Mafia 101 - Blarney Castle: Return of the Leprechauns - Game Thread

[Kashta]

I would say that LG's vote doesn't do anything to make me learn her one way or the other at this point. No one except Chill knew he was scum.



Wow, lots of question marks. I'll try to answer everything but forgive me if I miss one...

Red's vote looked to be more than just a joke vote, to me anyways. It certainly wasn't a "I vote to lynch you LOLOLOL" vote like most at the time were.

AAF saying his vote was random (when it wasn't) is the only thing that really stuck out to me yesterday and seemed vote worthy. I absolutely HATE having a joke/random vote on Day 1 although that's just how I play the game. I don't mess with people to mess with people. If I'm picking at something it is for a reason. I wont go so far as to say I thought AAF was "evil" but I thought there was a greater probability than others. On the first day it is hard to get much further than that...

I would have to go back and look at specific votes but I don't remember anyone actually saying their vote was "random" when it was placed. I think all had some line of thinking, whether it was based on a joke or not. Maybe it is a difference in semantics?

I can't say I have any suspects yet and it would be foolish for me to say that I think AAF is 100% scum and I will definitely be voting them tonight.

Apparently so. When someone is actually innocent and not scum I guess it's hard for me to say voting someone because it's raining outside or because dinosaurs became extinct is anything but random. Either the person getting voted was random, the method of selection used to pick that someone was random, or the reason itself used to vote them was decided randomly and that's what lead to the name selected.

I thought a lot of the Day 1 votes were random -- including several who didn't actually say so in those exact words. Do you think it's never a random vote unless the voter says.... ---> "this is random" in their post?

Do you also believe votes are never "subject to change" unless the voter types out the actual words: "this vote is subject to change?"

 

[Kashta]

so then how should i vote on day 1? bc even if i did a random number generator it still could've gotten dawg.

Oh dear Lord...... <sigh>

Any random method is equally as good or as bad as another. Seriously, AAF..... you really don't understand what I was getting at?

You need to put a little more thought into this and use your judgement in these games. Sometimes we don't know who to pick to help the town; we try in that case to at least make a choice that does the least amount of harm if it's wrong, the person gets lynched, and flips innocent instead of scum.

When you don't know how to maximize our gain at least try to minimize our possible losses in the process. Right?

We can't always help the town as much as we want to. We should still try to avoid helping the scum by taking out someone by mistake who actually poses a significant threat to the scum team when innocent compared to someone else we might vote for instead who's really no threat to anyone on either side.

You may not realize this but you must be using some judgement even in a purely random vote. What do you do then after you plug all the names into a random generator and it picks you? You're not going to actually vote yourself.... you know you can't do that based on the rules (if nothing else) so you use your judgement to remove your own name from the list before randomizing the choice. You really can pare down the player list first and then make a random pick from among the remaining names.

A good question to ask yourself about each player up for consideration is "what if I'm wrong and they are innocent instead?" If it doesn't help us to kill them (meaning they are scum) then evaluate how much might it hurt us based on your best judgement if we lose them (and they are innocent).

I hope that helps explain better what I meant before. Let me know if it does or not.

 

[Kashta]

Just so I can get the timeline straight...

You decide to vote the person before you without looking at the thread

You then read the thread

You vote Dawg because you see his post last

Correct?



Really Kashta? In a numbers game you would trade TWO OR THREE townies for ONE player?

Don't get me wrong, I think Dawg is a solid mafia player. But that is an awfully troubling statement to me. Maybe it would make more sense if Dawg was say a super important PR, but to say that just based on his game play abilities seems like a huge stretch to me.

LMAO.... of course. That actually was an exaggeration just to illustrate a point at the time. Trying to explain something to AAF isn't always very easy to do. I thought that might get the idea across to him. Or, if nothing else, at least give him some other way of looking at this.

Even so....... if you want to get more literal about it, that remark still wasn't all that far off. I've played in lots of games where the town was lost and even the PRs with more info to go on couldn't figure out who was trying to fool us. And one very capable non-communicating townie (someone like Pappy or Ice, as other examples) managed to almost single-handedly turn the whole game around just because they were the only one at the time who could see through all the BS when no one else could.

In the end, that single player is a lot more valuable to us than a whole lot of other players who lack such ability, experience, common sense, or luck. And some players are just better at that than others. So yes, I guess I would rather trade in a few bad players for just one of those when it's still Day 1, our numbers are still high, and all other variables (such as PR roles, UDs, and so on) aren't already factored into the mix yet.

One good player like that on our side can help us eliminate scum -- one after another -- to win in the end even in a game that's based on numbers. Players like that are much greater prospects for us to hang on to or at least not killing them off on Day 1 compared to other players who (more often than not) hurt the side they are on by not bothering to read posts... or by blindly following anyone in the thead who posts the most... or by habitually UDing all the time anyway in most games they play... or by helping the scum team by creating pointless distractions for the town... and so forth... (Also, I did have some actual player names in mind when I made the comment, but disclosing those isn't necessary here.)

Let me know if this clarifies what I meant by the comment.

 

[Kashta]

I figured Chill would definitely vote and that he would break the tie. If for nothing else I was hoping it would at least cause some discussion. Apparently my vote didn't even do that.


Not sure about her but based on what I see I'll lean her innocent for now. Just because there is not much else to go on right now. Don't get me wrong there aren't any blinders going on for LG either.



I think we just found one I vote to lynch O3T

As a follow up to my previous question..... really, Dawg?

You really never noticed how often Lady G votes Chill on Day 1 and vice versa? Or the times Pappy votes DD or DD votes Pappy the same way? That surprises me mainly because they often tell us that's their only reason for those votes when they place initial D1 "random" or "joke" votes like that in those games.

So tell me........ Have you ever noticed it's a similar thing between Wizard voting Lab Rat or Lab Rat voting Wizard? Those two also do the same thing for the same reason. And they tell us so too that that's the reason for their vote.

I guess not, huh? lol.

 

[Kashta]

You're right, my mistake. For some reason in my head I thought Lab said that Chill was the non communicator but he could have been with the team.

That does lower LG on my list then.

No way. I don't see any other plausible explanation other than it being a slip, O3T. The communicating leprechauns would know if Chill was communicating with them or not.

When Chill UD'd and flipped scum I wondered whether that meant communicating scum or non-communicating scum before we got the next post. The only reason I didn't ask Labby which it was is because those are the questions game mods refrain from telling us.

How would an innocent just assume for no reason whatsoever that no one else knew Chill's role other than Chill himself. I don't believe any innocent would.

It was a mistake and I think you slipped up. Only a scum would think (know) from what Lab wrote that Chill was on his own.

I definitely agree with Dawg on that. You screwed up, O3T..... plain and simple.

I vote to lynch O3T.

 

[allaboutfish]

LMAO.... of course. That actually was an exaggeration just to illustrate a point at the time. Trying to explain something to AAF isn't always very easy to do. I thought that might get the idea across to him. Or, if nothing else, at least give him some other way of looking at this.

Even so....... if you want to get more literal about it, that remark still wasn't all that far off. I've played in lots of games where the town was lost and even the PRs with more info to go on couldn't figure out who was trying to fool us. And one very capable non-communicating townie (someone like Pappy or Ice, as other examples) managed to almost single-handedly turn the whole game around just because they were the only one at the time who could see through all the BS when no one else could.

In the end, that single player is a lot more valuable to us than a whole lot of other players who lack such ability, experience, common sense, or luck. And some players are just better at that than others. So yes, I guess I would rather trade in a few bad players for just one of those when it's still Day 1, our numbers are still high, and all other variables (such as PR roles, UDs, and so on) aren't already factored into the mix yet.

One good player like that on our side can help us eliminate scum -- one after another -- to win in the end even in a game that's based on numbers. Players like that are much greater prospects for us to hang on to or at least not killing them off on Day 1 compared to other players who (more often than not) hurt the side they are on by not bothering to read posts... or by blindly following anyone in the thead who posts the most... or by habitually UDing all the time anyway in most games they play... or by helping the scum team by creating pointless distractions for the town... and so forth... (Also, I did have some actual player names in mind when I made the comment, but disclosing those isn't necessary here.)

Let me know if this clarifies what I meant by the comment.

you better not be calling me dumb!!!!

 

[Kashta]

:rofl: I love this question

Hahaha.. so did I. Not one of my most "probing" questions but someone had to ask it.

 

[Kashta]

you better not be calling me dumb!!!!

Oh no, AAF. I'm really not. You're still just a noob and this game is really hard on so many levels. It's so easy just to tell someone to go out there and "be innocent" or "play to help the town win"..... or of course "pretend to help the town win" if you're evil. But actually figuring out HOW to do that takes a long time to figure out.

If it helps any, I'm also not calling you scum either. At least not yet. I saw how often O3T kept coming after you time and again to re-ask the same question you already answered. That's just something some vets do on Day 1 when they know a noob type player has broken down into a defensive puddle of goo in previous games when being similarly questioned like that. In those cases, I tend to wonder more about the person doing the grilling than the new, less experienced player.

I also couldn't really imagine you as scum sitting there at the computer trying to decide who to vote for and coming up with some evil leprechaun strategy which led you to believe going after someone like Dawg on Day 1 with no actual reason in mind other than a weak claim you were voting him at random would actually be something you'd think was a good idea. If you are scum and communicating, then your team truly let you down on that. And if you're scum but non-communicating... I still don't think you'd put yourself at risk going up against Dawg like that. As a tactic, that just seems too self-destructive to me.

 

[dirtydawg10]

As a follow up to my previous question..... really, Dawg?

You really never noticed how often Lady G votes Chill on Day 1 and vice versa? Or the times Pappy votes DD or DD votes Pappy the same way? That surprises me mainly because they often tell us that's their only reason for those votes when they place initial D1 "random" or "joke" votes like that in those games.

So tell me........ Have you ever noticed it's a similar thing between Wizard voting Lab Rat or Lab Rat voting Wizard? Those two also do the same thing for the same reason. And they tell us so too that that's the reason for their vote.

I guess not, huh? lol.

I know that LG and Chill vote for each other quite often. Not sure if they were both scum that LG would do that unless she is communicating and Chill was non-comm...or vice versa. I have been wrong before though.

 

[Kashta]

hmn...the plot thickens.*Fozzy can't stop looking at Dawg*

Well he is a handsome fella... gotta give him that much.

So what are your thoughts on the statement in question? Care to elaborate on what in particular you're looking at? Are you implying Dawg is scummy?

Actually I'm also interested to see Fozzy's response to JB's question here.