9PM EST, so it's pretty obvious they would have their elected officials sooner.

30 minutes left.

On January 22 2010 13:23 QuickStriker wrote:

Just to answer that question (I'm still sight-seeing your town as a tourist! ^_^), since there's 7 mafias and KP is (current mafia / 2) and rounded up with max of 3, 7 - 2 = 5/2 = 2.5 = 3 KP.... so you gotta have the mafia to be reduced to 4 to have it 2 kills rather than 3.

On January 22 2010 13:38 l10f wrote:


I was referring to how active you are on this thread, and how I won't be as active as you are, you don't need to jump all over my post

On January 22 2010 14:03 QuickStriker wrote:
This is troublesome indeed... now a 4 way tie for second place which holds one of the most important positions of all... the mafia.... It is highly likely one of these 4 candidates can be mafia....

On January 22 2010 14:04 Iaaan wrote:
and isn't it lulzy? ;p
It probably looks a little suspicious, but I'll just say that my two goals are not to have a mafia be mayor, and possibly become mayor myself. Going to bed now, but I'll be interested to see how this turns out (:

On January 22 2010 14:04 789 wrote:
I thought of one thing as I was getting into bed. Something we can do during the night phase to help the medics. We could compile a list of people likely to be hit by the mafia. This will be hard since we don't know who the mafia are as of yet. But we can do something. Anyone know how many medics there actually are?

My suggestion to the medics : pick those who are active. Losing an active person who ends up being a townie would be damaging. We need all the people analyzing clues we can get.

On January 22 2010 14:09 Zona wrote:
You know what, it may be useful for detectives to use at least one of the role checks early.

Right now, if they get a successful clue check, it's hard for them to convince the town of it without outing themselves, since we've already discussed the first set of clues ad nauseam without any conclusions. However, if they check someone and aren't too unlucky, they'll hit a town member and then can share with them safely (although the town member they contact will not necessarily be able to trust the detective). And if we establish a method of choosing which player to check (i.e. check the player below them in the player list) then they won't waste/overlap checks.

But the risk of that method is that if a mafia member is not contacted, then they will know the person above them is not a detective. Hmm. More to think about.

On January 22 2010 14:16 Zona wrote:
Yes, I totally agree that detectives should reveal themselves to who they check if the check turns up town, the godfather risk is low. If detectives find more than one medic, yes they should coordinate. But the medic needs to be careful that mafia members aren't fishing to find who the medic is.

At this point without coordination, a medic protection overlap is possible, but remember that even if medic protection was evenly spread out they won't necessarily choose who the mafia will target. I don't think that we can create a plan that will really guarantee that a medic will stop a hit at this point in the game.

Actually, the more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that detectives should use some of their role checks early in the game to build a base of people they can talk to privately.

On January 22 2010 14:17 Zona wrote:
Yes - but if the detective has checked someone to be town, the detective can reveal him/herself safely to the person he/she has checked.
(Of course, the person being revealed to needs to be skeptical, as the "detective" who contacted them might be a mafia member.)

On January 22 2010 14:39 d3_crescentia wrote:
Interesting that you're lifting ideas that from the other thread as I'm thinking of them, QS. In a game as large as this I'm guessing there has to be more than 1 DT. Let's hope BC hasn't been excessively cruel to us.

Signing off for the night.

On January 22 2010 15:24 ~OpZ~ wrote:


Says.....the untrustworthy one....

On January 22 2010 15:28 Chezinu wrote:


Says.....the untrustworthy one....

On January 22 2010 15:33 Chezinu wrote:


maybe I stole is post obv?

On January 22 2010 15:43 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Wait a minute...



Soon after he becomes major, he lynches the same person he wanted to ninja vote for him.

On January 23 2010 03:13 citi.zen wrote:
A guideline for detectives:

1. Use your role-checks to find people you can trust.
2. Only discuss your thoughts in PMs with these people.
3. Don't try to solve everything in the early-game. FE, don't 4 pool - nobody scouted!
4. In the mid-late game, use and abuse clue-checks - they are stronger than role-checks at that point.
5. Only share findings with trusted people.


Am I forgetting something? Is this useful to help coordinate the dts?

On January 23 2010 07:55 Ace wrote:
about inactives: Don't worry. Any inactive players are going to be banned from future Mafia games anyway.

On January 23 2010 08:19 toplexa wrote:
Ok i just read everything.
We lost a DT with bad luck. Im just wondering how important are the first mafia hits* and what is sheriff/mayors plan from now on /incarcelation?/. Adding some notes about what could be clues from day 1:

"With a quick attack, the Sheriff Ace collapsed to the ground. His mind raced towards the possibilities of what happened, and he reached for his gun. But before he could begin, the figure drew overtop of him and the sheriff was done"

"As he explored the nearby rooms he moved back to the hall and made his way back towards his office. It was then that he saw something on the ground by the window at the end of the hall. Moving towards it, he saw that it was a broken flower vase, with its contents now spread across the carpet, as well as the pieces of the pottery. It was then he felt a rush of air behind him, and something sink into his shoulder. The mayor vx70GTOJudgexv cried out, and crumpled dead to the floor."

On January 23 2010 08:24 XeliN wrote:
Just finished getting ready so just before i pop out let me note this. I have made it clear that I am willing and perfectly happy to have the Town lynch me, on a simple condition.

With this, and everything else I have posted in mind, take QuickStrikers compilation with a pinch of salt, although hopefully i will be around to analyse it as well.

Caio!

On January 23 2010 08:24 Iaaan wrote:
I agree with Crescentia, I doubt the Godfather would run, but obviously the Godfather will be someone who has at least voted, even if they haven't posted much in this thread, because of the talk about lynching the completely inactive, and because in order to be elected Godfather, they would probably have needed to talk to the other mafia to convince them to choose the Godfather.

I think the people we should think about lynching are Me, Xelin, Fulgrim, tree.hugger and Crescentia, because I'm pretty sure the Mafia would at least try to get someone elected.

I like the Idea of the DTs making an inner circle.

And last think I can think of right now, If either the mayor/sheriff are DTs, they could tell us, because they can't be killed by the Mafia right? we have to lynch them. for any other role they could just lie (if they were the Mafia), but its not hard to prove your a DT to the public if you have protection.

On January 23 2010 08:37 johnnyspazz wrote:
can someone explain the high lighted portions of toplexa's post? i fail to see the importance of them

On January 25 2010 01:39 Fulgrim wrote:
I have this feeling that either tree.hugger or d3 are mafia. We obviously know that at least one of the candidates is mafia, and d3 seemed to pick up a couple of votes at the end.

Also Quickstriker was running for a short period of time and withdrew for some reason. From his posts I don't think he's mafia, but both day clues point to him... He has abstained on every vote so far which I find a bit suspicious.

Depending on what Quickstriker is, I think Xelin is the opposite... (though he seems more like mafia then Quick, has accused more people of being mafia)