Mafia 80: The Lost Village

[listo95]

Do you have a win con to lynch Nixon?

Nope, anyone who can not have a confirmed trait by Danner at end of day needs to die. Just a single non-confirm means I want you dead.

[Reticence]

I believe the answer to this is largehorn.

That would be correct. Largehorn is the second-best focal point for that segment of votes. I also don't trust Kryllian, though I know you've opted for keeping him alive.

Apologies. I would have answered earlier, but I wanted to let things sit for a bit.

I still think the trait thing is a scum slip.

I am admittedly amused by how much attention that line has received, especially after you admitted that you have a shady background.

I don't disagree, but I thought the part just after that was even more compelling: he was surprised by Monkz being town as a blackmailer.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope, anyone who can not have a confirmed trait by Danner at end of day needs to die. Just a single non-confirm means I want you dead.

Thanks for the warning.

[listo95]

Thanks for the warning.

Yeah reason I want Catta dead! So now you all know. Don't lie about your traits

[Reticence]

Yeah reason I want Catta dead! So now you all know. Don't lie about your traits

Oh. Not claiming a trait doesn't count, just fake-claiming?

[listo95]

Oh. Not claiming a trait doesn't count, just fake-claiming?

Oh yeah guess I should have made it make more sense. If you claim a trait and Danner can not confirm it (aka Catta), I require you to die.

[PalawinFC]

That would be correct. Largehorn is the second-best focal point for that segment of votes. I also don't trust Kryllian, though I know you've opted for keeping him alive.

Convenient for you, given you were the other train.

If we didn't have the trait system, I would say lynch kryllian now. But if danner mod confirms his trait (which seems very very unlikely to me) then it gives him a little c credibility.

I am admittedly amused by how much attention that line has received, especially after you admitted that you have a shady background.

I don't disagree, but I thought the part just after that was even more compelling: he was surprised by Monkz being town as a blackmailer.

I don't understand what you mean here.

[Razamith]

Eh, honestly I was going to spend D1 randomly quoting portions of Wikipedia articles with no context. I don't really like D1 very much and wanted to liven things up a little but doing something similar during the previous game just got my lynched. I was also aware that there was a mechanic in place to tackle lurking but I wanted to try and draw Arialla out nonetheless.

As for my vote on Largehorn, as I stated yesterday I just shifted my vote over to him for no particular reason. I didn't want to lynch Monkz because he shared a trait with me and my gut told me that I could trust him.

In townie graeham scenario, did you think anyone who claimed any of your traits would be town also, and that scum would have no overlap with anyone or no traits or something? Wouldn't that trivialize the game by mass claim? These are the types of concerns i have with your actions so far: voting previous mod D1 when trains were forming, trusting based on unknown mechanic with logical overlaps ("trust" seems like a stronger phrase than "didn't want to vote", but i'), "no particular reason" during lynch determination, "useless D1" (paraphrased) a term i'm beginning to loathe. Small sample set granted, and dont want to get caught overly focusing on you at the detriment to looking at others but I haven't seen the content i'd like to so far.

...reads...
Arialla: null (if anyone has a scum or town read on him as of now I would be suspicious)
Catta: null (mainly joke votes so far, which is nice to read, but not helpful in finding scum)
Listo: null (only slightly suspicious thing is timing on the Monkz train, but really has posted mostly fluff so far)
Rixis: null (nothing in his posts stand out to me either way)

I can understand why these reads would be null, and could arguably throw in a few borderline cases of people posting light/rare content. Would like to hear more from these people on things like reads of situations/people.

...analysis, mostly around crackle with some repeats of large/catta/graeham/others...

I can following the logic and both crackle and graeham have been parties i'm watching today. I've had large involved in some issues but haven't looked as closely at him himself. May do a pass on that. To be complete i'll need to do a pass on actions around your train too since thats (understandably) mostly glossed over in your analysis.

Claim: Armed with a Rifle

That give me the power of a Vig. Why do you think I haven't been poking much or trying to get trains on the low posters for a change? I have a way to take them out if I feel the need to. It's not something I felt I needed to claim D1 as claiming a weapon would likely get me lynched and N1 is very rarely a night for a Vig to take action unless they really feel strongly as someone. But given so the lack of contribution in game by some people there are a few people that I feel are hiding and need to be put on notice that I have my eye on you for tonight.

Just seeing this now and while i want to look into it more my first pass on your claimed dancing around the mechanics early today isn't pointing out any contradictions (or at least none are jumping out at me). Time to dig.

[Reticence]

Convenient for you, given you were the other train.

Perhaps.

I don't understand what you mean here.

Based on my role and Monkz role, town appear to be immigrants who have arrived at this village. Often with shady backgrounds.

I never said I didn't have a negative trait. The rest of my traits are a mix of positive and negative.

I was surprised that Monkz flipped town based on his role, blackmailer seems scummy.

Perhaps I read too much into it, but my impression was that it surprised Kryllian to see a townie with a shady background, such as a blackmailer. I did not find this nearly as surprising, but my role is also one that I would consider a little shady in its own right. I don't normally put stock in "slips", but it amused me that everyone saw one in his trait commentary, but not in his surprise at Monkz' flip.

That said, I was waffling on whether or not I wanted to pursue it; it is possible that there are not-so-shady townies out there. I really only have Monkz' role confirmed to compare to my own, after all.

I can following the logic and both crackle and graeham have been parties i'm watching today. I've had large involved in some issues but haven't looked as closely at him himself. May do a pass on that. To be complete i'll need to do a pass on actions around your train too since thats (understandably) mostly glossed over in your analysis.

Of course. I almost included some commentary along those lines, but figured the post was long enough as it is.

My attempt at objectivity, in the context of that voting segment: I am quite unlikely to be scum with Crissi, and given their votes/timing an argument could be made that I'm not scum with Crackleslap and Largehorn, either. I could most easily be allied with Rixis, Graeham and Palawin.

Your mileage may vary.

[PalawinFC]

I see what you're saying now. Definitely a contradiction in his logic.

I don't need to be sold on a kryllian lynch. I just think why not leave it until tomorrow and see if his claim trait signs his death warrant (if danner confirms hes lying then I'll be 100% sure he's scum, instead of 75% sure).

- - - Updated - - -

Alternatively if danner turns around and confirms that trait, well then he's backed up slightly. That trait could easily be a scum trait but if it is then we get some excellent info about their roles.

- - - Updated - - -

At the moment I'm leaning a largehorn vote.

I've found myself agreeing a lot with ret and dupti. But im cautious of creating an echo chamber or trusting two players who are very good at acting town when scum.

For that reason, I'm very keen for some others to weigh in. Particularly those who have been quiet so far.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually. Let's try this.
@Largehorn, @Graeham, @Xanjori. Who do you want to lynch today and why?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh @Listo, how do you feel about lynching Catta today?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm really enjoying this day phase. A little because everyone's so active and a little because I've had a quiet day at work.
Downside is my phone battery about to die lol.

[listo95]

Palawin... I need Catta dead at some point to even be able to have a chance at winning. If he hadn't lied about his trait yesterday I wouldn't be like this.

[Catta]

I get what you're saying but I also find it very plausible that Catta was just making a joke and didn't care about claiming a real trait.

I'm keen to see what he claims today.

Claim: Disco Lover



- - - Updated - - -

Palawin... I need Catta dead at some point to even be able to have a chance at winning. If he hadn't lied about his trait yesterday I wouldn't be like this.

Your honor, I demand Listo's testimony be stricken from the record - he is clearly biased against my untimely demise.

[Crackleslap]

Palawin... I need Catta dead at some point to even be able to have a chance at winning. If he hadn't lied about his trait yesterday I wouldn't be like this.

Can I test something.

I am clearly Listo95.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh yeah guess I should have made it make more sense. If you claim a trait and Danner can not confirm it (aka Catta), I require you to die.

Nevermind found my answer.

[Xanjori]

@PalawinFC right now I'd still be tempted to lean towards the Kryllian lynch, I believe others have made the argument for me. I'm short on time again so I can't read through day 1 for another 4 or 5 more hours but there was nothing I recall that stuck out hugely.

[Graeham]

In townie graeham scenario, did you think anyone who claimed any of your traits would be town also, and that scum would have no overlap with anyone or no traits or something? Wouldn't that trivialize the game by mass claim? These are the types of concerns i have with your actions so far: voting previous mod D1 when trains were forming, trusting based on unknown mechanic with logical overlaps ("trust" seems like a stronger phrase than "didn't want to vote", but i'), "no particular reason" during lynch determination, "useless D1" (paraphrased) a term i'm beginning to loathe. Small sample set granted, and dont want to get caught overly focusing on you at the detriment to looking at others but I haven't seen the content i'd like to so far.

I mean, it may not be your intention to focus on me but it doesn't really matter what I do or say in these games. I tend to often be singled out early on regardless of my alignment. I think you're either trying to sow the seeds of doubt to set me up as a potential lynch or you're just falling into your usual trap of focusing too much on a particular element of perceived play. If it's the former, then I think you're likely scum - potentially aligned with Senna who echoed some aspects of your posts directed at me. It's little more than a gut feeling at this point but it does strike me as odd that you're both doing that.

As for your question, I wasn't really thinking in-depth about the traits at the time and how they would impact the game. I wanted to see how things played out once we ended up seeing a flip. I just felt like Monkz could be trusted so I avoided voting on him. I feel like you're expecting far too much from a player that often performs poorly as a lone agent. I'm also out of practice since I've not had the chance to actually play to a major extent for a while.


In the previous game: Day 1: Graeham playing Colors that End in "Urple" (Vanilla Town Member) has been lynched.

In the game before that: The game ended abruptly due to balance issues and was rebuilt into the above game.

In the game before that: Night one: Graeham playing Lucy Liu the VT was killed night one!

In the game before that: Graeham playing Cosplay Girl was killed night one!

In the game before that: I survived until the end as scum.

In the game before that: Night 1: Graeham has been left the building.

Now, it isn't my intention to turn this into a sob story but I feel like it's worth noting regardless. Out of the last six games I have only made it to D2 on one occasion and that was when I was scum. Every other time I've either been lynched or killed off early - bar the game that ended abruptly and was quickly reworked into something else. You can even check the previous game's dead thread, if you like - I stated that I was planning on skipping the subsequent game to cool off. I only joined this one because Danner's games are very enjoyable and I wanted to help support his efforts by playing. Now, I realise that you haven't been playing for a while so I don't expect you to know this but hopefully it alleviates some of your concerns. If you feel that my contribution is minimal or terrible then I apologise, but as I said - I'm out of practice. I'm also aware that there aren't any actual votes on me yet - but from my perspective it does feel like there's a potential for me to be set up as a lynch because that is a recent trend lately.

- - - Updated - - -

@Largehorn, @Graeham, @Xanjori. Who do you want to lynch today and why?

I'm just going to keep my vote where it is where Kryllian is concerned. Putting aside what other people have said about him I find myself looking at his claim and shaking my head with doubt. Based on something he said way back on D1, post #24. I'll quote it:

The most recent superb owl isn't really selling your argument the NFL is the best.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd also like to point out that for those who have claimed "charming" some of the most imfamous serial killers were charming...

This could simply be coincidence and I may very well be barking up the wrong tree but combined with his role claim I can't help but feel that he may very well be a serial killer himself. I also think that we may not even have a vigilante this time around due to anti-lurker mechanic in place. If we do, I suspect that it is fairly limited in what it can do (and let's be honest here, pretty much everyone has a special ability associated with their role given that this is in a similar vein to Danner's Murder Mystery game.

[Catta]

I kinda wanna vote for Kryll.

I am torn between whether I think he is unable to understand a joke or whether he is scum grasping at anything he can to get me lynched.

[Rixis]

claim: Armed with a Rifle

I believe Kryll's claim is true, as I have the same trait, and it would be unusual for him to have gotten the exact same words by accident, so he either has it, has a team mate who has it, or stole Marack's role card.

That said, I do not have any kill action that I am aware of, nor a need to claim a specific trait to use my night action(s), so find it a little odd if he does, though Monkz having to do the blackmail thing doesn't preclude it, and it could be an effective way of limiting his kills.

The problem now is, if he keeps that claim active and he is town/telling the truth, he's now going to night kill, or have wasted his claim and night action.

That said, us having the same trait doesn't mean we couldn't both be town.

[dupti]

@dupti: In (#181), you said that you would be okay with a Kryllian lynch or a Crackleslap lynch. Was that one post from Kryllian (#232?) enough to change your mind?

It was, but after his claim I'm not so sure.

Are you still interested in Crackleslap?

Sure, I'm interested in all the d1 wagons. Not really scumreading him at the moment though.

Have you considered the claim to be hocus pocus though? Can't Kryllian just reveal any trait, still use ability and claim that anyway? Tbf Kryllian could claim this mighty trait and sit on it all game. I don't like this at the moment.

Uh.. did you even read my response to his claim? (#234).

There is nothing to indicate it's anything other than a standard Vig (i.e. use as often as I feel necessary).

Hm I'm having a very hard time believing this. Are you claiming you only need to reveal the trait once and then nothing more?

- - - Updated - - -
@Kryllian wait I thought you had a vote out, but seems like I was wrong. Scumreads?

- - - Updated - - -

My attempt at objectivity, in the context of that voting segment: I am quite unlikely to be scum with Crissi, and given their votes/timing an argument could be made that I'm not scum with Crackleslap and Largehorn, either. I could most easily be allied with Rixis, Graeham and Palawin.

Unlikely to be with Crissi? Based on vote logic? Meh not sure I agree.

But well yeah, if you are scum then you are probably with Senna.

- - - Updated - - -

Palawin... I need Catta dead at some point to even be able to have a chance at winning. If he hadn't lied about his trait yesterday I wouldn't be like this.

Sounds like a pretty weird role.

[Catta]

Sounds like a pretty weird role.

Yea, I agree - lets kill him just to be safe.

[Rixis]

I have a win condition that requires a person/people to die if they do certain thing(s). So I could see someone else's win condition be "every false claimant has to die".

[Xanjori]

Also just cos I was at the job centre today

Claim: Unemployed