|
On May 21 2009 10:40 MTF wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:34 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:30 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
How? Ace would be the least scrutinizable individual in the game: he's got a group of followers that have consistently defended him since day 1, cannot be rolechecked, and cannot even be looked at during a double lynch. You don't need a role check to identify him with time (you can't fake away clues even if you can fake behavior) and I'm quite sure that if those defending him were not Mafia, they would stop doing so in the face of clear evidence. If not, then you were right. On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
This is the equivalent of the argument we made for Qatol earlier: "Well, its cool, we'll just kill him a turn later if we find out something's fishy" in the face of a mountain of evidence against him. You're either making the assumption that there is a mountain of evidence against Ace right now that nobody is seeing except you or that there will be a mountain of evidence later with which town will do nothing with. I'm guessing the former. I don't think there's really anything constructive to say if either option is correct, though. I didn't say we needed a role check. I said he's the least scrutinizable player in the game. Is that correct or not? No rolecheck. Large bandwagon behind him. Cannot vote for him until day 5 or vig hit if we do back to back double lynches. Consistently contradictory posts. Has supported mafia players in the past. The target of a massive voteswing. I mean, 2+2. There's evidence. First, the so-called large bandwagon behind him is pretty small to the very consistent core that voted Ver in and people can defend Ace without being die-hard about it. Like me, right now. Second, the "cannot vote for him" bit is incorrect, unless you assume that we can't vote for him because he'd pardon whoever the other person was. Which is incorrect. I haven't seen that many contradictory posts and I'm not sure what you mean by his having supported mafia players in the past, unless you somehow have them figured out already. Finally, the massive voteswing you're talking about happened because of the Nemy situation. Nemy was close to being pushed into a position and many players did not like that, so there was a movement to vote in either Mynock or Ace in behind Ver. Ace ended up being the one that got the votes.
MTF, we already 100% agreed that if Ace is mafia and he's going down, its always in his best interest to pardon the other player, mafia or not.
If both Ver and Ace are mafia, your analysis of the 'large bandwagon' is consistent with what most mafia players would do in the current situation. Drop Ver, switch to Ace.
And regardless of the nemY situation, if Ace flips red, the voteswing is a voteswing. THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TELL WHICH SIDE HE'S ON.
|
On May 21 2009 10:41 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:38 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:36 Ace wrote:
What Mafia players have I supported in the past? Obvious one? Your buddy running mate Ver. You mean the Day before the bodyguards were killed right? Right. Because after they died + the shifty PM I instantly said I think he's fishy. Thanks for the fail. Now what other Mafia players have I supported?
Pretty sure by all analysis of the bodyguards dying performed to this point towards you and Ver equally.
The main cause of suspicion on Ver is simple inactivity.
Guess what, I was calling him fishy before day 1 even ended, : ).
|
On May 21 2009 10:43 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:41 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:39 Bockit wrote:
@showtime!
Ver's already implied what his defense is going to be in his previous post. It's going to be something along the lines of 'You all sucked, so I ignored you, and the thread', 'I'm really disappointed', 'I was too busy to try and correct misconceptions'.
If that sits with you as a legitimate defense then by all means, wait. If it doesn't, I'd recommend voting for him now. It was Ace's defense last game.I agree its a bullshit defense, but it was actually valid in the most recent example of it being used. I got lynched last game? lol.
When incriminated by versatile you threw up your hands said the town was stupid and won a titay.
|
On May 21 2009 10:44 L wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:40 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:34 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:30 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
How? Ace would be the least scrutinizable individual in the game: he's got a group of followers that have consistently defended him since day 1, cannot be rolechecked, and cannot even be looked at during a double lynch. You don't need a role check to identify him with time (you can't fake away clues even if you can fake behavior) and I'm quite sure that if those defending him were not Mafia, they would stop doing so in the face of clear evidence. If not, then you were right. On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
This is the equivalent of the argument we made for Qatol earlier: "Well, its cool, we'll just kill him a turn later if we find out something's fishy" in the face of a mountain of evidence against him. You're either making the assumption that there is a mountain of evidence against Ace right now that nobody is seeing except you or that there will be a mountain of evidence later with which town will do nothing with. I'm guessing the former. I don't think there's really anything constructive to say if either option is correct, though. I didn't say we needed a role check. I said he's the least scrutinizable player in the game. Is that correct or not? No rolecheck. Large bandwagon behind him. Cannot vote for him until day 5 or vig hit if we do back to back double lynches. Consistently contradictory posts. Has supported mafia players in the past. The target of a massive voteswing. I mean, 2+2. There's evidence. First, the so-called large bandwagon behind him is pretty small to the very consistent core that voted Ver in and people can defend Ace without being die-hard about it. Like me, right now. Second, the "cannot vote for him" bit is incorrect, unless you assume that we can't vote for him because he'd pardon whoever the other person was. Which is incorrect. I haven't seen that many contradictory posts and I'm not sure what you mean by his having supported mafia players in the past, unless you somehow have them figured out already. Finally, the massive voteswing you're talking about happened because of the Nemy situation. Nemy was close to being pushed into a position and many players did not like that, so there was a movement to vote in either Mynock or Ace in behind Ver. Ace ended up being the one that got the votes. MTF, we already 100% agreed that if Ace is mafia and he's going down, its always in his best interest to pardon the other player, mafia or not. If both Ver and Ace are mafia, your analysis of the 'large bandwagon' is consistent with what most mafia players would do in the current situation. Drop Ver, switch to Ace. And regardless of the nemY situation, if Ace flips red, the voteswing is a voteswing. THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TELL WHICH SIDE HE'S ON.
IF I'm Mafia - which while is a solid idea you keep ignoring the fact that very few people think I am. Your plan relies on the fact that I'd be confirmed Mafia by now which is not the case and you keep trying to ACT like I am.
Which brings us to problem #2 - Ver and I are Mafia - which is impossible at this point. If both of us were Mafia you'd be ignoring a VERY glaring problem - we would never kill off both Bodyguards if that were the case.
And since you are relying on #2 to prove #1 as the point for me being Mafia and going along with your plan - it fails. This is what we've been telling you for ages but you come up with new ideas in your head to justify a failed plan.
|
On May 21 2009 10:47 L wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:43 Ace wrote:On May 21 2009 10:41 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:39 Bockit wrote:
@showtime!
Ver's already implied what his defense is going to be in his previous post. It's going to be something along the lines of 'You all sucked, so I ignored you, and the thread', 'I'm really disappointed', 'I was too busy to try and correct misconceptions'.
If that sits with you as a legitimate defense then by all means, wait. If it doesn't, I'd recommend voting for him now. It was Ace's defense last game.I agree its a bullshit defense, but it was actually valid in the most recent example of it being used. I got lynched last game? lol. When incriminated by versatile you threw up your hands said the town was stupid and won a titay.
because you'd have to pretty stupid to believe someone who's about to die as their last line" I know Ace's playing style - he's Mafia lynch him!" and when she flips innocent you assume she knows what she was talking about even though she barely paid attention to the game.
I win.
|
On May 21 2009 10:49 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:44 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:40 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:34 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:30 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
How? Ace would be the least scrutinizable individual in the game: he's got a group of followers that have consistently defended him since day 1, cannot be rolechecked, and cannot even be looked at during a double lynch. You don't need a role check to identify him with time (you can't fake away clues even if you can fake behavior) and I'm quite sure that if those defending him were not Mafia, they would stop doing so in the face of clear evidence. If not, then you were right. On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
This is the equivalent of the argument we made for Qatol earlier: "Well, its cool, we'll just kill him a turn later if we find out something's fishy" in the face of a mountain of evidence against him. You're either making the assumption that there is a mountain of evidence against Ace right now that nobody is seeing except you or that there will be a mountain of evidence later with which town will do nothing with. I'm guessing the former. I don't think there's really anything constructive to say if either option is correct, though. I didn't say we needed a role check. I said he's the least scrutinizable player in the game. Is that correct or not? No rolecheck. Large bandwagon behind him. Cannot vote for him until day 5 or vig hit if we do back to back double lynches. Consistently contradictory posts. Has supported mafia players in the past. The target of a massive voteswing. I mean, 2+2. There's evidence. First, the so-called large bandwagon behind him is pretty small to the very consistent core that voted Ver in and people can defend Ace without being die-hard about it. Like me, right now. Second, the "cannot vote for him" bit is incorrect, unless you assume that we can't vote for him because he'd pardon whoever the other person was. Which is incorrect. I haven't seen that many contradictory posts and I'm not sure what you mean by his having supported mafia players in the past, unless you somehow have them figured out already. Finally, the massive voteswing you're talking about happened because of the Nemy situation. Nemy was close to being pushed into a position and many players did not like that, so there was a movement to vote in either Mynock or Ace in behind Ver. Ace ended up being the one that got the votes. MTF, we already 100% agreed that if Ace is mafia and he's going down, its always in his best interest to pardon the other player, mafia or not. If both Ver and Ace are mafia, your analysis of the 'large bandwagon' is consistent with what most mafia players would do in the current situation. Drop Ver, switch to Ace. And regardless of the nemY situation, if Ace flips red, the voteswing is a voteswing. THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TELL WHICH SIDE HE'S ON. IF I'm Mafia - which while is a solid idea you keep ignoring the fact that very few people think I am. Your plan relies on the fact that I'd be confirmed Mafia by now which is not the case and you keep trying to ACT like I am. Which brings us to problem #2 - Ver and I are Mafia - which is impossible at this point. If both of us were Mafia you'd be ignoring a VERY glaring problem - we would never kill off both Bodyguards if that were the case. And since you are relying on #2 to prove #1 as the point for me being Mafia and going along with your plan - it fails. This is what we've been telling you for ages but you come up with new ideas in your head to justify a failed plan.
This is probably the THIRD time I repeat this. My plan does not REQUIRE that you're mafia to pay off. It does, however, pay off even in the event that you are. NONE of the other suggestions, including lynching ver today over you, do.
If both of you were mafia, there are a number of scenarios which would lead to both BGs dying. I believe Incog summarized my thinking on the matter like 2 pages ago in a completely seperate analysis.
Since #1 isn't an assumption I make and #2 doesn't prove what you want it to, you have no rational argument against my position.
|
On May 21 2009 10:51 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:47 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:43 Ace wrote:On May 21 2009 10:41 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:39 Bockit wrote:
@showtime!
Ver's already implied what his defense is going to be in his previous post. It's going to be something along the lines of 'You all sucked, so I ignored you, and the thread', 'I'm really disappointed', 'I was too busy to try and correct misconceptions'.
If that sits with you as a legitimate defense then by all means, wait. If it doesn't, I'd recommend voting for him now. It was Ace's defense last game.I agree its a bullshit defense, but it was actually valid in the most recent example of it being used. I got lynched last game? lol. When incriminated by versatile you threw up your hands said the town was stupid and won a titay. because you'd have to pretty stupid to believe someone who's about to die as their last line" I know Ace's playing style - he's Mafia lynch him!" and when she flips innocent you assume she knows what she was talking about even though she barely paid attention to the game. I win.
You know very stupid players are in both games, waiting to be led around by the nose. That would be exactly why you died. Not like Caller's NOT in this game, or the quality of players towers above him on average.
That said, the "i know his style, lol, i am right" argument was your initial gloss for Ver.
|
On May 21 2009 10:44 L wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:40 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:34 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:30 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
How? Ace would be the least scrutinizable individual in the game: he's got a group of followers that have consistently defended him since day 1, cannot be rolechecked, and cannot even be looked at during a double lynch. You don't need a role check to identify him with time (you can't fake away clues even if you can fake behavior) and I'm quite sure that if those defending him were not Mafia, they would stop doing so in the face of clear evidence. If not, then you were right. On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
This is the equivalent of the argument we made for Qatol earlier: "Well, its cool, we'll just kill him a turn later if we find out something's fishy" in the face of a mountain of evidence against him. You're either making the assumption that there is a mountain of evidence against Ace right now that nobody is seeing except you or that there will be a mountain of evidence later with which town will do nothing with. I'm guessing the former. I don't think there's really anything constructive to say if either option is correct, though. I didn't say we needed a role check. I said he's the least scrutinizable player in the game. Is that correct or not? No rolecheck. Large bandwagon behind him. Cannot vote for him until day 5 or vig hit if we do back to back double lynches. Consistently contradictory posts. Has supported mafia players in the past. The target of a massive voteswing. I mean, 2+2. There's evidence. First, the so-called large bandwagon behind him is pretty small to the very consistent core that voted Ver in and people can defend Ace without being die-hard about it. Like me, right now. Second, the "cannot vote for him" bit is incorrect, unless you assume that we can't vote for him because he'd pardon whoever the other person was. Which is incorrect. I haven't seen that many contradictory posts and I'm not sure what you mean by his having supported mafia players in the past, unless you somehow have them figured out already. Finally, the massive voteswing you're talking about happened because of the Nemy situation. Nemy was close to being pushed into a position and many players did not like that, so there was a movement to vote in either Mynock or Ace in behind Ver. Ace ended up being the one that got the votes. MTF, we already 100% agreed that if Ace is mafia and he's going down, its always in his best interest to pardon the other player, mafia or not. If both Ver and Ace are mafia, your analysis of the 'large bandwagon' is consistent with what most mafia players would do in the current situation. Drop Ver, switch to Ace. And regardless of the nemY situation, if Ace flips red, the voteswing is a voteswing. THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TELL WHICH SIDE HE'S ON.
I agree with everything in the first two sentences. The problem is they are complete "what if" situations to you.
For the third, however...Help me understand this. Assume that you are right, and Ace is Mafia. Why would Mafia not have voted him in sooner or secured him a strong spot in the election earlier on, so as to avoid the very suspicion you are putting on him? Was Nemy just a convenient cover for a sudden five-six votes to switch over to him? And assuming further that both are mafia: Was the plan just to get Ver in first and then the Nemy situation happened, so they figured, hell, why not try to get both of them in? Or was Nemy an intentional part of it?
See the problem I have with your scenario?
|
The point is, L, that you are really the only person who strongly feels Ace is Mafia and wasting a vote on him today does not feel worth it. Additionally, some may feel as I do about the voting pattern in that it is irrelevant for the moment who voted for Ace near the end of the last election, due to the Nemy situation. It only becomes relevant if more evidence builds up against Ace or, tenuously, if Nemy turns up red.
|
he may be the only one who believes ace is mafia, however, he could easily be traitor, or a retard towny. The longer the ace/L fighting continues the longer the town will be in chaos. As such we should off ace tonight as he is a suspect to put an end to it all.
|
On May 21 2009 10:56 MTF wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:44 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:40 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:34 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:30 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
How? Ace would be the least scrutinizable individual in the game: he's got a group of followers that have consistently defended him since day 1, cannot be rolechecked, and cannot even be looked at during a double lynch. You don't need a role check to identify him with time (you can't fake away clues even if you can fake behavior) and I'm quite sure that if those defending him were not Mafia, they would stop doing so in the face of clear evidence. If not, then you were right. On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
This is the equivalent of the argument we made for Qatol earlier: "Well, its cool, we'll just kill him a turn later if we find out something's fishy" in the face of a mountain of evidence against him. You're either making the assumption that there is a mountain of evidence against Ace right now that nobody is seeing except you or that there will be a mountain of evidence later with which town will do nothing with. I'm guessing the former. I don't think there's really anything constructive to say if either option is correct, though. I didn't say we needed a role check. I said he's the least scrutinizable player in the game. Is that correct or not? No rolecheck. Large bandwagon behind him. Cannot vote for him until day 5 or vig hit if we do back to back double lynches. Consistently contradictory posts. Has supported mafia players in the past. The target of a massive voteswing. I mean, 2+2. There's evidence. First, the so-called large bandwagon behind him is pretty small to the very consistent core that voted Ver in and people can defend Ace without being die-hard about it. Like me, right now. Second, the "cannot vote for him" bit is incorrect, unless you assume that we can't vote for him because he'd pardon whoever the other person was. Which is incorrect. I haven't seen that many contradictory posts and I'm not sure what you mean by his having supported mafia players in the past, unless you somehow have them figured out already. Finally, the massive voteswing you're talking about happened because of the Nemy situation. Nemy was close to being pushed into a position and many players did not like that, so there was a movement to vote in either Mynock or Ace in behind Ver. Ace ended up being the one that got the votes. MTF, we already 100% agreed that if Ace is mafia and he's going down, its always in his best interest to pardon the other player, mafia or not. If both Ver and Ace are mafia, your analysis of the 'large bandwagon' is consistent with what most mafia players would do in the current situation. Drop Ver, switch to Ace. And regardless of the nemY situation, if Ace flips red, the voteswing is a voteswing. THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TELL WHICH SIDE HE'S ON. I agree with everything in the first two sentences. The problem is they are complete "what if" situations to you. For the third, however...Help me understand this. Assume that you are right, and Ace is Mafia. Why would Mafia not have voted him in sooner or secured him a strong spot in the election earlier on, so as to avoid the very suspicion you are putting on him? Was Nemy just a convenient cover for a sudden five-six votes to switch over to him? And assuming further that both are mafia: Was the plan just to get Ver in first and then the Nemy situation happened, so they figured, hell, why not try to get both of them in? Or was Nemy an intentional part of it? See the problem I have with your scenario?
Why would Mafia not have voted him in sooner? Because mafia already HAD him in prior to nemY. Ver had a commanding lead, showtime had like 3 votes and Ace was sitting above that. No point stacking people on, might as well sprinkle mafia on other targets to lay low.
When nemY happened, mafia didn't 'want' to have to voteswing Ace in, but nemY's candidacy forced some people to switch to him. Obviously you examine each voter independantly, but there are a number of late Ace voters that are fishy. Tricode, for instance, has been either been playing consistently stupid (and given last game I sadly concede that he's potentially that stupid without ulterior motives. So what do I do regarding a player like tricode? How do I crack his motivations?
Well, I need date from Ace to complete the picture.
Basically you're saying "mafia could have done many things" which is true. What doesn't change, however, is that mafia will push their members into office given a chance, and during this election there was clearly an opportunity go go x2 office, which is why I think we should prepare for that possibility.
|
O, and seeing as you're looking for voting stuff, look at the current situation:
Ver's Mayoral Voter List:
BloodyC0bbler
Caller
Scaramanga
Mynock
0cz3c
dreamflower
RebirthOfLeGenD
Vivi57
iNfuNdiBuLuM
Incognito <-- from Showtime
Malongo <-- from Ace
LucasWoJ
Ace Current Lynching List:
L
nemY
dreamflower
Amber[Light]
Bockit <-- from Ver
Plexa
BloodyC0bbler <-- from Plexa
Scaramanga <-- from Ver
Italics are overlapped. Dreamflower has only ever posted in the thread to defend herself and Scaramanga has been even more inactive, yet they both voted in Ver and are both gunning for Ace.
If Ver is Mafia and some of those who voted for him also are, and now they want to switch over to Ace, they're doing a pretty poor job of it right now.
|
On May 21 2009 11:01 MTF wrote:
The point is, L, that you are really the only person who strongly feels Ace is Mafia and wasting a vote on him today does not feel worth it. Additionally, some may feel as I do about the voting pattern in that it is irrelevant for the moment who voted for Ace near the end of the last election, due to the Nemy situation. It only becomes relevant if more evidence builds up against Ace or, tenuously, if Nemy turns up red.
I am not the only one who suspects Ace. By a longshot.
|
On May 21 2009 11:09 MTF wrote:
O, and seeing as you're looking for voting stuff, look at the current situation:
Ver's Mayoral Voter List:
BloodyC0bbler
Caller
Scaramanga
Mynock
0cz3c
dreamflower
RebirthOfLeGenD
Vivi57
iNfuNdiBuLuM
Incognito <-- from Showtime
Malongo <-- from Ace
LucasWoJ
Ace Current Lynching List:
L
nemY
dreamflower
Amber[Light]
Bockit <-- from Ver
Plexa
BloodyC0bbler <-- from Plexa
Scaramanga <-- from Ver
Italics are overlapped. Dreamflower has only ever posted in the thread to defend herself and Scaramanga has been even more inactive, yet they both voted in Ver and are both gunning for Ace.
If Ver is Mafia and some of those who voted for him also are, and now they want to switch over to Ace, they're doing a pretty poor job of it right now.
This type of information becomes crystal clear when we find out who is who  . That's exactly why I want to blow away the confusion.
|
United States2186 Posts
Now I'm gonna to try to keep it to the point because it's blatantly obvious that people don't read my longer posts as thoroughly as they should. Yes MTF I'm gonna get under people's skin because the town is collectively being retarded and mafia are laughing from the sidelines. I've made my share of my mistakes as well but I prefer to sit back and figure out why I was wrong instead of blindly charging forward. I was considering writing in my normal style and giving a history of the game from my side but again I think people don't read my long posts thoroughly enough (understandable) and I'm pretty apathetic as it is. Thus I figured a direct approach might be better. I want people to react to this, and I want everyone to consider what they've been thinking. Many will criticize my lack of reasoning included for all I will write here but a) I've said a lot of it in previous posts and b) I'm putting my life on the line here. Do what you will.
I have had no reason to contribute because my posts will either be behavior analyzed by a bunch of wannabe analysts that frankly are terrible (hence the current situation of townies going after townies) or it will be swept up in the sea of garbage that is the thread. And furthermore I was also wrong on many counts earlier. For example I didn't post for some time because I thought Ace (traitor) and L (mafia) were arguing with each other and I saw no reason to disrupt it. I originally thought Mynock was mafia as well. Sorry guys.
I will not defend myself anymore. All I will say is that I'm a veteran. Instead of judging on my activity, or lack thereof, I suggest you carefully read through my posts and draw your own conclusions.
If you want to kill me, FEEL FREE. However, I suggest you do it in one of two ways: a) vigi me or b) let me modkill myself when Ace is dead. I am perfectly will to do either because frankly I am quite apathetic (running for mayor was a mistake sorry) and because once I am confirmed either way my evidence and analysis will instantly be trusted. The important thing is that Ace must die tonight because of my mistake in neglecting to consider the traitor possibility he has the pardoner's power and has shown no interest in doing the right things for the town.
I think it's better if the vigi goes for me, but you guys can decide which you'd rather I do. See the end for more info.
To start off I will tell you guys something interesting:
Nobody remotely considered for a lynch is mafia.
That means:
Ver
Ace (traitor)
L
Mynock
Dreamflower
BC
are all not mafia. Yes they're (the visible ones posting garbage) just sucking. My performance has hardly been good either but so long as Ace dies this lynch we will still be on track for victory. Of course that means the town as whole must stop going at each other's throats and broaden their searches.
Plexa is the exception here in terms of lynch suspects. Let's hold that thought though. I'll be thorough and give you the list of people that are almost ironclad innocent:
1. Caller
2. Incognito
3. scamp
5. bloodyc0bbler
6. fishball*
7. nemy
9. Ver
14. mikeymoo*
15. dreamflower
16. ace (traitor)
17. infundibulum
19. mynock
20. lucaswoj (Bodyguard)
21. amber[light]
25. infinity21*
30. L
A few notes here: Ace is traitor. *'s are dead.
I'm pretty positive at most 1/6 people here are mafia. At most. I'm not going to explain how I came to these conclusions because everyone will try to be a supersleuth and misanalyze it. Trust it, hate it, do what you want with it, but keep it as a frame of reference regardless.
Nonconfirmed innocents:
Scara
fusionsdf
Bockit
Plexa
Cam
Showtime
vivi
rol
mtf
0cz3c
heavon
tricode
malongo
mbh
5/6 or 6/6 here are mafia.
Of these I am most suspicious of (not saying others are off the hook though):
Scara
Bockit
MBH (would be GF if mafia)
Camlito
0cz3c
heavon
I'll be honest my analysis on this is not finished yet, which is why I didn't want to post it, but we have some leads. I'll refrain from posting the full reasoning until things are more clear, but here's a start.
I have known several blue roles for awhile now (lol why would I kill bg's when I know vigis meds and dts?) and I've made certain the key people know what they are in case I die or anything. I'm going to have one of them roleclaim because after tonight it's irrelevant anyway.
Essentially mafia have been in the shadows for the most part, encouraging bad ideas and being active but not contributing much.
Overall lesson on behavior analysis: Mafia are the ones who want to make you think everything is normal; a mafia doesn't want to stand out. They are inherently afraid of putting themselves at risk in most normal circumstances. This is how Ace/L/Mynock can be determined (among other metrics); they are all gunning so hard for certain things that the backlash on them would be murderous. Mafia are much more likely to subtly influence things and watch the carnage. Exceptions exist, but I just wanted to point this out because it clearly reflects the current situation.
Btw Ace I will tl;dr whatever you say since you're playing so far below your normal level and just adding garbage.
|
Sydney2287 Posts
It's pretty crystal clear simply if Ver flips red, who we all suspect anyway. That information doesn't require Ace to be flipped.
|
Sydney2287 Posts
|
This is going nowhere. I hope you guys make the right decision. I've waited long enough.
Bed.
EDIT: Ver just posted. READING and then bed.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Thought I mayaswell break my silence 
I agree with L, and I too strongly believe Ace is mafia
just saw Ver's post; looks solid to me
|
On May 21 2009 11:08 L wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 10:56 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:44 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:40 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:34 L wrote:On May 21 2009 10:30 MTF wrote:On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
How? Ace would be the least scrutinizable individual in the game: he's got a group of followers that have consistently defended him since day 1, cannot be rolechecked, and cannot even be looked at during a double lynch. You don't need a role check to identify him with time (you can't fake away clues even if you can fake behavior) and I'm quite sure that if those defending him were not Mafia, they would stop doing so in the face of clear evidence. If not, then you were right. On May 21 2009 10:18 L wrote:
This is the equivalent of the argument we made for Qatol earlier: "Well, its cool, we'll just kill him a turn later if we find out something's fishy" in the face of a mountain of evidence against him. You're either making the assumption that there is a mountain of evidence against Ace right now that nobody is seeing except you or that there will be a mountain of evidence later with which town will do nothing with. I'm guessing the former. I don't think there's really anything constructive to say if either option is correct, though. I didn't say we needed a role check. I said he's the least scrutinizable player in the game. Is that correct or not? No rolecheck. Large bandwagon behind him. Cannot vote for him until day 5 or vig hit if we do back to back double lynches. Consistently contradictory posts. Has supported mafia players in the past. The target of a massive voteswing. I mean, 2+2. There's evidence. First, the so-called large bandwagon behind him is pretty small to the very consistent core that voted Ver in and people can defend Ace without being die-hard about it. Like me, right now. Second, the "cannot vote for him" bit is incorrect, unless you assume that we can't vote for him because he'd pardon whoever the other person was. Which is incorrect. I haven't seen that many contradictory posts and I'm not sure what you mean by his having supported mafia players in the past, unless you somehow have them figured out already. Finally, the massive voteswing you're talking about happened because of the Nemy situation. Nemy was close to being pushed into a position and many players did not like that, so there was a movement to vote in either Mynock or Ace in behind Ver. Ace ended up being the one that got the votes. MTF, we already 100% agreed that if Ace is mafia and he's going down, its always in his best interest to pardon the other player, mafia or not. If both Ver and Ace are mafia, your analysis of the 'large bandwagon' is consistent with what most mafia players would do in the current situation. Drop Ver, switch to Ace. And regardless of the nemY situation, if Ace flips red, the voteswing is a voteswing. THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TELL WHICH SIDE HE'S ON. I agree with everything in the first two sentences. The problem is they are complete "what if" situations to you. For the third, however...Help me understand this. Assume that you are right, and Ace is Mafia. Why would Mafia not have voted him in sooner or secured him a strong spot in the election earlier on, so as to avoid the very suspicion you are putting on him? Was Nemy just a convenient cover for a sudden five-six votes to switch over to him? And assuming further that both are mafia: Was the plan just to get Ver in first and then the Nemy situation happened, so they figured, hell, why not try to get both of them in? Or was Nemy an intentional part of it? See the problem I have with your scenario? Why would Mafia not have voted him in sooner? Because mafia already HAD him in prior to nemY. Ver had a commanding lead, showtime had like 3 votes and Ace was sitting above that. No point stacking people on, might as well sprinkle mafia on other targets to lay low. When nemY happened, mafia didn't 'want' to have to voteswing Ace in, but nemY's candidacy forced some people to switch to him. Obviously you examine each voter independantly, but there are a number of late Ace voters that are fishy. Tricode, for instance, has been either been playing consistently stupid (and given last game I sadly concede that he's potentially that stupid without ulterior motives. So what do I do regarding a player like tricode? How do I crack his motivations? Well, I need date from Ace to complete the picture. Basically you're saying "mafia could have done many things" which is true. What doesn't change, however, is that mafia will push their members into office given a chance, and during this election there was clearly an opportunity go go x2 office, which is why I think we should prepare for that possibility.
You know you're getting on my nervs. Keep me out of your stupid tangents and raves. You have brought my name quite a few times with a few insults here and there.
If you can take some consideration, my last game was the first time I was ever townie. Before that I was just thrown into mafia with out a shit of a clue in what to do.
Now if you would like to call me stupid this game. I would like you to present me with some sort of reasoning, other wise stop being a emotional cry baby about how since I didn't agree with you early on in the game = me being stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
