Newbie Mini Mafia XLIX

On October 09 2013 05:30 Umasi wrote:

oh yeah sure, now that you're unbanned (that was you that got temp banned right?)
if not then w.e you're signed up anyway

On October 09 2013 09:21 Bereft wrote:
also, totally excited to play with mitt guy. great attitude.

On October 15 2013 04:37 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Ok mitt wtf? LOL

##vote: istandwithmitt

On October 15 2013 04:39 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
You get pinged throughout the day as having only made one early aggression post. People want your thoughts and for you to respond to concerns.

What do you do?

You do the same exact thing on another person. Unless you give something to me to convince me otherwise or someone else fucks up even more (which I think you've raised the bar pretty hard here so that will be difficult), I'm not changing my vote at this point.

On October 15 2013 04:44 GGTeMpLaR wrote:


That's not the issue.

The issue is your reasons are lackluster and you've only made two posts in this entire thread. Early on people have pinged you as suspicious and why they think that and you didn't respond to any of them.

I encourage you, nay I challenge you to actually put some thought into this game and convince me you're town, or at the very least that someone else is a better lynch at this point.

On October 15 2013 04:50 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Like, you didn't even give a reason why you switched your vote off of SagaZ. Is he not suspicious anymore to you or are you just more convinced of playerboy345?

I'm sorry if my vote post on you was disrespectful I just thought it came from nowhere. I expected the next post you would make would address at least one of the people who pinged you as suspicious.

On October 15 2013 04:51 Seuss wrote:
##vote: istandwithmitt

I'm not going to argue with you. Either you shape up and post in a style that doesn't invite us to get into long, time-consuming, and pointless arguments, or we're lynching you on principle.



You guys know for a fact that I'm not scum, but I'd like to remind you that I'm the only person in the game with zero people I can 100% trust. The fact that you know I'm genuine helps, but it doesn't make my reads correct.

That said, here's how I see things right now.

Completely Worthless, Lynch Plz: istandwithmitt

Probable Townie: E00e, nyxnyxnyx, OdinOfPergo, GGTeMpLaR
Uncertain: Bereft, onlywonderboy, SagaZ, Vonthin
Probable Mafia: July617, playerboy345

AFK: Balla24

These are just my initial impressions. I'm uncertain about a few people because we really haven't seen enough of them to truly judge. In any case, these are not conclusions but working hypotheses. I'll change them at the drop of a hat if I find reasons to change my opinion.

On October 15 2013 05:01 OdinOfPergo wrote:
Istand, even to this point, if anyone goes through your filter, you haven't posted anything useful to support yourself.

@Suess,

I'm curious on why you think Nyx is town though.
His 5? post consist of nothing but pretty much the same statement.
I'm less than sold on the idea.

On October 16 2013 02:39 Seuss wrote:


Playing mafia is 90% communication. I'm not sure what you expected was going to happen when you made terse, confrontational posts your modus operandi.

If you want to play, play. The only thing that's stopping you from communicating with us is you. If you'd just gone into detail about why you jumped on SagaZ so fast and why you swapped to playerboy345, rather than blithely posting "good poast" and "Yeah sorry for posting about who I think is scum." you wouldn't be the social pariah you are now.

On October 16 2013 08:48 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
While I respect and relate to your judgment of istandwithmitt, I think if there's ever a day where we can afford to lynch the weakest town instead of a mafia, it's day 1. If he's mafia at this point, then all is well. If he's town, then I think it's better we get rid of him now rather than let him end up in the final 3 and remain a target of suspicion - in addition to the possibility that his seemingly arbitrary reads could end up being the final deciding vote on who is mafia or not.

On October 17 2013 01:06 SagaZ wrote:
God damnit mitt, we already went over this, this is not how it works. If you make an accusation you explain your reasoning behind it, you don't make us guess. If you have a problem with any post, point it out, it helps us, or me at least to understand how you think.

On October 17 2013 02:56 Seuss wrote:


Question: GGTeMpLaR posted that in response to a post I made suggesting we vote for SagaZ or July617. If you think GGTeMpLaR was scum, do you think he was trying to deflect the vote away from other scum or do you think he was simply sowing discord?

On October 17 2013 05:44 GGTeMpLaR wrote:


When did I ever say I thought you were scum all game? I was initially suspicious of both you and SagaZ based on your one initial post and then several pages of silence.

When you made your reappearance, I was pretty convinced whether you were town or mafia, you were the safest lynch for the town because you were making poor contributions without any reasons behind them.

I'd disagree that it's never safe play to lynch a weak town and I gave my reasons for why lynching a horrendously weak town is safe play on Day 1.

On October 17 2013 07:04 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
istandwithmitt you seem to be getting at the notion that you think playerboy345 and myself are mafia together.

Who do you think is the 3rd mafia with us and why?

On October 18 2013 13:55 Seuss wrote:


I am totally okay with murdering SagaZ based on this principle.



Welcome back.

Who do you think scumslipped?

On October 23 2013 22:19 kitaman27 wrote:


That's not how the win conditions were worded. Additionally, your suggested win condition does not work with a Serial Killer.



Voting is required because we don't want the choice to abstain to be a tactical decision for the mafia team. I think 48 hours is a more than reasonable amount of time. If you anticipate that you may be busy at the deadline, then it is suggested that you vote before the deadline.

On October 23 2013 22:24 marvellosity wrote:

I actually posted this then edited it out because I realised I was wrong.

owb was a multi-shot vigilante and so could have shot mafia at the time he was shot by mafia.

People worry way too much about the exact wording in the OP, when using common sense to work out what would happen is almost always the right way.

The only reason there's the # of mafia = # of town rule is to rule out stupid vote races based on who's online when.

On October 23 2013 22:25 marvellosity wrote:
This forum has run dozens and dozens of games, and we are very happy with our voting rules.

On October 23 2013 22:27 marvellosity wrote:


What are you talking about? Town is obviously encouraged to vote in a 2:1 situation, otherwise a 2:1 situation becomes a 1:1 situation.

Literally the *only* situation that mafia does NOT win in this 1:1 situation is the EXACT situation that occurred in this game - where the remaining townie has bullets to shoot at the mafia.

On October 23 2013 22:49 LoneMeow wrote:


Technically, it would have been a vote race because of the tiebreaker rule, and the winner would've been the one that dropped a vote on the other first. Since vote races are dumb we decided we prefer to end the game with a draw.



However dumb you think it is, it was the rule. You don't like the rules, then don't play.

Personally, I believe the rule makes sense from a game theory perspective, but that's not the issue here.



I'm glad you appreciate the effort we put into this...



If we consistently let single no-voters get by with a warning, that becomes a strategic option in itself (although one of questionable morality)...

On October 23 2013 23:09 WaveofShadow wrote:
More often than not I find that rule more visibly affects people who fuck off for most of a game and don't care enough to vote.

In which case I support it wholeheartedly.

On October 23 2013 23:11 marvellosity wrote:


The 1:1 situation this game is a special situation because the townie has a gun

pretty sure i already explained this. I think we're done here.

On October 23 2013 23:20 marvellosity wrote:


It's nothing to do with "favouring"

You disallow vote-races because that relies on when people are physically online, which is an outside-of-game commodity/chance

Therefore it goes to night actions, where both players have guns to shoot each other with, which they obviously will. It's really, really, really simple.

On October 23 2013 23:31 marvellosity wrote:


Town loses 100% of the time by not lynching if they have no vigi - it goes to 1-1, no voting, then mafia kills the townie at night

Once again, town having a vigi alive at the end of the game is a unique situation.

On October 23 2013 23:37 Mocsta wrote:
I Stand With Mitt

This conversation is pointless.

Whether the game should have ended in a mafia victory or draw.

YOU LOST !

As an important aside:
The people commenting on this game that did not play int his game are pretty experienced fellows when it comes to mafia. Many have hosted several games and do know what they are talking about.

Anyways, hope you enjoyed playing, and theres another newbie with signups ready, if you have not joined yet.

On October 24 2013 00:00 Mocsta wrote:
Well, town got a victory.

I am saying "YOU LOST"

(1) barely used coaching
(2) failed using the most powerful weapon a townie has - their vote
(3) chose to participate in the game in a manner which would alienate you

But do not despair; there are many things you can improve upon, as long as you want to improve. \

On October 24 2013 00:12 Mocsta wrote:

Whose being rude?

You clearly do not have thick skin.

According to this: you want to share constructive criticism, but will not reciprocate by receiving?