Mini Mafia IV - Page 12

Hello everyone its Pandain the Panda, hoping he won't ruin town again for everyone. And as Pandain always learned when young, the best way to get from A to B when theres a brick wall in front of you is to not go around the wall, but keep on running into it until it breaks!

This is mildly amusing but not all that relevant

In other news, just some general thoughts:
1.Blue's dont claim unless you are about to be lynched. If you find a red, don't claim. Instead prepare an analysis on him and get him lynched without claiming. If you find green, and they're about to be lynched, express support for him, but don't claim unless its near lylo.

This is more of the generic advice for blues, its really not very useful as we all already know this, but since I was kind of giving the same type of advice I can't really be all that judgmental about it, still I expected more from a vet

2.I agree we should not let inactives survive in this town. But considering we've hardly started, "inactives" is hardly the word to call them. So let's get things moving.

The traditional pressure inactive status, common early game, nothing out of the ordinary with this

##Vote Nemesis


+ Show Spoiler +

What is this? Clarify this for me, because as I understand right now you just said we should lynch scum, and then say we should lynch inactives.

This feels like nitpicking to me, as far as I could tell, Nemesis' message was pretty clear, "our real goal is to hang scum, but for now pressuring inactives is a good strategy"

Plus I want to see more contribution.


Come on people, pressure is pointless if only one person votes. Let's get things moving.

this post is not all that suspicious all considered, it just seems to be a townie putting on some pressure

~quote snipped~
The problem with abstaining is that we basically let mafia have a free turn. Rather than voting, and therefore collecting vital information and discussion, no one is lynched, and we end up on day 2 being none the wiser. It's basically as if we started on day 2.

This is the expected reaction to the no lynch idea, a majorly negative one, its a appropriate reaction for a townie, and not at all suspicious


Whether it postpones lylo for one night cycle is really irrelevant, as losing that vital lynch just for an extra night cycle(which won't mean anything if we don't get through that without town getting hurt), is not even an even trade.

More of the same

Speaking of which: Vigi's do NOT use your ability until town declares a consensus on that. We don't need a townie dead because you decided to be a "hero."

Generic town advice, this is self evident and to me at least feels like a piece of common sense masquerading as advice

Speaking of, I want people to start voting Shockkey as well as nemesis. Shockkey has barely contributed with a real post, I want to see that from him.

This is interesting, Panadian is starting to lead the discussion away from Nemesis and towards Shockkey...however he'll reverse this opinion soon enough

~nemesis post suggesting lynching Shockeyy~
I don't like this post either. Let's take a look at it.

ohhh, an analysis, this should be revealing

First off, lynching inactives itself is a bad strategy. I shall be lenient to him because even I make this mistake, but lynching inactives is a horrible thing to do.

Didn't Panadian say earlier that it was a working strategy? ah yes, he said "Lynching inactives. Since lynching a scum is very hard in the very first day. Lynching inactives would be a very good start as it would prevent mafia from lurking." so is it a good start? or is it a horrible thing to do? Still though since Shokeyy turned out to be a townie and this is essentially a defense of him I can forgive it, although on the flip side it could be part of the mafia strategy in earlier games of killing off the active players first (note how Panadian accuses LSB one of the most active players later)


When we say "lynch inactives", we mean "lynch lurkers." We want to differentiate the lurkers from the inactives/bored.

This feels like nitpicking

If we say we'll lynch the inactives, the inactives won't respond.
IF we say we'll lynch the inactives, the bored won't really respond.

Only the mafia will respond if we say lynch the inactives. Which is why you never want to end up LYNCHING an inactive, just pressuring all of them to post.

I actually agree with this, but iirc that wasn't his attitude in other games, also, allowing inactive to survive simply seems to make a nice little nest for mafia to hide in

Furthormore, he just repeated information without actually adding anything to it. Finally he goes for the "easy" kill.

again, going straight for the throat, if Panadian flips green then I would take a good look at Nemesis while if Nemesis flips green then I would take a look at Panadian

This is typical mafia to me.

I now offer Nemesis as a viable option for a real lynch.

this seems a little rushed, but I guess its one way to apply pressure

~post of chaoser saying "I disagree with this post. While lynching inactives is suboptimal as a strategy when compared to lynching mafia, I wouldn't say it's a bad strat."~

Again, we want to pressure people to POST, not lynch the inactives. There is a HUGE difference between those two. We want to pressure the inactives and lynch the lurkers, not lynch the inactives themselves. Remember, mafia aren't inactive, they're lurking.

Here Panadian insists with his distinction between "lurking" and "inactive", my main issue with this is that he fails to provide a way to distinguish between the two. However this is consistent with his earlier post in regard to lynching inactive, this attitude is either pro town (dosn't want to risk killing townies) or pro mafia (wants a nice little lurker nest), atm I feel like its more of a mafia strategy since inactive townies aren't all that useful. Still not a tell either way

Inactives are those who are bored, who don't care about the game, who don't have time.
Lurkers are the ones who are watching yet don't contribute.

Differentiating between those will make or break it for the town. We can't just lynch all the inactives and hope for the best.

I agree, but he provides no method to distinguish, so its just essentially saying "lynch mafia not town" not a great contribution, but at least he defines his terms

As of right now, I want Shockkey to post, but am giving him time. Meanwhile there is someone who might be scum and slipped up. There's no point not pressuring the person at the very least.

Pressuring people is always good, and as I said earlier its vital to point out any perceived scummieness

I didn't think I'd have to go in detail about this, but I guess here it goes.

In mafia, there are two different extremes of people. Those who don't post, and those who do. The active, and the inactive. Mafia will usually end up taking either one of those extremes, either posting alot but not contributing(bill murray for instance), or not posting really at all(most lurking mafia.)

This is something we should all know, but I guess there is no harm in pointing it out

There is a vital different between lurkers and inactives. Most inactives are town. Usually when people are inactive they are bored/don't have time. They didn't get a "fun" role, so just have decided to play SC2 instead of play mafia. You will NOT find mafia in the inactive category. Mafia aren't inactive, they are paying plenty of attention to the game. As you will see, they simply decide to lurk, which is different from being inactive.

Lurkers are a portion of the inactives, but different in a vital way. While inactives don't pay attention to the thread, lurkers do. Lurkers just choose NOT to post because one of mafia's favorite things to do is let each day go by, while no one has said anything. Lurkers is where you will find mafia.

I think this definition makes sense, however it still dosn't provide us with a way to distinguish between the two

Being inactive, while anti town, is not a "scummy" thing to do. Lurking, however is. That is where we must analyze. And that is where Nemesis strikes me as scummy.

Repeats old information, went for the easy lynch, and just overall strikes me as scummy. I'm not saying by any means he's 100% scum, but we should at the VERY least pressure him.

I agree with the idea to pressure, but for some reason I feel as if this massive post hasn't contributed much at all

99% of time mafia do not fall into the realm of inactives. We want to find lurkers, not inactives.

Note I have always been ferevent about getting town talking, and this game should be no different. While we should pressure inactives to TALK, we should be VOTING lurkers.

For example as of now almost everyone has given a good post with the exception of shockkey. Do you really think(given 3 mafia), that mafia are going for the "inactive" role if town always says "lynch inactives."

We want to find those who seem to contribute but don't, not those who don't contribute and don't seem to either.

This is a rehash of what he said earlier, "find lurkers, pressure inactives, scum is spotted because they seem to contribute without contributing"

Mafia will never go inactive if we threaten to lynch inactives. They really never do. Instead they will go "Just above" the threshhold of "contribution", while not really contributing.
As for examples?

Lurkers: Obviously paying attention, talking about unrelated stuff/not topic of debate, repeating same stuff(can fall under inactives too though so be careful), bad reasoning/mafia tells(wishy washy ness, other stuff)

This is another post talking about lurkers, talk about beating a dead horse, this post in its entirety feels like a non-contributing contribution

Because mafia will never go inactive.

As for pressuring them....
For example, we can threaten to lynch people. When for 2 days in a row you only say "I'm busy", that's unnacceptable, and we lynch them. As of now though there is no one I would consider truly "inactive inactive." There really the only way to differentiate is by lynching them, such as soulfire and george clooney, who wouldn't talk even if pressured.

But no one is doing that now. So for now, lynching "inactives" is not what we should be doing.

Says that our current strategy isn't working but does not offer any alternate suggestions, still its not a bad point, except when you consider the amount of games that an inactive/lurking mafia have cost us, in which case it comes out under a more suspicious light

~LSB mentions how inactives have cost us games before~


No LSB, I lost town the game. And I was really active that game.

And you can't say "it doesn't matter". Again, we want to pressure inactives to vote, not lynch them.

Let me ask you some questions:
1.Do you think mafia will lurk, or be inactive, and why?
2.Would you rather lynch a lurker or an inactive, and why?
3.You said you had opinions on Nemesis, what is that?

Forcing LSB to answer questions and fostering discussion is not a bad thing, but questions 1 and 2 seem rather forced to me, they are self evident and #2 in particular has the obvious answer everyone who doesn't want to look suspicious will give, #3 is good though, this almost feels like a non-contributing contribution to me, but I think it has enough to squeak by

Panadian analyzes Hesmyrr, since this one is full of quotes and I really dont want to mess with the format, I'll just write my opinions here, you guys can go look up the post if you wish, essentially Panadian argues that Hesmyrr hasn't posted much and then proceeds to tell us that we should pressure him

~Snipped irrelevant top part~
~snipped quote of Barundar saying Panadian is all over the place with his pressure and asks why he switched off nemesis~

I got enough out of him, the point is to pressure as many people as possible in a limited amount of time. Speaking of which, why is chaoser still voting me since I've obviously spoken.

a fair explanation of why he is switching votes, although personally I would have piled on more pressure to see nemesis' reaction

And BC, I'm expecting alot out of you this game. You're certainly the most experienced one here, yet as of now have hardly said anything of real substance.

Just wanted to point out the irony of BC being modkilled after this post

Finally, I've decided that I don't think Shockkey is scum. He's playing his norm, in fact, even has contributed more with a semi analysis of Nemesis. I think Hesmyrr is a far better person to vote considering he has barely talked at all.

This in my mind gives Panadian some townie points, as he decides against continuing to pressure/bandwagon Shockkey, its pretty common for for mafia to just stick with the easy target

~snip chaoser justifying his vote against Panadian~
I'm not just going to say "If someone does this: then I suspect them as mafia". Should I? It just seems to me that would enable mafia to easily hide from me even more.

And me thinks I've gotten town active. By accusing two people, I started discussion, got people talking, and so forth.

Sounds pretty logical and is a fair defense, nothing suspicious, and it is true he has promoted discussion

Tevo made a very long post, and actually was quite content-full when he actually contributed. Then he died on day 2. We don't know what would've happened with his activity. Furthormore, Brockett was lurking, not inactive. I'm unsure about Tevo, he may have just been inactive as well.

Discussion of a previous game, no comment

But as a very consistent trend those who are inactive are not mafia. While you can name two(and only really one might be inactive mafia), I can name at least 4. George clooney, soulfire, DTA, treehugger.

Pointing out that inactivity == mafia its pretty consistent with his whole lurker/inactive stance from earlier, and its not necessarily a bad thing


Seeing as I doubt I'll get any more from Hesmyrr seeing as he's going to be gone, it's time to pressure a more seasoned player.

Ok

I'm going to be voting Bloody Cobblar. He actually hasn't played anti town. But the thing is he hasn't contributed at all really to the discussion of who to lynch. He's talked about "forced activity" and "watch out for lurkers", but then hasn't done anything. I know your in another game, but you need to start posting more.

##Vote BC

Again a fair target for pressure, but at this point I'm going to throw out there that 3/5 people Panadian has accused have flipped pro town, if either of the other two flip green then that will make me really suspicious of Panadian.

Alright, didn't know you were purposely going to not be as active as you were in pyp3.

Dosn't seem like a good reason to stop pressuring a lurker, but ok I guess

Since I really don't know who to lynch, I'm just going to stick with the Shockkey lynch. Because while I don't think he's mafia, I'm unsure about everyone. And at the very least, there is merit in lynching lurkers, as he has himself addmitted to be one. I think he's been to "I'm town screw off", but as for right now no one else comes to mind.

And this is supicious in my mind, suspicious as hell, as Panadian said earlier he was pretty sure Shockkey was not mafia, as Panadian said earlier its not our goal to kill inactive but rather to kill mafia, also he calls Shockkey a lurker, while under his definition he is more of an inactive, thats quite a mistake for someone who insisted that it was an important distinction

~in reference to LSB~
1.Bad logic, which wouldn't normally be bad but he's not new at all
2.Contradictory statements

Not a great amount, but considering day 1 I think it's decent amount to lynch LSB.
This is actually what I thought too, so I can't really be judgmental about it, although I did not think it enough for a lynch

Fadoodle
##Unvote LSB
##Vote Shockkey

seeing as how Panadian was sure Shockkey was not mafia, would it not be better to go ahead and have a tie? (Im actually unsure about what the answer to that is)

While Hesmyrr is a good choice for medic protection, having only one possibility for medics to protect is a very bad idea. Medic, you should RNG between Hesmyrr and another person you think is blue/going to get hit.

As for the DT check list, here's my list:

Barundar-I agree, that vote switch did catch my attention. Something about him just isn't right. However, he has been performing analysis, but his playstyle has been off(for example, doesn't post as much.)
LSB Has been playing suspiciously
Jackal This guy really catches my eyes. Either he is just showing how he's new, or he's mafia. It's somewhat consistent with the previous game so that helps him a little, but as of now i think he's a good check.

Nothing all that odd here, plus Im getting tired of all this reading

And I changed my vote so we didn't have a tie.
Note if I was mafia, then if I had not done so, there would'be been no lynch.

Im not sure if knowing there was going to be a modkill and being sure of the innocence of the target, that a tie wouldn't have been better for the town, so this argument is pretty much null