[Ruse]

Kaschan, on Jan 20 2009, 11:25 AM, said:

Ruse, you should probably sign in as invisible.

Sigh...i dont see what the big deal is?

But for you i will make an exception, since you asked so golly darn nicely.

[Rashan]

I've not fully caught up yet, but this is getting kind of old

[Rashan]

Mockra, on Jan 20 2009, 01:40 AM, said:

Well, I know i'm inno
not sure what to make of the Rahan and Omtose's "reveal"--if it's true, aftert his gam eanyone trying it will be lynched day 1without thinking twice, but even if they ARE telling the truth, who the hell would believe it?

Kesso's attitude annoys me, but I don't vote based on how I feel.
no one else really stood out to me, tbh.

I never revealed

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 01:46 AM, said:

Well, I was assuming that even a blocked blocked nk would stop em, so I had to clarify it. I personally don't like Kesso much myself, but Im not suspicious of him, nor am I suspicious of Omtose.
Rashan and Galain annoy me, truly.
With two Necros, it'd just be good luck if both were new players, I think we have to assume they are dangerous.
And yeah I think we need a BP tonight.

Sorry wrong button. See BOLD


The only thing connecting me with Galain is the Avatar. How else do I annoy you. Anyway off to work, just read that and had to respond, more later.

[D'riss]

Ruse, on Jan 20 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

Rather interested to see this serc case.
He does seem to jump out of the page when he posts sometimes.

Examples?

I've seen nothing in his posts to put him above others on my suspicious list. Although I disagree with his theory of why the witch should use his/her (witches can be either, right?) BP on the first night, that's no reason to lynch him.

[Thyrllan]

Yeah ruse...

[Galain]

@ Ruse: I think it is in the rules. Makes it kind of a big deal.

Hi Liosan,

So you are so are saying that you took an obviously tongue in cheek post as fact. You say you didn't WIFOM, but you have. Just because you've done it and made it a philosophy of sorts doesn't mean it isn't WIFOM.

And you say I've been backing off Ruse. Well dur. But it wasn't because I didn't like his reaction, it was because I was thinking of someone else - you - as I clearly stated a whole line further down. I apologised to Ruse, not for attacking him, but because he clearly saw some of my comments as slightly personal attacks, and that's not really how I want to play mafia.

I need to have a look at Serc if people seem to be looking at him. I don't remember anything especially scummy so I hope I get surprised.

[Ruse]

D'riss, on Jan 20 2009, 11:42 AM, said:

Ruse, on Jan 20 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

Rather interested to see this serc case.
He does seem to jump out of the page when he posts sometimes.

Examples?

I've seen nothing in his posts to put him above others on my suspicious list. Although I disagree with his theory of why the witch should use his/her (witches can be either, right?) BP on the first night, that's no reason to lynch him.

I mean that when i was catching up his posts did catch my eye more than others.
Nothing specific...in general.

He made some pretty decent posts early on and has ended with this witch thing that i too obviously dont agree with.

Thats why i am keen for the case, maybe liosan has spotted the reason behind him sticking out more than the rest for me.

[Omtose]

Just to let you all know, whether it's relevant or not: work is killing me and does not even allow me time to catch up
Hopefully I'll be able to do so tonight.

[Ruse]

Galain, on Jan 20 2009, 11:47 AM, said:

@ Ruse: I think it is in the rules. Makes it kind of a big deal.

meh

[Ruse]

Thyrllan, on Jan 20 2009, 11:46 AM, said:

Yeah ruse...

Bumping up that post count I see.

[D'riss]

Yeah Thyr...

[Galain]

Just had a quick squizz at Serc's posts, and besides the whole witch thing, I didn't see too much that worried me, unless "Kuollut peli on kuollut... " has some sinister meaning.

Also noticed that, of everyone, he put the most effort into defending Omtose, so, should my esteemed colleague turn out to be overly honest, I'd immediately focus on Galain and Serc.

[Path-Shaper]

Galain, on Jan 20 2009, 12:16 PM, said:

unless "Kuollut peli on kuollut... " has some sinister meaning.

I could translate it for you if you want

[Galain]

Slow thread is slow?

Dead thread is dead?

Something like that?

[Path-Shaper]

Dammit I felt special

[D'riss]

Is it Latvian for "I'm scum, lynch me?"

[Path-Shaper]

It is day 1, less than 11 hours left in the day

23 players still playing, 12 votes to lynch, 12 votes for night

1 Vote Kaschan (Galain)
1 Vote Galain (Fener)
3 Votes Omtose (Ruse, Kessobahn, D'riss)
1 Vote Thyrllan (Mockra)
3 votes Mockra (Omtose, Shadow, Thyrllan)
2 Votes Serc (Liosan, Kaschan)


12 have not voted: Ampelas, Anomandaris, Emurlahn, Galayn Lord, Gamelon, Hood's Path, Korlat, Meanas, Rashan, Serc, Silanah, Tennes.

[Liosan]

PART 1

This case isnt that comprehensive, it is day 1 and my suspicions are a gut feeling based on the way serc seems to be spreading our attention toward quite a lot of players. It is quite hard on day 1 to get a solid lynch based on suspicions and i feel on day 1 a symp would be trying hard to keep attention away from his masters and to muddy the field on the innos. To begin then.

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 04:26 PM, said:

Kessobahn, on Jan 20 2009, 05:08 AM, said:

Hood's Path, on Jan 19 2009, 04:59 PM, said:

Kessobahn, on Jan 19 2009, 07:50 AM, said:

it will always be gut on the first day, and in all honesty I am of two minds about Omtose. For one I don't like the post and the nervousness it radiates, but at the same time I do recognice that small things become huge in the absence of larger blocks of information – which is essentially why day 1 lynches are as odd as they are – ergo I may be less objective in this regard than I would've liked. Omtose is a strong player, if a bit too willing to parrot my every say in an attempt to seem wise, and so I am not quite convinced we should move to lynch him today..

But at the same time, he seems to guilty!

He does seem very guilty! The thing about it is he's not really doing anything to deny the guilt. It seems odd to me, at first he was nervous about it and now he's throwing it all out there in a way. Very erratic behaviour! An attempt at some reverse psychology perhaps?

the best way to avoid this kind of thing is to ignore it.. unless someone latches on. Unfortunately for the killers, it's often difficult to do that.

Middle-of-the-roading, boys. I don't like it, but its not actually a scum tactic, not all the time anyway.
Kessobahn, seems to be like thats a bit of symping. "Omtose is a strong player... and so I am not quite convinced we should move to lynch him today." That's not only middle of the roading, its keeping the attention on him in a subtle way, making us watch him, and making Kess seem like he's posting solid content. Of course at the same time we should just "ignore it". While I can see Omtose being guilty, the only time any "suspicious post" gets scum lynched Day One is when its a drunken post
Vote Kessobahn

A vote on kessobahn, i actually agree with some of the points as saying we need to watch people is irrelevant as of course we need to carefully examine everyone so in essence he is doing exactly what kessobahn is doing.

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 05:34 PM, said:

You're voting the guy who's being symped?
Where is the logic in that?
Symps don't blatantly symp their masters, I'm sorry, if you are going to vote for me make up a weakness in my argument against Kesso or something, not "He's being symped".

If a player actually believes you are being symped why would they not vote for you? You make the point a few times about the noobishness of some players and put things down to noobish mistakes. Something fener is also prone to do. What is to say emurlahn isn't your symp? We are trying to find the killers, and although finding the symps is important it is ultimately a means to finding the people they have been protecting. Another generalisation, but a good point in the end, cases need to be based on what you regard as evidence.

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 05:44 PM, said:

Thyrllan, on Jan 20 2009, 06:40 AM, said:

Serc, by your logic, we should leave alone anyone being symped, since symps never symp there masters. Thats convinient.
However, Emur could just be looking for an easy train to hide on, and I cant recall him posting much else, so he seems to be avoiding attention.

By my logic, you should come up with a reason for voting someone, because its easy for symps to fake-symp someone, provoke your kind of reaction, and then try to start a train on that person, or just let it happen itself. I think if you want to vote me for being symped, at least also come up with a second reason based on my play style. Let that be a lesson for future games.

Again i agree with your first point, but not the second. A player can vote for another player if they feel that player is being actively symped. At some point in the game symps must make some form of signal to their masters to avoid a night kill, which is one of the reasons why i originally voted for omtose as the killer reveal seemed like a possible symp saying, here i am master i am on you team.

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 07:25 PM, said:

Because that was why Thyrllan originally voted me. Then Mockra attacks him out of the blue. I've only made the connection now that could be considered defending me.

The reasoning is valid, but this is possibly the second symping attempt by a player on you.

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 08:55 PM, said:

The thing about Kesso's votes is, why would any of the scum leap on that train that early? The scum usually join in the middle/end, after all. Its possible that one of them was scum, but if both were, they have made a very very foolish mistake.

Now you are defending players who followed your votes, one of them, emurlahn who others suspected of symping you. You also follow this up with a classic malazan mafia line regarding the foolishness of how killers would never do something. I inherently dislike these sweeping generalisations and they have been proved false many times.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 12:52 AM, said:

Ah okay, cule You know, I think it would probably be in everyone's best interest to take out the Cult, they seem the biggest danger atm. I know I'd rather have one nk, then one kill and recruit...

Now that the killers are in the limelight you begin to examine the cult and hope attention moves away from symps and killers toward the 'big' threat of the necromancers. This to me seems like a way of nullifying that mornings play as you have found yourself involved in a few discussions that are probably too close to the bone for a killer. It is also a very strong scare tactic and is immeadiately picked up by a few players and begins a long section of role distribution talk, which as long as it stays within the confines of evil teams is fine, but you stray into the usage of a particular innocent role.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 01:02 AM, said:

Anomandaris, I want you to think about the roles for a second. They can have at least one guaranteed recruit a night.

This is just wrong, how can they have a guaranteed recruit? You are pushing attention onto the necromancers and either away from yourself, or from your master.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 01:23 AM, said:

Their creature can hint it in code or something. And Im assuming with 23 of us they get to block four tonight, thats a high chance of getting someone in fairness.
As we are going to get an inno down today in a lynch, lets face it, we could in all possibility be down four innos tomorrow.
I think if we have a witch, we might need our BP tonight, as I asked PS, and that would also negate recruitment.

Now we get to where i find most disturbing. I am unsure why you throw in about talking to path-shaper, the role is clearly explained in the opening posts. The necromancers recruit the recently dead, if no one dies, there is no recruitment, what did you have to clarify?

[Liosan]

PART 2

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 01:46 AM, said:

Well, I was assuming that even a blocked blocked nk would stop em, so I had to clarify it. I personally don't like Kesso much myself, but Im not suspicious of him, nor am I suspicious of Omtose.
Rashan and Galain annoy me, truly.
With two Necros, it'd just be good luck if both were new players, I think we have to assume they are dangerous.
And yeah I think we need a BP tonight.

You voted for kessobahn earlier in the day and now you are clearing omtose. Yet somehow rashan and galain have entered as suspicions. So today alone you have been suspicious of kessobahn, thyrllan, mockra, rashan and galain, yet your sole vote was on kessobahn and you never go into any of your suspicions.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 01:48 AM, said:

Fener, on Jan 20 2009, 01:44 AM, said:

I don't think the BP is probably not a good move tonight. Without it we're totally vulnerable for the rest of the game. Don't know if it's worth it tonight.

The longer the game goes on the more chance the witch has of being nked and losing her BP. We need to use it early to prevent the most damage. If we use it tonight, we essentially get another Day One tomorrow.

The witch losing her nk does the same thing as her using it to protect everyone, it stops a kill from happening. Granted it would stop two, but it would also enure that the killers or creature would need to remove that player the following night again. By announcing on thread the need to use the power you have stripped it of any usefulness as there is no reason for the killers to believe their target was recruited, or the creature to believe it failed. They will know, if we followed your plan, that the witch has become powerless and been removed from the game essentially.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 01:53 AM, said:

Its the getting another shot at Day One that most spurs me on to ask for it. We don't get that kind of chance often. Usually we mess up on Day One and go after the completely wrong players Day Two, pretty much maximising our losses.

Day one is regarded as a shot in the dark with a lynch, are you suggesting that going in to day 2 with only a day 1 train and the knowledge that we are all fair game for the killers and creature from then on in is a good position to be in? It also opens up the possibility of a fake reveal later on as a witch.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 01:54 AM, said:

Mockra, on Jan 20 2009, 01:52 AM, said:

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 08:48 PM, said:

Fener, on Jan 20 2009, 01:44 AM, said:

I don't think the BP is probably not a good move tonight. Without it we're totally vulnerable for the rest of the game. Don't know if it's worth it tonight.

The longer the game goes on the more chance the witch has of being nked and losing her BP. We need to use it early to prevent the most damage. If we use it tonight, we essentially get another Day One tomorrow.

would another Day one REALLY be a good idea, though?

as bad as they are, NKs do give us info.

NKs are usually WIFOM and we both know it. We get more info from analyzing trains. This way we have two trains to analyze, at least.

Discounting the night kills before they happen? In a game where the creature is going to target players it thinks the necromancers might target. Either you ignored that mechanic when writing this or you never considered it, but at least one of the night kills will be a calculated attempt to enable a recruitment.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 02:14 AM, said:

Aye, yes, that wasn't a fun mistake for us to make.
The irony is, Day One usually does end up in the lynch of an inno, not deliberately, but all the joking tends to make one of us look suspicious.

Yet you want to enjoy day 1, twice? I am somewhat confused by your motivation here.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 02:21 AM, said:

Im very tempted to vote D'riss, because he has what, one post, which was basically jumping on an easy target.
Any opinions?
I can pass Liosan's vote off as a joke vote, sort off.

Now we can add Driss to the list, but i am somehow exempt, how kind.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 02:33 AM, said:

Mockra, on Jan 20 2009, 02:28 AM, said:

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 09:26 PM, said:

Emurlahn, on Jan 20 2009, 02:22 AM, said:

Serc, on Jan 19 2009, 09:19 PM, said:

Thyr seemed lynch happy, but I put it down to n00bism, for the moment.
I thought he was someone who's playstyle I knew, but now Im more convinced he's modcraft.

I'm not so sure that noobism is the response here. We have what? 3 or 4 new people in on this game or so, and I doubt that a noob is playing as one of the top posters. I would guess modcraft as well, or someone from here hiding his playstyle.

Remember Lisheo, he posted a ridiculous amount in his first game, and he was a n00b.
No one here hides their playstyle that well, let's face it, bar maybe Gem! biggrin.gif

laugh.gif, remember that Merc game when she pretended to be Yellow?

Sadly, no tongue.gif I can never remember who she pretends to be, only that I can never alt guess her!

I've never checked out a modcraft game, but I do remember someone say they can be very aggressive players, so you could be right, Ruse could be modcraft, or Westerosi, who take their Mafia super serious.
Tbh, right now I'm just going to
vote D'riss
and hope he appears.

You have named a lot of players suspicious and yet you vote Driss? i am not against the reasoning here, as a single post to vote on a growing train isn't very helpful, but voting for people to make them appear is just a way of appearing helpful in my eyes and proving your not afraid to vote.

Serc, on Jan 20 2009, 05:16 AM, said:

Gah.
Night all
Remove Vote

Of course you do not leave the vote on, because that might make people wonder why your voting for a player who has only one post.

I will admit it is not the most compelling case, and i do have my doubts, but as day 1 cases go, there is an awful lot going on around serc, and much of it is contradictory. We had two people seeming symping him and we had an attempt to make the witch use her power on day 1. He claims suspcions about a wide variety of players but votes for a player he isnt suspicious of and votes for a second player only to remove it again before they need respond.

My vote stays where it is.

[Liosan]

sorry that took so long, i was quite busy and then it took me ages to work through all the posts.