Ys Mafia (Current Phase: Game Over!)

[Disquieted]

Alright.

were you the person who skipped out on mafia to play mystery dungeon, because if so this is not totally out of the blue i guess *squints eyes* if you really did just not know the game started (as the activity log would tend to suggest) then i won't call you scum for it :v

also smh i was gonna make a post about how i was re-re-thinking tom's posts but now that fabloo posted about it, it would just seem like i'm doing it because of him. smh i thought of it organically, ok??

So given that you know that zwerdjib was scum last game, this statement doesn't really track. Cause I feel like a defining part of zwerdjib's gameplay was him not just being in the thread and instead playing videogames and was why he ended up being scum at the end. So you could probably call it a scum indicator. Whether zwerdjib will agree on that being his meta is a different matter but I'm not sure why you would consider this in particular not alignment indicative.

Spoiler:

as I write this I realise there's a really easy answer to this, but, my funeral I guess.

[Dormio Ergo Sum]

Votecount
Bardiche (4): Tom, Yaersulf, NekoNekoRex, BigBangMeteor
Fabloo (2): Polaris, Serela
PX (1): NucleusWaffles
raikaria (1): raikaria
Tom (1): Bardiche
Disquieted (1): PX
Polaris (1): Disquieted
Daiya (0):
NucleusWaffles (0):
zwerdjib (0):
meow56 (0):
Serela (0):
Yaersulf (0):
BigBangMeteor (0):
NekoNekoRex (0):

With 15 players alive, it takes 8 to lynch!
Not voting: zwerdjib, Fabloo, Daiya, meow56

Time until day phase ends: [ Expired ]

[Polaris]

i mean to me it seems obvious that dropping mafia to play video games is something that would be just a general (and extremely relatable) character trait overall regardless of alignment (like i literally just ignored the thread just now to do a boss run in a game). plus if zwj is pumped and raring to go after being prodded like it looks (i haven't read his post yet since i wanted to respond to you first), then that's not really a classic lurker trait.

[Polaris]

wow zwj didn't even make it to the end of the thread? i'm disappointed

(i'd also be disappointed in smartbomb if that's all he has for now, but i'm assuming he's planning on posting more after this)

[NucleusWaffles]

I agree with Tom, we should no-lynch now and wait better for the abilities to do their thing.

Thanks NNR for answering me about quicktopic upkeep.

I don't understand why there is pressure on Bardiche, and why, conversely, has there not been pressure on meow56, zwerdijib, and disquieted.

These persons have been lurking, and disquieted only contributed by saying 'I am chewing' which is well, not helpful in the lightest sense of the word.

I also don't like how much zwerdijib is swearing, although the new filter is much better.

Meow56 how fast do you type? I personally am quite fast on the keyboard but not exactly too eager because I don't like to make mistakes here. Do you like the Bardiche lynch?

I don't like the Bardiche lynch, I also read the mafiascum wiki but lynching lurkers should not be a policy in games with strong meta tells. We have a player base where many persons know each other and a well-documented player meta history. Therefore it is incorrect to lynch lurkers unless they are actively making the game harmful.

In addition, the mafiascum guide states its only helpful to lynch lurkers when there's a sufficiently large pool of inactive lurkers for scum to hide.
Right now, our only pool of inactives are zwerdijib, meow56, and disquieted.

This should not be a lynch-all-lurkers policy today, it won't exactly be helpful.

cut by 2

[NucleusWaffles]

Who is smartbomb?

[NucleusWaffles]

No, sorry, I realise there's another lurker in my vote, PX.

PX, do you have anything of value to add?

[Polaris]

sorry, i meant disquietedakasmartbomb, which i will shorten to disqbomb

[NucleusWaffles]

Okay, I have decided.

I am upgrading my vote tentatively from PX to Fabloo.

##Unvote
##Vote Fabloo

My reasoning being, I would like to see Fabloo being more content-posting rather than trying to reset our progress.

I get Fabloo is a very active player who plays by the rulebooks, often correcting us on our misplays.

However, correcting misplays is all he does. He himself, aside from leading a vote on me, only used quite ambiguous means of expressing his discontent including ("I dislike you and I dislike Serela") without actually following up on those leads.


On the subject of leads, I am looking not to lynch lurkers today, which would include zwerdijib, meow56, PX, and disquieted.
However, I am up for lynching the persons who are more active today but seems to be bent on driving attention away from themselves, this seems to include Fabloo, Daiya.

I don't know about these players because they post similarly they sound like the same person, Bardiche, BigBangMeteor

I tentatively read town these people; Polaris and NekoNekoRex

[NucleusWaffles]

Hi Fabloo, I see you are online. Lets chat?

[Polaris]

i am amused that nucleus is calling out lurkers even more than i am, even though he's not looking to lynch them. i dunno if i would label them lurkers just yet but i definitely do want to see more posts from meow56 and PX, and also from raikaria (just because it's nice to get fresh opinions, but he said it'll be a while before he can post again, so no pressure yet), and also disqbomb again (are you still there >:( do you have another post lined up)

for now i'll update my fabloo case since i've sort of just been sitting on it (and nucleus voting means we have a proper wagon! wow) i agree with nucleus that fabloo is not actually being proactive on his so called scumreads (if BBM and serela are even his scumreads rather than just "not liking them"). if he was really waiting for a response for his questions then i think it would've been as simple as just asking them "hey please answer this question" (although i agree with BBM that the question that was asked to BBM did not really even seem worth answering) instead of just waiting? fabloo is my #1 for now. vote stays.

i guess i'll put disqbomb somewhere up there because i was really expecting some sort of actual case behind the random vote (like even i could probably make a case on myself if i tried), so it just reads as a poor attempt at a gotcha game (pun on gacha game) that went nowhere.  may as well mention tom here because although he's gotten better, it's mostly from the initial gut feeling i had in addition to his weird insistence on "sitting out the first day". all three of these people share the common theme of "posting without scumhunting", i guess?

that's a good wrap-up post i guess! time to go to bed

[Polaris]

oh i guess i should touch on bard's wagon. it's also technically a proper wagon now (aside from tom) even though the votes haven't changed, since BBM and yaersulf updated their votes into serious ones :v

well.... i guess i'm not seeing it? i don't think that one post of bard looks too vote-worthy for me, although it's true that this wagon is suffering from the fact that bard hasn't really posted since then. i'll just wait for bard to post. (this should be pretty obvious, but i should note that i've played with bard before, so there is a possibility of bias towards familiarity here.)

ok, going to bed for real

[Fabloo]

Resetting our progress? I don't think there's much progress being made. What did you want to talk about Nucleus?

[NucleusWaffles]

Not much really, can I hear a case against bardiche or serela?

[Fabloo]

meow56
Yaesulf

Polaris

I was slightly pinged by the second but it didn't go anywhere. I don't know what to make of Polaris personally. He seems to have an explanation at hand when he needs it but is surprisingly directionless. Maybe you're being put off by this and think his words are hollow but at least they're original.

[NucleusWaffles]

I don't understand, do you mean you now scumread Polaris and Disquieted?

[Fabloo]

I don't understand, do you mean you now scumread Polaris and Disquieted?

I'm Null on Polaris. I quoted Disquieted to get his attention. I have done this with other people in the game as well.

[Fabloo]

Not much really, can I hear a case against bardiche or serela?

I don't have a case to make. It's just what I was trying to describe earlier. BBM just happened to fit the description to me. There is nothing necessarily wrong with what BBM is doing. Talk to the newbies. Explain mechanics. Change vote and explain why. I think it lacks though. I'm not sure how to put it. A lot of people have been trying to do the same but he's surprisingly stiff. When we tried to conversation earlier he was quick to say something along the lines of "you haven't been trying to interact with me or Serela" despite it not being true. Just seems like he's making it up as he goes along.

[Fabloo]

When it comes to Serela it's basically like I said. He's excessive. He was like this last game as well but it's different here. His personality comes with a catch this time. It feels like he is relying on too much as a crutch. Doesn't seem natural.

[BigBangMeteor]

I don't like/agree with Fabloo's style of play but he seems too present to be active lurkscum? I just feel like scum wouldn't draw so much attention to the fact that they're not being proactive by posting as often as he is. That's why I'm trying to ask him a bunch of questions to open him up.

Also I hold Bard to a higher standard than Fabloo.

Nucleus what happened between you not liking the Bard lynch to not being able to distinguish between me and him?

~ long-winded mafia theory~

lynching all lurkers is a bad policy but it can be a good idea to default to a lurker lynch if the top lynch candidate claims a role the town doesn't want to lynch. the problem with lynching lurkers is that it's basically a random lynch that gives few interactions to help on further days, particularly if it's done as a policy rather than some kind of late turbowagon. also, holding off on lynching lurkers lets the mod sub them out if possible. however, if you don't lynch lurkers and they don't get replaced you end up having a slot with nothing to go on later in the game that obfuscates things at a point when each lynch is very important.

personally I prefer to let the mod try and sort it out before lynching them. midgame town subs can be pretty useful because they read the thread with a fresh set of eyes but with flips in mind. it's also better to use vigshots on lurkers vs lynches, if they exist.

[BigBangMeteor]

flipped the other way around: if theres no drawback to gender claims, this makes a pr's usage unstoppable, which can be seen as just as lame for a scum team

nah because town roles tend to be weaker than scum roles. also scum can just kill/hook the town role now once they've identified themselves.

I don't have a case to make. It's just what I was trying to describe earlier. BBM just happened to fit the description to me. There is nothing necessarily wrong with what BBM is doing. Talk to the newbies. Explain mechanics. Change vote and explain why. I think it lacks though. I'm not sure how to put it. A lot of people have been trying to do the same but he's surprisingly stiff. When we tried to conversation earlier he was quick to say something along the lines of "you haven't been trying to interact with me or Serela" despite it not being true. Just seems like he's making it up as he goes along.

I mean, I didn't even realize you were scumreading me and Serela until I specifically asked you.  ??? when I'm scumreading someone I talk about whether their posts changed my read on them, how good the content was, etc.

[Fabloo]

It wasn't something I wanted to talk about. Yet. I'm not going to be callous however.

[Fabloo]

My biggest question to you is what these interjections matter to you personally. Like in your last post, you spend a good paragraph explaining your take on lynching lurkers, but what does that provide exactly? Having word salad theories are nice talking points but I'm more tuned into how you're taking your own theories into account. Right now there isn't anyone I would consider a lurker nor do I have some comment about it either.

[Bardiche]

Whoo, I wake up and... ugh, there's nowhere near as much content as I'd hoped.

Disagree with Fabloo's reasoning re: coaching. Not that a Scum!Tom wouldn't receive some, but there's only so much "don't say stupid things" can do when newbies to the game haven't a grasp on "what's a stupid thing to say in a Mafia game?" Basically, I don't think coaching would apply to any of his current posts, except maybe "lay low and ignore it."

I think BBM's complaint of "making it a bigger deal than it was" implies there was a plethora of content at the time. So here's a question for BBM: What would a Town!Bard have voted instead? I get the sense you're voting me because I tried to get the game started, and now you're happy sitting on that.

Think NNR is exceedingly lazy for voting me based on me obfuscating the 'tone' of my posts. That's literally not voting based on actual content. I'd done things at the time, why did you not hit on those points? The complaint of "no content from PX" is also baffling considering at the time, PX engaged with one of two pieces of content: discussion on the gender-role. The other piece, of course, was arguing if we should lynch lurkers. Saying he had no content, while simultaneously having no content himself makes NNR look pretty suspicious.

"Bard is suss, thoughts?" is a classic scum way of throwing strawberries on someone but then letting others make the case for lynching. Yaerself, if you want to contribute but don't know what to do, try posting your opinions. It doesn't matter if they're wrong, because Something >>>> Nothing.

I think Tom's been more concerned with game mechanics so far while spectacularly commenting not-at-all on the game itself. Welcome to Active Lurking while arguing we shouldn't lynch lurkers.

Serela has also been useless and lazy. Why single out Fabloo if "everyone" is empty-unvoting, Serela? If you don't need a good reason to vote people, then why did you not comment on BBM's vote, considering he is literally accusing me of needing a good reason to vote at the time I did? If you really believed "any reason is a good reason", I feel it's weird you ignored that.

Leaving my vote on Tom because I'd like for him to quit asking about game mechanics and actually weigh in with his opinion on things. Who do you think is scum, and why do you think that?

[Tom]

I think you are scum because you lied in your initial accusation claiming to know roles, and while it might have been a joke lies hurt the town.  Secondly you've been homing on to me more than a Hakurei Amulet, instead of going after better targets.  By your own theory you should be lynching lurkers and zwerdjib was a far better candidate even getting prodded by the mod!  Most likely pushing for a mislynch because I'm new.

I wasn't going to vote for anyone on day one because I don't like the odds but as long as your vote is on me, mine will be on you.

[Bardiche]

By your own theory you should be lynching lurkers and zwerdjib was a far better candidate even getting prodded by the mod! 

The mod prodded zwerdjib a few hours after I posted. How should I know of this in advance? I don't think you know how "lynch all lurkers" works. For one, more than 24 hours need to have passed to really qualify someone as a "lurker".

But what I'm really interested in is this line:

instead of going after better targets.

'kay Tom. Who were better targets at the time I made my vote? Who are better targets now? Let's hear it.

[Tom]

The mod prodded zwerdjib a few hours after I posted. How should I know of this in advance? I don't think you know how "lynch all lurkers" works. For one, more than 24 hours need to have passed to really qualify someone as a "lurker".

I didn't know you were so picky with your time limit, you should have mentioned that beforehand when you attacked me when I said we should be more careful.

'kay Tom. Who were better targets at the time I made my vote? Who are better targets now? Let's hear it.

zwerdjib was the only person I had in mind when you made your vote and you shot my theory down so I'm outta bullets now

[NucleusWaffles]

Bardiche you seem to be very smug and very capable, what other insights can you offer?

[Bardiche]

So... are you agreeing there's no better targets than you? Just... trying to get this one straight, here.

And that's not picky at all. "Lynch all lurkers" isn't a game of hot potato, where you vote whoever's been gone the longest. That's not even remotely trying to catch scum. I'd be happy to discuss the strategy at length, but in the middle of the game is simply not the appropriate time. Afterwards, yes? For now, the abbreviated version is:

"Lynch all lurkers" doesn't mean "exclusively lynch people who lurk", and it doesn't mean "exclusively vote people who say very little". It does mean that given the choice of lynching someone "who's slightly scummy" and someone "who does nothing", I'd prefer to go with the latter, as the former's future behaviour can inform whether they are just slightly scummy, or hella scummy. Just piling onto one without even attempting to find scum will just lead into going Night 1 as if only 14 players signed up, which doesn't help. The reasoning people use to vote right now (whether on me, or someone else) can be useful later on. Slightly suspect reasons for voting now could, combined with suspect reasons every vote, lead into finding the scum on Day 3.


Cut by Nucleas... did you just insult me and compliment me in the same breath?

[Bardiche]

Slight aside: Tom, I'd still like to hear your thoughts on who's scummy and who is not. It can be as minimal as you like. Say we absolutely have to lynch someone, and can't no-lynch: who would your choice be, and why? Who would your second choice be?