Mafia 80: The Lost Village

[Razamith]

Also to pose back to both of you: What do you both think of largehorn. It should be clear i'm struggling with my read on him.

- - - Updated - - -

Great break up my post by posting within seconds of my typed line thanks a lot senna!

- - - Updated - - -

ok really gotta run now should be back later

[Senna1251]

Anytime Raza, anytime. /wink

The people I'm most interested today are the people who voted for Kryllian after he revealed his claim. I find it highly likely that there is scum in that position. So the people that I'm going to focus on most today are Catta, Crackleslap, Crissi, Largehorn, Palawin, and Xanjori. Some of these people I'm currently town reading, but I'm going to go through them just as I did Razamith just in case I come across anything suspicious. I may not put everything I write on here though, maybe in spoiler tags or something.

That's going to have to wait though, as I'm going out to dinner and karaoke tonight in a few minutes.

[Reticence]

Who is this graeham? I didn't remember him playing / clearly haven't mentioned him. o.O

I am seeing that back and forth as I re-read through things a bit. Prior to this latest read I could not remember any of your opinions.

So you are most interested in Rixis, Xanjori and Crackle? Which of those are you most interested in?

Also to pose back to both of you: What do you both think of largehorn. It should be clear i'm struggling with my read on him.

I am at least as distrustful of Largehorn as I was yesterday.

I’m wondering why Raza didn’t follow up with Large on his claim swapping today, as Large’s answer in #197 wasn’t really an answer imo. I was surprised to see that he put Large in the town bin after the questionable move by Large day 1. I also don’t like that he was tentative with his vote and didn’t put one out; however, I was also tentative, so I’m not sure if I can read that as scum or town. Otherwise he had a lot of good content day 2, though I might say he didn’t pull many conclusions out of all the work he did.

Thank you for the post overall, but I thought this was an interesting observation. What do you think of his latest post (#421), in that context?

Another thing nagging at me is how we only had one kill N1, and 2 N2. Possibly Raza is sk who was able to perform his kill now that he claimed. How’s that for wild conjecture!

Quite wild! Why do you propose Raza for this theory, as opposed to another player?

[Senna1251]

Quite wild! Why do you propose Raza for this theory, as opposed to another player?

I only thought of it as a whim, a spur of the moment while typing out my Raza thoughts. I haven't looked at anyone else who has claimed day 2 but not day 1.

[PalawinFC]

Also to pose back to both of you: What do you both think of largehorn. It should be clear i'm struggling with my read on him.

Largehorn, Xanjori and Crissi are in my cross-hairs today due to day 1 unvotes and day 2 votes on kryllian after he claimed and dupti and I stopped voting him. I want some more info out of largehorn today before deciding who to vote for.

@Largehorn
- why did you vote kryllian instead of letting danner confirm his trait?
- if you couldn't vote for kryllian yesterday, who would you have voted for?
- did you target me with anything on night 1?
- who are your top 3 scum read and why?

- - - Updated - - -

Anytime Raza, anytime. /wink

The people I'm most interested today are the people who voted for Kryllian after he revealed his claim. I find it highly likely that there is scum in that position. So the people that I'm going to focus on most today are Catta, Crackleslap, Crissi, Largehorn, Palawin, and Xanjori.

Totally agree with this line of reasoning .

I think it was a dumb decision strategically to lynch kryllian yesterday. We could have lynched him today if danner had said he was lying about his trait. Further, he could have proven himself a bit by killing someone (which might not have worked out anyway, noting that Arialla died).

As for my position in your list - I unvoted kryllian when he claimed for the above reason. I then went to bed and woke up with 2-3 hours left and the kryllian train the only viable lynch. At the time I said I didn't like it.

- - - Updated - - -

Also in case it wasn't obvious, I need Crackle dead now.

Yes. I wasnt happy about that.

@Crackle why on earth did you lie about your trait?

[Crissi]

Huh. We get role cards revealed from lynches, but apparently not from any NKs. Also, would we have another Vigi in a 17 player game? I've only ever seen one in the games Ive read, so I currently doubt it and think its something more sinister.

@Reticence
Senna: Was the one that pushed Monkz into minority lynch territory, but I don't find that as iffy as I did Pala's right after. I honestly have more of a town read on her from such things as wanting clarification from Kryllian traits before lynching him (which didnt end up happening), although Id like to know why she wasn't thrilled with Catta's train. I think she justified her iffyness for Kryllian well enough.

@PalawinFC

I felt that the combined iffyness from how he ended up with Catta on both Day 1 and 2 and how I really didnt think that role was a role (my mistake form metagaming. Stupid wealthy family lack of guns...), was enough. I put that vote out when I did because I knew I was going to be gone the rest of the day and felt being voteless may be more of a hindrance, and at the time I had a better feeling from Catta than I did Kryllian.

Although now I'm having second thoughts, knowing that Kryllian is actually town now. Catta seemed like a dog going after a juicy bone in terms of Kryllian. and Xanjori agreeing with Catta again (#367) just hits me all sorts of wrong. It strikes me as pushing on an already vulnerable player to create chaos that day.

[listo95]

Crissi I am not to sure about that either but remember that Monkz had a condition to be able to kill also. If someone did not go through with the blackmail or revealed it he could kill them.

[Crackleslap]

At work lunch break. @palawin, honestly just forget to change it. Listo has a really shit role for a town. What if half the players lie on day one. Whats he gonna do? Makes me think hes a survivor.

[PalawinFC]

At work lunch break. @palawin, honestly just forget to change it. Listo has a really shit role for a town. What if half the players lie on day one. Whats he gonna do? Makes me think hes a survivor.

Does your win condition pose a potential conflict of interest in any way?

Why did you post a fake trait in the first place?

[listo95]

At work lunch break. @palawin, honestly just forget to change it. Listo has a really shit role for a town. What if half the players lie on day one. Whats he gonna do? Makes me think hes a survivor.

Well if that happened I would probably have screamed at everyone because then it would have been impossible for me to win!

- - - Updated - - -

Does your win condition pose a potential conflict of interest in any way?

Why did you post a fake trait in the first place?

Yeah so far it seems out of the role cards we have seen and me saying mine we appear to have conflict of interests. Monkz could have managed it easy but if lets say he blackmailed a townie and they didn't go through or told it he would have to kill them to win. We haven't seen a townie with the Revolutionary trait so far but if we do and they revealed it Kry would have needed them dead. Mines is anyone who lies about a trait at end of day is needed dead.

[PalawinFC]

On that note.. @Catta why did you decide to fake claim a trait on day 1?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah so far it seems out of the role cards we have seen and me saying mine we appear to have conflict of interests. Monkz could have managed it easy but if lets say he blackmailed a townie and they didn't go through or told it he would have to kill them to win. We haven't seen a townie with the Revolutionary trait so far but if we do and they revealed it Kry would have needed them dead. Mines is anyone who lies about a trait at end of day is needed dead.

I have more to say about this but I want to hear from Catta and crackle first about their traits and win cons.

[Crissi]

Crissi I am not to sure about that either but remember that Monkz had a condition to be able to kill also. If someone did not go through with the blackmail or revealed it he could kill them.

True, but Arialla has all of what, 2 posts? Unless the kill activation has to do with depression trait or guessing on a NK, I just don't see Arialla activating a "must kill X to win" win con.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean unless Arialla claimed depression, then in some weird world committed suicide N2 as a win con.

...

which would be hilarious actually.

[PalawinFC]

I mean unless Arialla claimed depression, then in some weird world committed suicide N2 as a win con.

...

which would be hilarious actually.

Awesome. I really hope that's true.

[Crackleslap]

I have a weird win con i have to ensure anyone that claims to HAVE killed someone, must die.

- - - Updated - - -

Also i faked my claimed because its part of my real life personailtity to troll. XD just forgot to change it.

[PalawinFC]

I have a weird win con i have to ensure anyone that claims to HAVE killed someone, must die.

- - - Updated - - -

Also i faked my claimed because its part of my real life personailtity to troll. XD just forgot to change it.

So if kryllian yesterday had said he had killed someone, you would want him dead so you could win.

[Crackleslap]

Yes. But claiming to kill people isnt very popular around here.

[PalawinFC]

Yes. But claiming to kill people isnt very popular around here.

Yes but kryllian was town. So you would have had incentive to want to lynch town.
Same conflict as Listo and Monkz and kryllian. Mine is the same - may require me to want town dead in certain circumstances. I'm hoping to be lucky enough to avoid that... Listo was not that lucky because of you and Catta.

- - - Updated - - -

Seeing as Listo was completely open about his motivation before it was in the limelight, I read him strongly as town. Any scum would have been way more cautious about it. And in any event scum could just kill the people, instead of trying to lynch them.

- - - Updated - - -

I actually have a theory about this, crackle ... If I had a win condition to heckle all players who lied about a trait (not claiming I do, just theorising). I wouldn't be able to win, would I?

- - - Updated - - -

Trying to get all my thoughts out before I go out tonight. Going to see Logan (so excited) and going to have many drinks. So I probably won't be around until tomorrow.

Once the yanks have woken up and everyone's posted thoughts, I'm leaning toward voting Crissi or Xanjori.

[Razamith]

I am seeing that back and forth as I re-read through things a bit. Prior to this latest read I could not remember any of your opinions.
So you are most interested in Rixis, Xanjori and Crackle? Which of those are you most interested in?

See now this triggers me on a whole bunch of levels. I know i'm wordy (see signature knife) and tend to drift toward megaposts -- i began this game promising myself to change playstyle and keep posts to under a paragraph each unless needed -- ieven said so D1; and yet i fall back into my standard which gets lengthy. Sorry. BUT the stuff i type needs to be read even if its not in 2-3 sentence bursts - i'm not doing it for my own notes (... ok maybe a bit of it is headdump to have record of, but still). To say you cant remember my opinions (skimming? skipping? not meshing with yours? possibly i'm not communicating well, its always a possibility) to say that is one thing but on a question about graeham, one person who i self-admittedly [on D2] seemed to be overly focusing on very prominently... doesn't strike me very ret-like analysis/following. Then on top of that in direct response to the paragraphs i just typed in response you DONT include him on the list of three even though i just talked about him again using the phrase and i quote: "I still have distrust for him, and he is a potential vote, but its getting lighter over time." If you wanna say you discluded him for that last bit that's a bit weak but i guess understandable but still -- now i'm asking myself do i read that as trying to move my potential vote away from graeham if i decide that way. Is there a reti-graeham angle?

So i just went back and did two things. 1- i looked at entire ret history of graeham interaction/talk 2- finally looked at D1 trains again
I found these are your mentions of graeham:

Razamith: 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.

Dupti: Reticence, I'd like some more actual reads from you, so thoughts on Graeham, listo, Palawin and Rixis?

Sure.
Graeham: I do agree with Razamith in that his vote on Largehorn was a little strange -- it's very rare that we lynch the mod of the previous game, and I feel this was something Graeham himself would have pointed out. Not a lot of reads from him to judge his perspective, unless I missed them, but minor gutfeels tells me that he's lying low. I've honestly been giving him a bit of a pass due to what he argued just a few posts ago: he does have a tendency to die early, and I was partially responsible for this a couple of games ago when I random.org'd him for a N1 kill and didn't think about it. I intend to question him more starting tomorrow.

Palawin is currently my strongest town read as well, misgivings aside. I could see Graeham and Listo being town, but I need more time to assess. I haven't ruled out that Graeham lying low is intended to avoid another early death, though.

The second quote shows you were at least following some of my reads even if you said otherwise as i noted above. What do you feel about graeham currently?

The short[ish] version of the trains (because i'm physically unable to stop myself from making long posts apparently) is Marak's vote brought it to 4-way tie crackle/monkz/large/reti -- the next (potentially critical push) votes after that was rixis vote on monkz saying "If it weren't for Reti I wouldn't have seen signups for this game until it was too late, so I'ma look after him for day one", graeham vote on large (see multiple of my analysis posts), crissi vote on reti, senna+pala vote on monkz, and basically took off as clear monkz from there. As you noted in quote 1 above there could easily be a tie together between you and graeham, or rixis. I would bet if graeham is scum there is a fair to good chance you're his teammate, but you could both be town or any combo really. Its a new angle i need to consider.

Semi-related, i want to hear more from the people with lesser content like catta, rixis, xanjori, borderline a few others.

[Reticence]

Well if that happened I would probably have screamed at everyone because then it would have been impossible for me to win!

Oh, I dunno. There's a good chance most of the players will die on their own at some point.

Yeah so far it seems out of the role cards we have seen and me saying mine we appear to have conflict of interests.

Same conflict as Listo and Monkz and kryllian. Mine is the same - may require me to want town dead in certain circumstances. I'm hoping to be lucky enough to avoid that... Listo was not that lucky because of you and Catta.

Yup.

I expect some skepticism after I reveal what it is, but I've honestly been ignoring mine, for a couple of reasons:

• If I take the role card at face value, it doesn't matter unless town wins, anyway. I also don't believe we have a chance in hell of winning if we're divided by our personal win conditions in addition to our base distrust. To that end, my first priority is to a town win.

• I don't take the role card at face value. Danner said no overt bastardry, but he did not completely rule out bastardry. In some games, with some mods, this would be cause for concern, but I think I know where he draws the line (as it's not far from where I do).
  
  Danner loves plot twists, and he enjoys taking established conventions and turning them slightly on their head. This is intended to make players think outside the box, to minimize winning solely on metagaming, and to make the players actually have to play the game of wits that Mafia is meant to be. The mixed bags of traits and mechanics we've seen so far (and compared to my own) are not dissimilar from how we set up the D&D game -- roles that could belong to anyone, and some that even begged to be lynched the moment someone claimed them (Blackmailer, Assassin, Necromancer, etc.).
  
  At his core, though, I believe that Danner subscribes to the notion that a Mafia game comes down to town versus mafia, with the town's challenge always being to overcome their distrust of each other and banding together to win. In the Danganronpa game, the "townies" were labeled as survivors, much to the same effect, but Danner intended for them to win as a town if they communicated that, took a risk and played like a town anyway. Some called this bastardry -- I don't recall the exact words Danner used, but his argument amounted to "not really/overt bastardry".
  
  To that end, I believe that the role card says that I have to satisfy both win conditions in order to win -- but on some level, I don't believe it to be true. And even if it is, I'll point you back to my first point. Like I said, I don't think we have a chance if we're undermining ourselves with our win conditions. And I think that's the point.

So, disclosure time. I had been planning to do this at some point, regardless, but I wasn't sure when it would be best to do so. Now seems like an appropriate time.

• For my secondary win condition, I must see to it that anyone who ends the day at the head of my train dies at some point. Due to D1, this currently includes... Largehorn. Now you see why I expect skepticism. That said, my suspicion of him is genuine, but if people feel less inclined to follow me on it now that I've shared this information, I am willing to be convinced to go for a different lynch. Provided that I trust the train and the reasoning, of course.

• I was targeted with something N1. I don't know what it did, but I was told that it happened and I was given some flavor text to go along with it. I don't currently see a reason to share the specifics of that flavor text, yet, since I don't know who it came from or what it did (if anything).

• I have reason to believe that I was blocked in some capacity last night. I know this because my action would have resulted in a message about me in the dawn post, and it didn't happen. I ruled out mod errors. It's possible that this was a delayed effect from the N1 thing, but I can't say for sure; all I know is my action failed.

BUT the stuff i type needs to be read even if its not in 2-3 sentence bursts - i'm not doing it for my own notes (... ok maybe a bit of it is headdump to have record of, but still). To say you cant remember my opinions (skimming? skipping? not meshing with yours? possibly i'm not communicating well, its always a possibility) to say that is one thing but on a question about graeham, one person who i self-admittedly [on D2] seemed to be overly focusing on very prominently... doesn't strike me very ret-like analysis/following.

Firstly, I do read them. I never said that I didn't. I said that I didn't remember your opinions.

Part of this is because much of the reading I do is done at work, where I'm distracted. Part of this is because, as you seem to have figured out, I don't spend nearly as much time as I used to analyzing every post and taking copious notes on every single player in the game. I record vote records and whatever jumps out at me at the time.

The fact of the matter is that your attention may be solely on Graeham, but my attention has been on players that aren't you or Graeham, so you don't stick out in my mind as much. In fact, it's because you don't stick out in my mind that much that I asked you for your read.

Then on top of that in direct response to the paragraphs i just typed in response you DONT include him on the list of three even though i just talked about him again using the phrase and i quote: "I still have distrust for him, and he is a potential vote, but its getting lighter over time." If you wanna say you discluded him for that last bit that's a bit weak but i guess understandable but still -- now i'm asking myself do i read that as trying to move my potential vote away from graeham if i decide that way. Is there a reti-graeham angle?

Call it weak, but I did exclude him for that last part. Your opinion appeared to be shifting in favor of the other three, so I asked you about them. If you would like to include Graeham in your answer, you are certainly welcome to.

The second quote shows you were at least following some of my reads even if you said otherwise as i noted above.

No, the second quote shows that I saw your comment on D1 about the players who were voting for Largehorn, and I saw that Graeham was one of them from my vote records. It was a single sentence that I remember from you; it encompassed multiple players, and I focused it on Graeham for my reply to Dupti.

What do you feel about graeham currently?

Currently the same as I did when I replied to Dupti -- that some of his votes are weird and I think he's lying low, but that I haven't been paying as much attention to him as I usually do because he keeps dying early and I felt partly responsible for it for murdering him a few games ago.

I also said I intended to question him more today, and he happens to be on that same list of players that you were on.

As you noted in quote 1 above there could easily be a tie together between you and graeham, or rixis. I would bet if graeham is scum there is a fair to good chance you're his teammate, but you could both be town or any combo really. Its a new angle i need to consider.

I... honestly don't understand this part. You rehashed the point that I already made about myself yesterday, then undermined it by saying I could be anything. Are you suspicious of me, or not? Are you waiting to see if someone else bites, first?

[Graeham]

I just woke up, so apologies in advance if this post seems all over the place. I'll start by stating that it isn't my intention to 'lay low'. As I said during D2 I've died fairly often in recent games and the only time I survived until the end was when I was scum and paired up with somebody else to guide me in the right direction. Whenever I'm left to my own devices I tend to be either too reckless or too paranoid...or my theatrics just distract other players. Add in the rust that has set in and I've been trying to be a bit more...well, grounded this time around.

As for my reads? I'm most interested in the following players:

- Catta & Crackleslap: It rubs me the wrong way that they've lied about their traits, especially when we have Listo claiming that his role involves the elimination of those who lie. I feel like there's definitely something not right with the situation. I can't help but wonder if they activate an ability or win condition through putting forward a false trait claim. Technically speaking if Listo is telling the truth then he couldn't secure his goal unless someone were to lie. So if Listo isn't lying then there must be some mechanic that encourages at least one player to put forward a false claim. Which, in turn, brings us to the whole 'Town shouldn't lie' argument that is popular from time to time.

- Razamith: I can't help but feel that he's been focusing on me a little too much to the point where it seems like he's laying the groundwork to see me lynched or night killed at some point. I already caught him out when he neglected to realise that it wasn't only Monkz and myself who had the 'charming' trait but Palawin as well. He was also strangely silent about Arialla who we now know was town but was set to be a problem if not dealt with quickly due to minimal participation. It's not something I want to pursue just yet, though. It's more about me putting the read out there. To his credit, though, he's engaged me and listened to my point of view instead of stubbornly pushing a lynch on me. That does make me feel a bit better about him.

I'll give the thread another look and potentially put forward additional reads. For now, breakfast!