TL Mafia XXVIII

On July 18 2010 03:47 ~OpZ~ wrote:
##Vote: Chaoser
He's mafia.

Also, other mafia, = Darth, and Infundiblum.

Trust me.

On July 02 2010 07:57 Bill Murray wrote:
24/24 town-aligned players alive
2/2 Veterans alive
2/2 Town KP roles alive
2/2 Medics alive
2/2 DTs alive

6/6 Mafia-players alive
1/1 Godfather
1/1 Suicide Bomber
Mafia KP: 2 (until they have under 1.5 when divided by 2)

Double lynches: 2

On July 18 2010 04:26 zeks wrote:
lynch inactive first day

in all the recent games i've played theres always mafia who play lurker

dt rolecheck night 1 okay for me - check active ppl as usual

On July 18 2010 12:03 citi.zen wrote:
A few comments on how I see the game going:

1. PMs are allowed so trust circles are the way to go. Sooner or later they will form because of Dt checks, medic protection, vet soaking up a hit when we know they are the lone vet, etc. When this happens we'll be in good shape.
2. BCs list is fine, but many people seem to miss its point entirely.
3. There is no roleblocker, but there is a suicide bomber. Be very careful with your circles. Speak through confirmed townies if possible.
4. We lynch an inactive and/or bad player day one. Hyperbola is a fine target. Bumatlarge is ok too, bringing grudges from prior games here can derail us for many pages.
5. I already voted for Darth, why is it not counted? I will likely change it, but still!

On July 18 2010 15:29 Divinek wrote:
How is voting for some one cause of a long , useful post defending himself pretty well? He said in other games he has been quiet but that doesnt mean that shit is gonna fly here. And he didnt really say why someone who makes a long post is a scum or anything.

I dont feel he really defended himself well at all

On July 20 2010 09:31 Foolishness wrote:

You'd have an easier time if you look at lakrismamma or citi.zen

On July 20 2010 07:15 LaXerCannon wrote:

What interests me is this block of voting:
Misder -> Hyperbola
Divinek -> Hyperbola
Pandain -> Hyperbola
Pyrrhuloxia -> Abstain
zeks -> Hyperbola
SiNiquity -> Hyperbola

and these people:
Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon
zeks -> Hyperbola* -> abstain

My head hurts so I'll just give a couple one liners for now (I've been digging through this damned thread for like an eternity)

The Hyperbola bandwagon
Misder @ 10:43
Divinek @ 10:51
Pandain @ 10:56
zeks @ 11:22
SiNiquity @ 11:37

Within an hour, Hyperbola gets bandwagonned and is in first place:
@ 11:37 (after roffles' vote)

Definitely suspicious considering how fast and compact the votes were together

Misder -> Hyperbola* -> LaXercannon
zeks -> Hyperbola*
-> abstain

Misder -> starts bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed
zeks -> fourth voter for bandwagon, jumps off when Hyperbola's screwed

attempts at lowering suspicion?

On July 18 2010 04:26 zeks wrote:
lynch inactive first day

in all the recent games i've played theres always mafia who play lurker

dt rolecheck night 1 okay for me - check active ppl as usual

On July 18 2010 11:22 zeks wrote:
##vote hyperbola

place holder

On July 18 2010 22:59 zeks wrote:
5 people is really a miniscule number.

this whole supposed "bandwagon" wasn't exactly bad - at lesat it got hyperbola talking and it got us somewhere - rather than the 1 vote everywhere

its important to not bandwagon but its also important to have a unified town when necessary.

my vote won't be on Hyperbola tonight you can guarantee it. Just give me a couple hours to see who's a better target.

On July 19 2010 08:58 zeks wrote:
##unvote hyperbola
##abstain

incase i forget to unvote hyperbola like i promised

On July 19 2010 23:23 zeks wrote:
^ picking out choice words out of everyones posts is quite convenient. What are you trying to paint of us?

On July 20 2010 07:36 zeks wrote:
i explained why i wasn't going to end up having my vote placed on hyperbola. I had it on him first to pressure him to talk and then I said he had a valid defense so I guaranteed that my vote wouldn't be left on him and I'll try to find someone else. When I returned to my comp like 8 hours later then I changed to abstain.

Don't get me wrong I think the Hyperbola list is a perfect choice (the obvious one) the look at cause he did flip town and who'd be more suspicious than the people who voted him.

On July 22 2010 07:02 Bill Murray wrote:
vote count:


not voting:

double lynch:

On July 22 2010 16:03 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:

Hmm he's usually more active than that, but not super active, probably less than average. Could be due to some distraction / bored townie. Worth looking into, though.

Voting Zeks on inactivity didn't make too much sense to me though, I think there are more inactive people, though I haven't been scientific about it, yet. Like how many posts does Jayme have? Or lakrasmamma, who couldn't even be bothered to figure out who to vote for?

On July 22 2010 12:02 lakrismamma wrote:
I will leave my vote on abstain because I think we are on the wrong track, I dont think any of the accused are mafia.

On July 18 2010 20:46 youngminii wrote:
Okay I find it funny how BC and citi.zen go nuts over how I said (half jokingly) scum list instead of list of people under scrutiny. I get that this is the phase of the game where you pick apart the tiniest words of everyone but that's just ridiculous.

Anyway, what's with Opz randomly saying everyone should PM him? Is he some mafia veteran god? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, why would you even try and ask that? Do you honestly think people will PM you or are you scum trying to bait the newbies for some free blue kills?

@ Subversion: There's been nothing interesting. You're clearly misreading the thread if you see anything interesting because it's a bunch of people (including myself) in complete disarray talking about stuff that no one else agrees with.

As for hyperbola's bandwagon: it has absolutely no reasoning behind it but it is day 1. I'd prefer abstaining/lynching someone that's about to be modkilled but so many of you are against that with no good reason and decide to lynch someone based on the smallest reasoning founded on RVS.

On July 18 2010 20:58 youngminii wrote:
^ I'm going to overlook this post because of the fact that it's day 1 when stupid things are generally 'allowed' and 'normal' (like the hyperbola bandwagon).

On July 18 2010 21:01 youngminii wrote:
Actually, I'm not going to overlook it. Why would you place a vote on me 'just in case'? Especially after you heard BC say I was a strong player (which citi.zen evidently disagrees with)? You have these two guys criticising my post when it's not even serious, you jump on this bandwagon and then put a placeholder vote on me just in case?

Does this not strike you as scummy at all? Overly scummy but scummy nonetheless? In fact, I think this is the scummiest post I have seen all game (not that long). However, I don't think you're really that bad at this game and even a mediocre scum wouldn't do that kind of mistake. Will need confirmation on other more experienced TL mafia players on your meta.

On July 18 2010 21:46 youngminii wrote:
There was only one thing that they did point out and that's the only thing that was directed at me, hence I responded to it.

Obvious blue advice? Really? Do you honestly believe that all 30 people in this thread know exactly how to play blue? Do you really think that each and every new person in here knows how to play their role perfectly? So in the case of all 30 people knowing the exact way to play without any discussions as to any plans we should just leave it at that and not discuss our options? You can't be that stupid, I refuse to believe it.
Also, what already answered questions? Back up your statements with evidence please.

How is telling the town to abstain not a good idea? I'm willing to accept criticism of my ideas, but I'm not willing to just sit back and watch as someone comes in, votes for me as a placeholder in case a bandwagon is formed on me (which I suppose is pre-emptive bandwagoning) and then says my ideas are not good. Information Instead of Analysis. In fact, IIoA is a big scumtell in my experiences in other mafia sites (not sure about TL since this site is actually quite a lot different).

I never said citi.zen said I was good. In fact, I implied citi.zen said I was quite bad. I don't critique citi.zen's play because as far as I can tell, people seem to believe his meta is good but if he continues to critique me, so be it. I don't care.

Your 'just in case' is the same as bandwagoning, except you're doing it early. You think there might be a chance that people will start voting for me so you put your vote on me 'just in case'. Biggest hidden form of bandwagoning imo.

My conclusion: You're either a really bad scum, really bad townie, or a fucking bad blue.

##Bote infundibulum

On July 19 2010 03:37 youngminii wrote:

This is why lynching on the first day is a terrible, terrible idea. The scum can blend in with the town so well and even lurk a bit. They'll just leave people to lynch each other on the first day or two and before you know it, it's lylo. No lynching is a gift, use it. If not, lynch an inactive (someone that's about to be modkilled).

I am 99% certain that whoever gets lynched today will not be scum, simply because it is way too easy for scum not to draw attention on the first day.

On July 19 2010 04:14 youngminii wrote:

This actually intrigues me a bit. I honestly believe hyperbola is either a townie or a really really really bad scum. There's no way in your right might you would say 'nah all my posts were just jokes, don't worry' if you were scum because that's outright stupid. It's drawing unnecessary attention (ie. the post I'm quoting) and would be something an honest, naive townie would do.

Of course, if he ends up flipping red I'll eat my own arm.

On July 20 2010 15:48 youngminii wrote:
Perhaps Vet's should just make trust circles via PM? Instead of openly roleclaiming, they can slowly bring in people one by one maybe? I guess I'm not that against the roleclaiming part but it does feel a bit iffy.

Also, note that it's interesting how there were 6 votes for hyperbola and 5 votes for me. What's more interesting is that there are only 6 scum and they could have easily single handedly voted off hyperbola (unlikely though). What is likely is that there were at least a few scum voting for either me and hyperbola.

Here's a plan that we can use (I realise my last plan was like, totally distracting and stuff so if you choose to ignore this I don't blame you), instead of Vets roleclaiming, how about Vets 'recruit' people into their PM trust circles. These trust circles can exclude anyone from Hyperbola/my bandwagon as there ought to be at least 2-3 mafia in total in the bandwagons.

On July 21 2010 08:29 youngminii wrote:
I completely agree with and back Pandain's suspicion against chaoser. I have two reasons.

My first reason is Pandain's points. The majority of his points are valid and chaoser's responses are sub-par. The biggest point that sticks out to me is the fact that chaoser didn't change his vote from abstaining after drilling me so hard. Why? Well he probably knew hyperbola was going to be lynched and there's no use jumping on any bandwagons to raise suspicion. I don't really have an opinion on BB's bandwagon except that it was almost as random as hyperbola's. I was pretty much certain that hyperbola was not scum whereas for BB I cannot say the same however it doesn't warrant my vote. Another thing that irks me at the moment is how chaoser jumped on the subversion bandwagon instead of hyperbola's. There could be a few reasons such as BB is scum and chaoser is protecting him by backing the second bandwagon or BB is town and chaoser doesn't want to raise suspicion on himself. Either way, more evidence points to him being scum than not.

My second reason is outside this thread.




For some reason, he sent me a PM asking the same question before posting on the thread. There was no way I couldn't raise my eyebrows but didn't know what to make of it. I replied to him telling him to post in the thread as posts are used in the future to analyse a player's actions and by PMing me he was bypassing that. Then he goes on to ask my opinions of his play so far which I still can't make anything out of. The reason I didn't post this before was because I thought he was a newbie and I didn't want to use it against him but I just looked at his posting history and it seems as if he's played games before. I don't know why he PM'd me but it seriously rang alarm bells in my head.

On July 21 2010 10:50 youngminii wrote:
My scumdar indicates that Subversion is not scum. I think that his bandwagon has to be one of the most interesting developments in the game so far. I refuse to believe that a load of townies simply jumped on because he said 'mafia aren't making too many mistakes'. There is at least one mafia in his bandwagon and I am convinced it is chaoser.

On July 22 2010 05:05 youngminii wrote:

This man raises a good point. I also like this amberlight accusation as it sounds solid and very reasonable, unlike this silly DTA one. However, I'm going to stick to my chaoser vote unless amberlight and DTA are on the same vote count or something, which in that case I'd change my vote to amberlight.

Also, how many hours 'til twilight?

On July 22 2010 13:32 youngminii wrote:
Well see Protactinium, with a central townie to rely on, the game becomes much easier as he can direct the scum hunt without the town having to worry about the central townie being scum. Also, every confirmed townie makes a huge bit of difference late game.

It is not enough to play 'correctly' especially as the game goes on.

On July 24 2010 02:05 chaoser wrote:

Even if this is all some complex plot to get a lot of blues on one person, the suicide bomber still has to decide on whether 1) there ARE that many blues on the teammate he's going to blow and 2) which of his teammates to blow up. It's a stupid idea for mafia to double-lie for both BC and Tricode cause when one falls, the other will too. The only way I can see this somehow working out in mafia's slight favor is if BC is mafia (godfather even), he got hit by Tricode and protected by someone else but the chances of that are so low and can be checked via a DT visit.

On July 24 2010 02:11 Amber[LighT] wrote:

It's a dead end though. Once we lynch Tricode that only gives us a hint of who BC is, depending on the flip. BC will not be confirmed 100% from lynching Tricode, and then from there we don't have a lot of connections. BC wasn't really involved with much other than a few posts about the bandwagons and BrownBears plan.

I think we should just avoid them and go for players like Youngminii or Subversion.

On July 24 2010 04:49 tree.hugger wrote:

Actually, you're absolutely right.

Tricode is confirmed as town. But BC still is the same. At this point, I advocate a mass roleclaim to Tricode. He can then tell the town how many of each blue role claimed, and build a circle.

On July 24 2010 08:50 BrownBear wrote:
tree.hugger: The town shot down my roleclaim idea yesterday, I don't think enough time has passed for people to consider a roleclaim scheme now. Plus, tricode is in NO WAY 100% cleared, chaoser's logic is sound but we have no way to check that mafia actually followed sound logic, thus we cannot assume that mafia always act using solid logic (they could purposefully do something dumb, hoping town will assume they would never do something so dumb because nobody could be that dumb right guys?)

So, I'll echo:

DO NOT CLAIM TO TRICODE

yet, at least!

On July 25 2010 00:41 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:


As BC pointed out, if the GF decided to appear as DT he could have a representative (a red) act as his contact for this. However, the chances of GF picking DT in my experience are pretty low (never seen it happen) and mafia probably played it safe with vet or townie. But it's still POSSIBLE and so it must be weighed into consideration.

On July 25 2010 00:41 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:


The other thing is, how can you ask the DT to claim if more than 1 representative comes forward? The way the plan is worded, you yourself do not know the names of the DT's and are instead passing the names of the representatives, or am i misreading?

On July 25 2010 04:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:


Thanks for appearing after I went to sleep, its nice to know I get to wake up to stuff like this.
Now, if you read the bolded text you can easily see a mistake in your reasoning. In the case of multiple DT mouths talking to citizen, rather than him clear his legimacy, your having him instant 100% cleared and his dt clears the others....If he is red, you just handed him the entire dt list, good job. Best plan so far. IF he is legit, we have no way of proving this. Regardless, your plan requires 100% trust pretty well in him.

As for why I haven't analyzed misder? So what? I opted to snag people I saw obviously coasting/acting scummy. You know, rather than fingering me for who I didn't analyze, maybe you should spend time analyzing said person. Hell if you think you believe they are scum, maybe you should give a reason why other than "I think"

Trying to put suspicion on me for who I didn't analyze is like saying "You contributed, but because your scum list and mine don't overlap 100% you must be red" instead of contributing yourself.

On July 25 2010 05:24 SouthRawrea wrote:
Look..I've been busy for the past few days anyways. Do you want me to go take a picture of everything that I've been doing in the backyard in the pouring rain? Just one yes is all I need. This is my first time ever playing a forum mafia game and I'm not used to this way of posting extremely long posts and having every single word scrutinized. The few times I've played the game people would say their reports, and chat in a chatbox. Not to mention this is filled with much more text. I've never even encountered the Mad Hatter role. If you look at the game EpicMafia, although they have like 50 roles, they don't have a single one that I know of that resembles the one in this game. I figured that it was a town-favoured role that was only supposed to be used later in the game when you had a higher chance of hitting the mafia with your bombs. Hence why I only placed one on the person I was most suspicious of at the time. What we could be doing here is giving citi.zen all the info he needs if he is mafia to win the game for that side. DT claims especially.

On July 25 2010 05:48 SouthRawrea wrote:


Not sure how this is completely representative of all my posts. You're missing a few actually. The type of mafia I'm used to is more fast paced and over a short period of time. I'm not entirely good with the analytical thing where you link the posts of people from 50 pages back and stuff which is what the "better" players seem to be doing.

Also at citi.zen if you really are the Mad Hatter, why not announce who you placed your bombs on? If they're really innocent, no problemo and if they're mafia they'll think twice about shooting you and we have someone to lead.

On July 25 2010 03:52 SouthRawrea wrote:
So far I've been trying to slip under the radar so I don't get lynched early on or killed at night. I've actually only placed one bomb thus far as I was a little hesitant to kill place two people at risk even if I suspect them. My only one at the moment is on chaoser but that was placed yesterday after seeing that he didn't get lynched. I decided to abstain from placing a second bomb because of the first vote placed on me by Bumat... I felt threatened. :/

## Vote Citizen for now

On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:


see bolded part. He wasn't actually cleared with no counterclaim for a reason I listed earlier which was this

IF you were the mad hatter and you saw someone claim your role, You know instantly he's most likely red. You then wait a day, move your bomb to him get lynched following day (confirms both of you). Instead, he said "if no one claims im legit." He did however get a claim, regardless, his point was moot regardless.

On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
I most likely wont trust citizen until he proves to be trustworthy. He is far too inactive at this point for the plan he proposed. He has legimate concerns raised against him, a counter claim, etc....
Where is he? Nowhere to be found, instead people who have been semi inactive all game have decided to vouch for him. It comes of as extremely suspicious.

Also, it has no matter where he placed his bombs. If he has them on reds or not. A dt circle is still confirmed, and as much as dead townies suck to have, they do lower the dt pool of checked targets finding reds faster. Anyone who flips red dies, then its a hunt for the gf. If you find three of one blue role, boom you found him, etc...

On July 25 2010 07:28 chaoser wrote:
[
LaKrismamma unvotes SouthRawrea, votes Southrawrea at 7:18 (sorry I bolded, this is just funny)

On July 25 2010 09:43 youngminii wrote:
As soon citi.zen flips green here's the following list of people to lynch (in order).
I don't care what you have against it, just listen and do it if he does flip green.

SouthRawrea
Chaoser
BC
Infundibuxdlgxcubum
tree.hugger
Fake claimer (I have an idea of who it is)

There's a likely chance that one person in this list will be town but it will be a fair trade. No buts, no arguments, just straight lynching.

On July 25 2010 11:03 tree.hugger wrote:
Basically, it works like this:

We lynched citi.zen because in doing so, we would find out which he was, and thus Southrawrea would be the other. Of course, we could've done the same thing by lynching Southrawrea, but due to suspicions I, and many others held, along with the advantage of catching a bigger fish, or using the skill of a superior hatter, we decided that citi.zen was the better target.

However, the fact that citi.zen is NOT the MH candidate, makes our choice a mistake. Whereas lynching Southrawrea would've had the same effect; either validating citi.zen and his friend/Tricode, lynching citi.zen means that we still have a third option on the table; namely that citi.zen was a pawn of the GF. And now we can't ask him about it. Not only that, but if this is the case, then the GF knows both detectives.

Or Southrawrea could be mafia.
Or Tricode and Bc could be mafia.

We should've had two choices, but now we still have three.

So here's what we need to do. If citi.zen's MH was the mafia, then we could probably call gg right now, because we're done. At any rate, our detectives should make sure to confide in someone that they trust, because they'll both die. A suicide bomber is likely in this scenario, and that means Southrawrea would die as well, leaving a total of five town deaths and one mafia death in a night.

But because of how bleak this other outlook is, I think we have no choice but to reject it. We can't win the game that way, and so we shouldn't even consider it, and pretend like citi.zen's death has given us the two-pronged choice that we aimed for.

On July 25 2010 09:33 citi.zen wrote:
The townies who voted with the mafia need to stop playing this game. Forever. This is as clear cut as it gets: BC, Inf, Chaos, Tree.hugger, South are red. Perhaps after you lynch me you will... I don't know... go after one of them. You have a double lynch to use.

By the way: to avoid this dumb town situation, the mad hatter is actually the SECOND player my DT checked, not myself. I claimed in his place to keep them safe for one more night. Now they have all they need to accurately place their bombs. I am plain vanilla town, as you are about to find out when I flip.

Remember: BC, Inf, Chaos, Tree.hugger, South. Plus whoever fake claimed.

On July 25 2010 11:07 zeks wrote:
Let's blow the real taco stand.

Citi.zen was my mouthpiece.

I am the real mad hatter.

My bombs are on BC and SouthRawrea.

I am missing a medic and a DT. Claim to me if you wish.

I'm right here. Kill me.

On July 25 2010 19:51 Subversion wrote:
youngminii how can you have BC and southrawrea on the same list when BC tried to get a vote together against south?

On July 25 2010 18:09 d3_crescentia wrote:
What the fuck is this shit. We should have lynched either Tricode or BC today, because we have no idea if BC is confirmed town, and then all of this shit happened. In fact given the amount of misinformation that's flying around in this thread it can become unmanageable and frustrating to try and figure things out right away.

Claims that need to be resolved:
- BC/Tricode
- zeks/Southrawrea
- Pandain/Amber[Light]/youngminii

Since we have three claimants (Tricode/South/zeks) then we need to avoid overlapping kills if it so happens we have two bombers. Since zeks has claimed to have bombs on BC/South, South should put his remaining bomb on Tricode (chaoser?? what even makes you think he's a THREAT, for fucks sake). We then lynch both of them. I'd rather all of the above die and have our DTs check other targets rather than waste any more time trying to figure these things out.

Yes, I realize that this 1-for-3 trade is terrible. I don't really give a shit, though, because it's time to play hardball.

Something is especially not right here, considering citizen's claims that he was also DT checked. But then if our claimant checked Amber and young, when could they have checked citizen? I don't like this.

On July 27 2010 03:37 Divinek wrote:
[
They are still fucking idiots or mafia.

I will be happy to vote anyone that pushed BC AND South over majority if EITHER pops green. Could of at least waited for BC to post suspects. Could of waited for more from south. Ignore every other scummy person and possible information we could of gathered because you guys would like to vote.

Sorry BC, regardless of your color, I didn't cast my vote for you yet.

Vote: Abstainx2 & Double Lynch

On July 29 2010 08:37 Divinek wrote:

did d3 actually ever claim vet? people kept fabricating the fact that he did, can you get a direct quote of him saying he's a vet?