Mafia 96 Who Are You? Game Thread

[Lab_Rat]

Yes, actually I did miss there were 2...I thought there was only one for each side, then yes that makes since and YAY!!!!

Ok, I guess I can see where you were coming from on the "tie" thing...but I don't really see where much was learned, not like a typical game where the vote switches can actually show something. In this case it just caused a bunch of people to scramble around, jumping back and forth having no idea where votes where or what exactly they were doing...it was just a bunch of mass panic.

I agree that we can't learn much from the mass of vote changing that took place late. When I first wanted the the tie, I was thinking of a 3 way tie (which was feasible at that time). Then I think I got wrapped up in the thought of a tie possibly showing us something, until Dag pointed out that since we didn't know when nightfall would be called we likely wouldn't see a last minute move to save someone.

 

[Lab_Rat]

That's also why I questioned Kash on why she thought she'd focus on the mass vote switching chaos.

 

[Lady G]

I agree that we can't learn much from the mass of vote changing that took place late. When I first wanted the the tie, I was thinking of a 3 way tie (which was feasible at that time). Then I think I got wrapped up in the thought of a tie possibly showing us something, until Dag pointed out that since we didn't know when nightfall would be called we likely wouldn't see a last minute move to save someone.

Well, I can see if in the middle of it, getting all caught up and getting a bit crazy...(not that I have ever done that, lol)!

That's also why I questioned Kash on why she thought she'd focus on the mass vote switching chaos.

I have to say though, when first seeing that mess...I had the same thoughts (as Kash), and still am very leary of how it all happened, and just because we did get a mafia...does not in any way clear anyone on him, especially since mafia do not know each other, and I can easily see a mafia member voting either AAF or UN, even if they did think they were mafia (sacrifice to look better)

 

[Dagamoth]

I agree that we can't learn much from the mass of vote changing that took place late. When I first wanted the the tie, I was thinking of a 3 way tie (which was feasible at that time). Then I think I got wrapped up in the thought of a tie possibly showing us something, until Dag pointed out that since we didn't know when nightfall would be called we likely wouldn't see a last minute move to save someone.

I have been doing some serious thinking about your logic along with Ice in either having the votes spread out or having a tie. It seems like a very big flaw in your plan "to see if anyone last second changes" to save a team mate like an hour after we found out that nightfall would be an indefinite time (and I find it very hard to believe that you would overlook such an important point in coming up with a plan). Beyond the indefinite time frame of night fall at most there could only be 2 people on the scum team communicating. I know the Don would not do a last second change and expose himself and I doubt any team of 2 would sacrifice the only other person to bounce ideas off of just to try and get someone lynched. That lynch would still essentially be a 50/50 since they couldn't know for sure, if they were communicating, what another person's role is for sure.

I find it far more likely that having the votes spread out and then that strategy evolving into lets have a tie was a much more convenient way to blame fate and not your voting if the person who got eliminated turned out to be innocent. If you couple with this Ice after night one saying there is a clear strategy to win it appears the scum have put their strategy into action. I had a gut feeling that both of you were scum back when I asked for people's list and after last night I am only more convinced I am correct.

I vote to lynch Ice

 

[Lab_Rat]

Well, I can see if in the middle of it, getting all caught up and getting a bit crazy...(not that I have ever done that, lol)!


I have to say though, when first seeing that mess...I had the same thoughts (as Kash), and still am very leary of how it all happened, and just because we did get a mafia...does not in any way clear anyone on him, especially since mafia do not know each other, and I can easily see a mafia member voting either AAF or UN, even if they did think they were mafia (sacrifice to look better)

Look at the timing of all the posts. I know when you're reading through it after the fact it seems a lot slower of a pace than it was when it was actually occurring. Of course mafia members must have voted AAF or UN since everyone was on either of them.

I have been doing some serious thinking about your logic along with Ice in either having the votes spread out or having a tie. It seems like a very big flaw in your plan "to see if anyone last second changes" to save a team mate like an hour after we found out that nightfall would be an indefinite time (and I find it very hard to believe that you would overlook such an important point in coming up with a plan). Beyond the indefinite time frame of night fall at most there could only be 2 people on the scum team communicating. I know the Don would not do a last second change and expose himself and I doubt any team of 2 would sacrifice the only other person to bounce ideas off of just to try and get someone lynched. That lynch would still essentially be a 50/50 since they couldn't know for sure, if they were communicating, what another person's role is for sure.

I find it far more likely that having the votes spread out and then that strategy evolving into lets have a tie was a much more convenient way to blame fate and not your voting if the person who got eliminated turned out to be innocent. If you couple with this Ice after night one saying there is a clear strategy to win it appears the scum have put their strategy into action. I had a gut feeling that both of you were scum back when I asked for people's list and after last night I am only more convinced I am correct.

I vote to lynch Ice

This post makes no sense. I voted for AAF and then UN, so no matter who was lynched nor what they came up as (pretty sure they were both scummy) I would be on the hook for voting for them. Pretty sure I made cases against both of them as well. I can't speak for Ice, but that's my side of it. This post sets off my scumdar, little brother. Did you miss where I didn't see the flaw regarding the timing of nightfall until you pointed it out? Then I admitted that that part was indeed a flaw.

 

[Dagamoth]

Look at the timing of all the posts. I know when you're reading through it after the fact it seems a lot slower of a pace than it was when it was actually occurring. Of course mafia members must have voted AAF or UN since everyone was on either of them.


This post makes no sense. I voted for AAF and then UN, so no matter who was lynched nor what they came up as (pretty sure they were both scummy) I would be on the hook for voting for them. Pretty sure I made cases against both of them as well. I can't speak for Ice, but that's my side of it. This post sets off my scumdar, little brother. Did you miss where I didn't see the flaw regarding the timing of nightfall until you pointed it out? Then I admitted that that part was indeed a flaw.

That is quite the flaw that you "over looked" and from what I read the whole basis of having the votes spread out evenly and then tied, depended on it. Even after it was pointed out, what was the point in going for a tie instead of having people vote for who they thought was scummiest? What information have you gleaned from getting the tie you wanted? I see no merit in the tie, the only value I could see in trying for a tie was to create a safe haven for scum to vote.

Yes you did technically vote for both of them at one point. However that can also be interpreted as you voting for no one and instead voting for a tie and thus having the mod decide with a coin who is lynched.

What do you think about the other flaw in the let's have it spread out and then tied plan? You know, the one where at most the scum team consisted of 2 people with one of them being the Don. Would it make any sense at all if they were in fact communicating to sacrifice the only other team mate (because I assume the Don would not give up the game) to save someone who they couldn't know for sure was scum?

You claim that my analysis of your plan "makes no sense" when in fact it is your plan that made no sense. Either of the 2 "flaws" in your plan make the plan worthless. I can see the flaws in the plan but I just can't find the merit of the plan. Please let me know what it was and "I thought both were acting scummy" doesn't really count, if that was really the case why would you want the tie still? You should have been fine picking one or the other to get lynched and have no need for a coin flip.

 

[Dagamoth]

Glad the 50/50 on FF turned out to be in our favor.

Dun,what do you mean innocents killing innocent townies? Only innocents killed were by their own hands by not voting.

Personally I wouldn't have let Spencer or LBF play.Spencer has UDed in every game I think and LBF I never thought would grasp the game.

There is a strategy to use now but I don't know how to tell it without ruining it, you're all smart I think you can figure it out.



AAF so why did you switch off FF to Spencer? A player was about to UD?

Dun, I did switching as well, but with that chaos and the stunt UN pulled, I don't know what Kash expects to find by looking at the switching. A tell would have been if someone had moved to break the tie, hence me (and prob some others) wanting the tie. The count was so chaotic that counting Dag twice seems like an honest mistake to me.

I think the strategy is out there now Ice. Make a flawed case for spread out / tie then say I don't know how you can get anything from the voting.

 

[Lab_Rat]

That is quite the flaw that you "over looked" and from what I read the whole basis of having the votes spread out evenly and then tied, depended on it. Even after it was pointed out, what was the point in going for a tie instead of having people vote for who they thought was scummiest? What information have you gleaned from getting the tie you wanted? I see no merit in the tie, the only value I could see in trying for a tie was to create a safe haven for scum to vote.

Yes you did technically vote for both of them at one point. However that can also be interpreted as you voting for no one and instead voting for a tie and thus having the mod decide with a coin who is lynched.

What do you think about the other flaw in the let's have it spread out and then tied plan? You know, the one where at most the scum team consisted of 2 people with one of them being the Don. Would it make any sense at all if they were in fact communicating to sacrifice the only other team mate (because I assume the Don would not give up the game) to save someone who they couldn't know for sure was scum?

You claim that my analysis of your plan "makes no sense" when in fact it is your plan that made no sense. Either of the 2 "flaws" in your plan make the plan worthless. I can see the flaws in the plan but I just can't find the merit of the plan. Please let me know what it was and "I thought both were acting scummy" doesn't really count, if that was really the case why would you want the tie still? You should have been fine picking one or the other to get lynched and have no need for a coin flip.

Got scum lynched. That's a positive thing imo. I was fine if AAF got the lynch as well. Tell me, if you didn't think it was a good strategy, why didn't you break the tie yourself? It was in your power to do so.

If UN were the don and he was in communication with someone, you bet I'd expect them to move.

Tell me, what would we have learned if either AAF or UN went down in a train fashion, as it was shaping up to be? Certainly you can't claim the votes would have stayed spread out after UN's actions. Even prior to that, there was a semi-late pile on to AAF. Regardless, votes were not spread out.

 

[Dagamoth]

Got scum lynched. That's a positive thing imo. I was fine if AAF got the lynch as well. Tell me, if you didn't think it was a good strategy, why didn't you break the tie yourself? It was in your power to do so.

If UN were the don and he was in communication with someone, you bet I'd expect them to move.

Tell me, what would we have learned if either AAF or UN went down in a train fashion, as it was shaping up to be? Certainly you can't claim the votes would have stayed spread out after UN's actions. Even prior to that, there was a semi-late pile on to AAF. Regardless, votes were not spread out.

I didn't break the tie because I liked my vote on UN. I felt that UN's vote so near to what was supposed to be nightfall was extremely scummy and more so than AAF. Had my vote been on AAF before UN did that I would have certainly switched.

I never said I liked AAF being on the cutting block so you asking why I didn't break the tie and go for AAF to be lynched is about as flawed as your plan to have the vote spread and then tied. You also say a train happened on UN, did you happen to notice what time UN posted his vote? He slipped up 10 minutes before what was supposed to be night fall. When someone slips up that badly yes it's going to appear like they were just trained as people read it and vote against that kind of scum. Had he done it 5 hours before nightfall and then suddenly 10minutes before nightfall bunch of people switch to him, then yes that would be train like.

 

[Dagamoth]

Got scum lynched. That's a positive thing imo. I was fine if AAF got the lynch as well. Tell me, if you didn't think it was a good strategy, why didn't you break the tie yourself? It was in your power to do so.

If UN were the don and he was in communication with someone, you bet I'd expect them to move.

Tell me, what would we have learned if either AAF or UN went down in a train fashion, as it was shaping up to be? Certainly you can't claim the votes would have stayed spread out after UN's actions. Even prior to that, there was a semi-late pile on to AAF. Regardless, votes were not spread out.

Say everyone had gone with the spread out plan and there were 5 people up for lynching. How much do you bet that any of the people who were up for lynching would stay on their vote instead of breaking it to save themselves? You can't say someone trying to save themselves and get someone lynched they think is scum could indicate that they are the Don. The only way the whole spread the vote makes sense is if you're not one of the people who are at risk of being lynched. Anyone would change their vote last minute to save one's self and even more so if the vote were spread out among many people so that even if both you and your team up you could vote for some random person to break it. You can't gain any information about anything from one second switching when they are on the chopping block themselves.