Ender's Mafia Game

Ankeli didn't win as treestump in the Monty Python game. :evilgrin: I don't think G-Man counts as a treestump either.

Wait. They are really called buggers? That's as bad as DarkFriend.

Don't think I read Monty Python game. Could be mistaken, I just seem to think he got it a lot, and in general rarely votes.

Yeah, Formics is the official name, but the slang/derogatory term most humans (especially military) use is buggers.

I'm not sure, I'm probably going to spend the first few 'days' voting for whoever is voted for the most, until I learn how to work it out from people's posts etc.

When it comes to voting, always make up your own mind. Just voting with the crowd means that if mafia can guide a vote they get an extra free vote. Not quite as bad as not voting, but not as good as voting for who you think is scum. A townie always wants to make up their own mind, because the only person they can be 100% sure is town is themselves.


Attempted framing is what I see, and I've seen similar tactics used before. Now sure what makes this scummier than other times.

The fact that you brought it up, and then drug Drixx in with you. In general I don't use the LAMIST (For new people that is "Look at me I am so townie" - usually pointing out a scum is trying to hard to pretend to be townie), but it seems to apply here.

No one commented on you being suspicious because CG died. Why did you bring it up? Why did you decide to mention Drixx in your response?
 
I'm not sure, I'm probably going to spend the first few 'days' voting for whoever is voted for the most, until I learn how to work it out from people's posts etc.

1. You suspect Mafia. You are not sure of who they are but you suspect someone all the same. Then you want to jump on trains instead of voting for/trying to find out who you think is Mafia?

2. You assume that you will survive not just one Day but a few Days. The only players that assume that they will survive are the Mafia.

Not sure who is more deserving of my vote, you or Korial.
 
Is it just me or does the "who-posted" screen (if you click on 'replies' of a thread to see who posted in that thread) not work for anyone else? Down across the forums for me, not just this thread.
 
Is it just me or does the "who-posted" screen (if you click on 'replies' of a thread to see who posted in that thread) not work for anyone else? Down across the forums for me, not just this thread.
I had this problem yesterday but didn't think much of it for some reason. Will certainly make tracking posts more difficult.
 
Is it just me or does the "who-posted" screen (if you click on 'replies' of a thread to see who posted in that thread) not work for anyone else? Down across the forums for me, not just this thread.

The squid has been around. I've been having trouble receiving e-mails of reported threads.
 
Games most often start with a 'joke phase', of sorts, to get the ball rolling. Otherwise, who wants to be the first poster? Reading over past games, how often have you found that those that start the serious conversation are labeled as scum? So jokes are said, silly votes are placed, and the reactions those illicit will eventually provoke proper discussion. Case in point - my joke votes got you discussing the merit of them, which has now lead us to a serious discussion about the validity of the joke phase.

For instance - due to those joke votes I placed, I now suspect something about Korialstraz. He felt the need to inform us that he wasn't going to be around much during the Twilight phase, yet stops by to offer a drunken read on me that very much looks to be in response to my joke vote on you (while re-informing us of his lack of activity). Almost as if he were defending you, for some strange reason. Now, later in the game, if you were to be lynched and flipped scum, that would naturally lead me to start questioning Korialstraz.

I don't see that as obfuscation at all. In fact, I see it as exactly the opposite: Perform an action; gauge reactions to the action; use information to determine who is scum.

Here CG talks about korial and Drixx and their possible relation.

I am not a man and neither is Moar. Can we be in the tub too or should we be in our own tub? Moar, do you like bubble baths? I have some good smelling stuff, quite exquisite! :D And a bubble bath is not complete if there is no wine. I have some wine by the tub too. :cloud9:

I vote for our own tub. More space and fewer people to share the wine with. ;)


Because killing off CG would be an efficient way of adding suspicion to both me and Drixx at the same time, considering our interaction with him in the twilight phase.

I don't think its suspicious that korial mentioned both him and Drixx there since CG was talking about both of them.

@pharphis: Seems my PAL subscription ran out. I've already paid for a new one, but it hasn't updated yet. In other words you probably can't PM me until it's been updated. I'll notify Rush/Elly in the evening (my time) if it still hasn't been updated. Let me know if you need an alternate way of contacting me until my account has been upgraded.

This I don't know what to make of. Korial saying that pharphis currently hasn't got another method of contacting him implies that korial is not in a QT. Which implies he's not mafia. I don't buy that outright.

I do not know the motivations for CG's NK. Korial in particular is not giving off good vibes to me. That Korial comes out and mentions this point himself, and then includes Drixx for a frame-up as well does not look good to me.

See again the first quote. I didn't react to korial's posts at all before his pm post. Now I'm unsure.
 
In the ASOIAF game, we lynched a white walker, because the claim didn't match with lore. So in some situations I guess it helps. Depends on how you apply your knowledge.

Forgot this one in the last post. White Walkers where actually the town but because of the lore they were seen as the bad guys. So not so sure how much lore helped there.
 
Unvote: Kitteh
Vote: Solar Ice

Too eager to create suspects, too whimsical, too uncharacteristic. Korial is just playing like he always does, town or mafia. Kitteh is a newcomer and won't think of tactical voting or gameplan's on D1.

Of all the flimsy cases we normally have on day one. Having one because someone's out of character is looking mighty fine to me.
 
He mentions Drixx as well as himself for a frame-up, not just himself. Quite a difference, as he is defending another player. And he is under no pressure but raises that the motivation for the NK as a frame-up almost off the bat. Why?

Because from previous experience, someone very often points out the possibility of framing. I figured I'd get it out early so it could be discussed.

Now if Korial was Scum and killed CG, he can get it out of the way that he was framed and make himself look more Townie. If Drixx is Town, he places suspicion on Drixx should Korial go down. If Drixx is a Scumbuddy, Drixx looks better as well, provided that Korial is not lynched.

If I was scum I could risk it yes. Or I can do what seems to be common around here, wait for someone to point out the conversation between Drixx and CG and how he's now dead, and then play the frame card. I considered it, but I went ahead and posted what I'm sure others were thinking. It's started a discussion, which imo is good.

The fact that you brought it up, and then drug Drixx in with you. In general I don't use the LAMIST (For new people that is "Look at me I am so townie" - usually pointing out a scum is trying to hard to pretend to be townie), but it seems to apply here.

If I had waited for someone else to point out the connection, and played the "I'm being framed!" card then, would it make a difference? If so why, because even after this post I can't see it.

No one commented on you being suspicious because CG died. Why did you bring it up? Why did you decide to mention Drixx in your response?

1st question: Because from my experience such things are noticed and brought up at some point. As I said earlier, I wanted to just get the focus out there, and the discussion rolling.

2nd question: Because it felt natural, due to CG's post about how he thought both me and Drixx looked suspicious. What would your reaction be to my post if I didn't mention Drixx?

Moar has already quoted CG's post where he talked about me and Drixx, but I'll quote it again below for convenience.

Games most often start with a 'joke phase', of sorts, to get the ball rolling. Otherwise, who wants to be the first poster? Reading over past games, how often have you found that those that start the serious conversation are labeled as scum? So jokes are said, silly votes are placed, and the reactions those illicit will eventually provoke proper discussion. Case in point - my joke votes got you discussing the merit of them, which has now lead us to a serious discussion about the validity of the joke phase.

For instance - due to those joke votes I placed, I now suspect something about Korialstraz. He felt the need to inform us that he wasn't going to be around much during the Twilight phase, yet stops by to offer a drunken read on me that very much looks to be in response to my joke vote on you (while re-informing us of his lack of activity). Almost as if he were defending you, for some strange reason. Now, later in the game, if you were to be lynched and flipped scum, that would naturally lead me to start questioning Korialstraz.

I don't see that as obfuscation at all. In fact, I see it as exactly the opposite: Perform an action; gauge reactions to the action; use information to determine who is scum.

Forgot this one in the last post. White Walkers where actually the town but because of the lore they were seen as the bad guys. So not so sure how much lore helped there.

Well yea there were essentially town, but that doesn't change the facts, even though I was on his side. Had I been in any of the houses, I would still press for his lynch due to the claim not holding up, based on information I knew form the lore. So the point still stands, knowing the lore can be beneficial to the game, for better or worse.

Of all the flimsy cases we normally have on day one. Having one because someone's out of character is looking mighty fine to me.

It is a bit odd to see SI being more aggressive so early, since he's usually a bit more passive in his playstyle so early (from my experience). But for now though I'll welcome it, if only to keep the discussion rolling, and for people to make up their mind on the situation.
 
Unvote: Kitteh
Vote: Solar Ice

Too eager to create suspects, too whimsical, too uncharacteristic. Korial is just playing like he always does, town or mafia. Kitteh is a newcomer and won't think of tactical voting or gameplan's on D1.

Of all the flimsy cases we normally have on day one. Having one because someone's out of character is looking mighty fine to me.

I am not referring to someone's playstyle being the same whether they are Town or Mafia. I am referring to specific points made against Korial and voting him for it. Kitteh being new is a factor for me not changing my vote to him but if he is Mafia him being new makes it easier to catch him as he may have made a mistake that more experienced players would not.

If your playstyle is the same whether you are Mafia or Town, we should not lynch you?
 
I do not know the motivations for CG's NK. Korial in particular is not giving off good vibes to me. That Korial comes out and mentions this point himself, and then includes Drixx for a frame-up as well does not look good to me.

Sorry, not quite what I was asking. Let me re-phrase: If you accept the idea that CG was killed to frame someone, do you think the player(s) framed include korialstraz? Drixx? Anyone else not mentioned that should be? These questions are open to everyone btw.
 
Sorry, not quite what I was asking. Let me re-phrase: If you accept the idea that CG was killed to frame someone, do you think the player(s) framed include korialstraz? Drixx? Anyone else not mentioned that should be? These questions are open to everyone btw.

If the NK was made in mind to frame someone, then Korial and/or Drixx would seem logical suspects due to Twighlight interactions with Caluin. Whether Korial/Drixx actually were framed as opposed to being the perpetrator(s) of the NK is unknown and up for debate.
 
I am new to playing Mafia online!

If you were playing mafia like you normally play it, and you saw someone that talks as much as you have this game, would you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of them? What would you say to them or about them?

Here CG talks about korial and Drixx and their possible relation.

Do you see the possible relation CG talks about? Does anyone? I don't. If korial isn't in a possible relation with Drixx, then why does korial just accept that as fact and not deny the relation? I didn't see a possible relation until korial brought it up a couple of different ways: all after CG died.

Because killing off CG would be an efficient way of adding suspicion to both me and Drixx at the same time, considering our interaction with him in the twilight phase.

I don't think its suspicious that korial mentioned both him and Drixx there since CG was talking about both of them.

An important phrase: "considering our interaction with him in the twilight phase." I can't find that "our interaction with him." I see CG interacting with Drixx and korial, not the other way around. I don't see korial in the picture at all except for one name drop in one sentence. Yet after CG died, suddenly korial thinks Drixx was a framed townie. I don't follow from point A (CG mentions both) to point B (Drixx is a framed townie).
 
Back
Top