mafia 63- Who is Who

[Kashta]

Kash, there's a difference between using a strategy that could kill some innocents and using a strategy that could wind up costing us the game.

Okay, smart one. You tell us which type of player is safest to vote against without running the risk we'll lynch our own mayor by mistake. How it this any safer for the town if we avoid lurkers... as opposed to focusing on them?

You're not suggesting Ice might hand pick a PR from within a group of lurkers, are you?

Aren't you supposed to be the conservative one?

Sometimes.. lol. Other times I go out on a limb and get thwacked in the head when it snaps. Depends on my mood how conservative or gutsy I get at the time.. it's that woman's perogative thing. lmao.

 

[jpappy789]

Okay, smart one. You tell us which type of player is safest to vote against without running the risk we'll lynch our own mayor by mistake. How it this any safer for the town if we avoid lurkers... as opposed to focusing on them?

You're not suggesting Ice might hand pick a PR from within a group of lurkers, are you?



Sometimes.. lol. Other times I go out on a limb and get thwacked in the head when it snaps. Depends on my mood how conservative or gutsy I get at the time.. it's that woman's perogative thing. lmao.

My thought was that people with PR's tend to hang back a little, trying not to draw attention. Easier to not slip up when you dont say anything at all...

 

[Kashta]

My thought was that people with PR's tend to hang back a little, trying not to draw attention. Easier to not slip up when you dont say anything at all...

Fair enough. I see what you mean now. We're talking about two different things. Mad's idea was to target people who normally lurk or are usually less than helpful... however he phrased it. I took that to mean it's their natural style of play, regardless of the role assigned. But you're talking about someone who hangs back a little (more than usual) because they got a key role assignment in the game.

I'm still not sure that works so well for them, though. When someone's game changes like that based on role, it's out of character for them. That draws attention too. The new(ish) players might not notice the change, but most of the others will.

 

[Zaffy]

More valuable to keep them around if you are scum though...Zaffy, why do you want to keep them around? So you can frame them? Makes it pretty easy to do so when they don't post much...

Haven't you seen a game end due to vote switches after a pile jumps on someone over a weak argument? Isn't that what the mafia does when they get cocky? Aren't these people great targets for scum especially late game? I'm just saying there is value in near everything, if you take the time to look for it.

Anyway, I'm not going to be home for nightfall tomorrow. So I'm going to go ahead and throw my vote out. Unfortunately I don't see anything that stands out to me so my vote will have to be pretty arbitrary.

I vote to lynch Madcrawdad

I'm going with my gut on this. I think his method is misplaced. I think his going after Rich for disagreeing with him is questionable at best. Yes, rich initially dismissed it as a "scum move" with no support, but later he did give reason which Crawdad seems to have ignored.

 

[jpappy789]

Fair enough. I see what you mean now. We're talking about two different things. Mad's idea was to target people who normally lurk or are usually less than helpful... however he phrased it. I took that to mean it's their natural style of play, regardless of the role assigned. But you're talking about someone who hangs back a little (more than usual) because they got a key role assignment in the game.

I'm still not sure that works so well for them, though. When someone's game changes like that based on role, it's out of character for them. That draws attention too. The new(ish) players might not notice the change, but most of the others will.

It's definitely a Catch 22-esque situation.

 

[Zaffy]

It's definitely a Catch 22-esque situation.

Exactly. Despite all the arguing we do either way. the fact is that we have to vote for someone, and right now there's no way that we can know the role of whoever we choose.

 

[jbradt]

It's definitely a Catch 22-esque situation.

I guess I don't understand why everyone thinks this game is so much different than the others. Why are we looking to lynch someone from a particular group other than "those who look scummy?" We've never (IME) been very good at lynching mafia on day 1. At least this time, the odds are not against us. I plan to keep looking for scum-tells like always.

 

[jpappy789]

I guess I don't understand why everyone thinks this game is so much different than the others. Why are we looking to lynch someone from a particular group other than "those who look scummy?" We've never (IME) been very good at lynching mafia on day 1. At least this time, the odds are not against us. I plan to keep looking for scum-tells like always.

Yet you find me to be scummy because of thoughts I have on a person in another "particular group" (noobs)?

 

[jbradt]

Yet you find me to be scummy because of thoughts I have on a person in another "particular group" (noobs)?

Nope. I just think that the things you're calling scummy are more noob-ish, so it sticks out to me, especially since you've made such a big deal about not wanting to vote for noobs in the past. It's not much, and I'm not saying you're definitely scummy, but it's the best I have at the moment.

My vote is subject to change (as always), if something better presents itself.

 

[jpappy789]

I don't remember ever making a big deal out of new players, other than maybe letting something slide the first day or two. I do remember being fine with voting for the newb last game for things that ended up being confusion but you just never know.