[Eloth]

Rikkter, on 02 April 2014 - 03:33 PM, said:

Rikkter, on 02 April 2014 - 03:31 PM, said:

Eloth, on 02 April 2014 - 03:29 PM, said:

We're putting a fair bit of weight on that GL initial post being a screw up. I think Rikkter is right about it though. It fits both Occam's razor and Murphy's first law. (Google is your friend if you don't know what either of those are.)

GL, who turns out to be a henchman, has/had off thread comms with somebody. They wanted to code something. Apparently with the letter A.

I'm going to suggest that it was for targeting purposes. Why would they need to do that if they already had comms? What if the comms were conditional? Power ups need a power to up. Level 0 they could only talk at night. Notice that PS edited the OP to say that the game would start in forty minutes. Was that a response to a plea from GL or his corespondent to let them talk a bit be fore the game started? If so, that helps explain why an experienced player would make that initial post screwup more plausible.

I'm going to add to this but want to get that thought out there because it certainly changes the interpretations of some posts if we assume they could not talk during the day.

A signalling post with an A in is placed after the target has posted?

I did wonder about the 40min but figured that it was just getting SH in order.

Thinking a little more I actually doubt the night-only lover thing; I didn't check in until hours after game start, how would scum have known to be on exactly at game start in order to talk?

It was in their role PM? Notice that the "something A" post is time stamped a minute after the PS game on post. That suggests GL was flipping back and forth between comm tab and game thread tab. That makes your supposition stronger. GL fucked up there.

[Eloth]

Monok Ochem, on 02 April 2014 - 02:51 PM, said:

Eloth, on 02 April 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

Monok Ochem, on 02 April 2014 - 02:29 PM, said:

ape, gorilla, monkey, chimp, chimpanzee, silverback

have I missed any?

Yes. You stuck to our biological cousins.

What about "gorilla" in the context of "enforcer", "leg breaker", "bodyguard". Or "henchman".

what is, I don't even



I'm sorry but you have officially gone off the reservation, you are pulling so much shit out of your ass you must be a colonic irrigationist.

is this even a serious post, I just cant tell



edit- changed shut to shit, typo made sentence look nonsensical

Unbunch your panties. Let me finish where I'm headed with my thoughts because I think you come out at the end as PI.

Typing on an iPad, flipping between tabs, etc is a pain in the ass. Patience please.

[Eloth]

Tiamatha, on 31 March 2014 - 02:41 PM, said:

Monok Ochem, on 31 March 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

lets pull up a sandbag and chat about the fucking war shall we?

next you asshats will be high fiving each other over the 'fucking eaters'



fifth or something

Someone's a grouchy gorilla.

Galayn Lord, on 31 March 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

Grouchy Gorilla Hidden Anaconda!

Nope does not work.

Again, pure supposition here. But if I'm right about the limited lover conversation and the "something A" then this looks a bit like Tia floating a candidate and GL disagreeing?

[Kessobahn]

Galayn Lord, on 31 March 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

Something beginning with A?

I think this is a setup for a fake lover confirmation, making Amp or Alky the partner if true, if off thread comms began shortly before the game opened, which is common

What other message would be getting established soon?

[Monok Ochem]

Tiamatha, on 02 April 2014 - 03:26 PM, said:

Anyway, I'm away for the next 8 hours myself at least.

Vote Monok Ochem

For what I detailed earlier in Galayn Lord's posts. Yesterday, I was fully convinced there was nothing in the Monok suspicion. But then I was fully convinced GL was town, too. So I figure I was completely wrong about everything

this, this right here.

oh so cute and jokey slides on day one, just about, not day two when we have plenty to work off. 'oh look at me so clutsy, what I think is always wrong so do the opposite LOL'

No, get your ass back in here and make a fucking case, instead of just picking a name that's getting a bit of bullshit attention.

[Kessobahn]

Galayn Lord, on 31 March 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Monok Ochem, on 31 March 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

lets pull up a sandbag and chat about the fucking war shall we?

next you asshats will be high fiving each other over the 'fucking eaters'



fifth or something

If we are an Asshat, we are covering your ass plug. Yours is worse. You go in!

It's so easy to see this as symp signaling the master

[Rikkter]

Kessobahn, on 02 April 2014 - 04:06 PM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 31 March 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

Monok Ochem, on 31 March 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

lets pull up a sandbag and chat about the fucking war shall we?

next you asshats will be high fiving each other over the 'fucking eaters'



fifth or something

If we are an Asshat, we are covering your ass plug. Yours is worse. You go in!

It's so easy to see this as symp signaling the master

Aye, but with that previously unremarked first post GL had to be in damage limitation mode even if no-one seemed to have noticed

[Kessobahn]

Man, page 1 & 2 just make me see GL & Amp as symps for MO

Now, I'm going to try to be more objective for a while

[Kessobahn]

Tiamatha, on 31 March 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 31 March 2014 - 05:11 PM, said:

is Rikkters point valid? should we level slowly?

Only scum would know the answer to that.

so based on GL's posting style, we assume that scum need to level ASAP??

[Rikkter]

Kessobahn, on 02 April 2014 - 04:28 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 31 March 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 31 March 2014 - 05:11 PM, said:

is Rikkters point valid? should we level slowly?

Only scum would know the answer to that.

so based on GL's posting style, we assume that scum need to level ASAP??

More initial need for it that town do anyway - as we saw no NK last night which is likely post count related

[Kessobahn]

Monok Ochem, on 01 April 2014 - 06:44 AM, said:

Good morning.

and a hearty what the fuck.



We've decided I'm vote worthy now why? This is interest derailment of the highest level, heat suddenly gets ripped from Amp and GL and thrown in the opposite direction, scum is amongst them, and the derailment crew involves a buddy.

rereading after a morning skim

Korabas votes, then Lock agrees, then Bek votes too - which of these are you accusing of a scummy derailing ?

[Monok Ochem]

Read the first 5 pages again whilst pooping (stopping at five, caj only stretch a toilet break so long)

For all their posting and back and forthing GlL and Taim.never butt heads (again, only up tk page five) a few of GLs cases and teardowns are passive defense of taim (pre-emptive of pressure if you will and this one post.

Tiamatha, on 01 April 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

Galayn Lord, on 01 April 2014 - 08:02 AM, said:

Tiamatha, on 31 March 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

Having said all that, I've just read something in the OP which revises my opinion somewhat.

Quote

P-S announces what level everyone is at the start of night and start of day.

As we know that town will get nothing from Level 1, but we don't know one way or the other if scum will get anything at level 1, it may indeed be worth pursuing Rikkter's idea of not reaching 120 posts before the end of the day, thus avoiding at least one night with killers potentially having another power.

My instinct is to say it probably makes little difference, but it's certainly something worth considering. Apologies to Rikkter, then.

Okay we are past 120 posts for today. That means level one has been breached. So now do we all get on the bandwagon and actually push for level 5 so that more town can get their abilities for night one or not.

I agree that this kind of talk needs to be dropped now. GL, you go with what strategy you think best, others will do the same. You can't force people to post. If you think getting to level 5 quickly is for the best - as I do - than just contribute to it yourself without continually asking for discussion about the point.

from taim, basically telling GL how to play screams on thread communication to me.



He's been on my shit list since yesterday and this morning, this is not OMGUS, this is, you sir are dodgy as duck, more likely to be in league with GL than Amp, lock or Korabas (my other button ticklers right now) and as such need to squeal like a little.piggy




Vote Taim

[Monok Ochem]

Cross post, Korabas is probably highest on my list of those three,but Lock is a feature there too. Haven't really looked sy bek

[Kessobahn]

Tiamatha, on 01 April 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

Lock, on 01 April 2014 - 12:55 AM, said:

So speaking of playing (well/badly), where do you think you'll vote Tiam?

I'm leaning towards voting the Monkey, since it's the only thing resembling a case, although I have this suspicion that Ampelas and GL are partners who decided that their strategy should be to spam conversations together.

I don't see Ampelas and GL as partners. I'm not certain as yet where to place my vote, but most likely among the middling posters, those who have spouted one or two posts of 'wisdom' and then called it a day. Having said that, I don't see what Monok's done to get attention.

Can you explain why not to the underlined statement?

[Kessobahn]

have to focus on work for some time yet, but I'll come back later

[Bek Okhan]

Hi guys been away for most of the day but I'm online and ready to dig.

Will take me a while to pull it together but I think lots of you guys already started the ground work which is really odd for me but anyways.

Tiam:

Quote

1.The unusual derailment issue on Lock (why lock??? makes no sense to me at all.)

The case on Lock as I understand it was based on this post by lock:

Lock, on 01 April 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

Alkend, on 01 April 2014 - 03:46 AM, said:

We're definitely going to all level up together.

Just like previous Spycraft games, it really isn't worth arguing about whether to try and level up quickly or resist it. Everyone needs to post at least a bit in order to have effective discussions and hopefully lynch scum, and it is easy for players who want to level up faster to post more often than that without going into overt spam territory. With 13 starting players, 120 posts per level is going to go by plenty fast anyways.




At the same time, scum will almost certainly start with at least one NK and while they might gain new abilities each level, since Tapper did not put any constraints that force town not to level too fast I highly doubt scum will get something game-breaking like 2 more NKs by level 3.




I don't think it's even worth arguing about an overall fast vs slow leveling policy, because you can't force others to go along with it short of diverting the lynching away from scum onto them (let's face it, no scum is going to be stupid enough to militantly argue for rapid leveling). IMO, it is better to just go with the natural posting flow on-thread and focus solely on hunting scum (props to Amp and Korabas for cutting through the leveling argument and staying on track on that, btw).

Vote Alkend

Day 1, looking away from the loud people we get Alkend who checks in, comments on Tapper's acronym and then this post is their attempt at substance.

Alkend had replied claiming this to be an OMGUS. Alkend before this had been rather low key IMO and maybe deserved a little pressure. Laying a vote on him might seem unwarranted but all angles were being explored. This led to a counter argument on lock. Nothing much came up off it. both cases started something but haven't to my knowledge gathered much attention or rather the cases were overshadowed by the train.

This:

Lock, on 01 April 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

I agree with GL. I called Alkend out, and he comes on and defends and votes, giving no better than a sort-of reason for the vote. Again, it smells like "Oh, I must contribute."

Was an interesting post though. Both because Lock agreed with GL and because the point was valid that Alkend had come on to lay a vote not quite fully supported. Either of these points could have been carried somewhere had Tiam invested time. Had he been serious I'd expect this to feature in his argument. It never came up.


Then Tiam comes in and votes on lock at a VERY weird time:

Tiamatha, on 01 April 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

Hmm no, I don't think I'll be voting GL. I think they've brought out some nice discussions and I think we could use more of their ilk. He strikes me as town attempting, rather spastically at times admittedly, to get everyone posting and answering, and upping the post count at the same time.


I won't be voting for Monok or Alkend either. I don't see what they've done to deserve votes. The signalling thing is stupid (wasn't it even a case of signalling without even actually signalling but indirectly signalling or some crap?), and with Alkend I think they've posted some good stuff. So that leaves Bek out of the current people being voted on, and while I struggle to understand the train of their thoughts (more so than even with GL) and think they've posted some nonsensical things so far, I don't know if that's enough to vote on. Maybe it is.

For now I will

Vote Lock

Simply because they've instinctively struck me as suspicious. I can pull out a couple of quotes if need be, but I don't expect people to follow. But I do want to register my suspicion in this area. I am amenable to switching votes should the need arise, though perhaps not to GL, as I'm pretty convinced they're town.

Given the very structure of this post Tiam does several things.

He tries to paint GL in a favourable light. He goes against the case on signaling despite the huge amount of it then and now being uncovered on thread. (I add that I highlight the varacity of its presence only. who and what it may blame I will not go into right now.)
This post also does something REALLY weird. He all but builds a halfhearted argument against me, then looks the other way. He obviously wants me to be the highlight of the above comment but tries to slip it in as though its a nonchalant "oh this is the only left over train worth following.

After all that he votes lock. now if this was Tiams only issue as a member of town I would not mind it. Gut feel can guide players to scum and GH posted something supporting that after the Malazan game. Whats odd HOWEVER is the way he presents that gut feel, it comes across as loaded with ulterior motives.

Why discuss the vote train if your intention was to level a vote on Lock who does not even feature and has no real case against him made as of yet?

This question was levelled on Tiam , Tiams response was this:

Tiamatha, on 01 April 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

Rikkter, on 01 April 2014 - 10:32 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 01 April 2014 - 10:30 PM, said:

That is to say, if I was scum and wanted to derail I would have voted on someone who already had a vote on them.

Obviously, I did want to derail from GL's lynch, because I thought they were town

What was your case on Lock again?

I didn't make one, an instinctive suspicion based on their posting, on the way they tried to point suspicion at Alkend and maybe Monok. I can put the posts together, but I want to take a look at GL first.

Again, yes, gut feeling has a place in mafia. Whats wrong about this here response is...he all but lays out his strategy.

"If I was scum and wanted to derail" can be read as

"I know you are expecting this from scum so to avoid being labelled as scum let me vote Lock because feels."

Tiam wanted GL in the game. Lock was a scapegoat and a method to distance himself from a lynch train supported by GL on me.

That is hard to swallow as a town action. REALLY hard to swallow. but I can afford it to Tiam because had he bothered to make one, a case was possible on Lock, even if somewhat thin and far inferior to anything on GL, it could still have been made.
The scummy part of all this is in the last underlined. Monok and Alkend keep being thrown in as PI's. Tiams making a case for instinct and defending people on the vote train.

I think after reviewing all the above the whole Lock vote is Tiam sowing confusion. Nestled in there are passive aggressive dislike towards my Alt and support of GL (Highly suspected Scum).

[Denul]

So far, this has stuck out to me:

Bek Okhan, on 01 April 2014 - 06:14 AM, said:

Ampelas, on 01 April 2014 - 01:01 AM, said:

problems i have with bek ---

misunderstands the OP. this almost has to be deliberate. seriously? you think that each player is going to rack up 500+ posts in this game? he may be confused by what seems to be insinuated by p-s - which is that although everyone levels up at 120 posts aggregate and 4 deaths aggregate (go ahead and argue 4 deaths per player, bek....), there also must be some kind of mechanic that allows certain players to level up outside of these two ways. otherwise why would p-s bother posting who is at what level at the beginning of day and night? it would be pointless if we all already knew we were on the same level all the time. so there must be something hidden here and bek is not only missing it but he jumped off the deep end without a lifejacket in the wrong direction

his refusal to show back up and talk. this is as bad as the first one. i don't care if you think your right or whatever, i don't think we (as malazan mafia players) are willing to afford anyone the luxury of showing up with one post, making a bad case on bad information, dropping a vote, and peacing out with no intention of returning unless his other lynch targets are possible trains. this is so arrogant as to border on stupid.

1.Misunderstandings are common place in Mafia. Atleast for me they are. can't see much fault in assuming what I do. its a stretch to assume I have ulterior motives when I did so. Since everyone disagrees I can accept that and move on. Are you working with extra information? its something I admit I suspected early on but it was shaky suspicions at best. You use the underlined as a point of rebuttal. Feels like alot of certainty to me on something I've barely begun to suspect.

2. I made no refusal to return, simply that when I did it would be to make a vote action. it was not an ultimate refusal to participate though. I can do what I like, hence this post addressing your response. Unlike talkatives in this game I learn far more by watching and listening. I want my posts to be direct. Fluffing about paints a target on your back, this is why you, Tiam and GL read as scummy to me. I will respond if it suits me but not in a drive to get words slung back and forth. That for me is a bad approach and I'll stick to that assumption even though as we're apparently already on level 2 I can worry less about being part of the drive to achieve it.

I must highlight this level is not useful to town. Day 2: we either contain it here or we shoot REALLY hard to reach Level 5. I don't think the latter is a smart option but I'll let the group decide on that. I'll be the guy in SH yelling I told you so.

Bek Okhan, on 31 March 2014 - 11:29 PM, said:

Tiamatha, on 31 March 2014 - 11:18 PM, said:

In fact, to quote PS:

Quote

For every 120 posts or every 4 deaths, everyone goes up a level.

I'd blame semantics there. Everyone, if not individually, is even more reason for worry. PS can clear it up for us I hope so I really just operate with above reasoning. I see no harm in doing so.

PS also said he will post the levels of each player. If this is true I think there is an individual aspect to it but again I am blaming semantics. Same strategy remains. We want a higher vote to lynch ratio. Attaining levels off of thread content alone we are already close to a point where level two is attained. More reason to vote players like you out. Day one then push for level 5 Day 2. I am open to changing my opinion Tiam. Nothing is set in stone. Just don't expect another post from me till I am ready to switch votes.

Edit: close to

Like I said I am open to changing my opinion. I came on mainly to agree with the argument on MO. Would be great to get the killer early, if there REALLY is substance to the signalling argument a CF is good proof. It'd help ease my worries about amp significantly and place GL and Tiam in a scummier category. How much do we get on a CF? did PS mention that explicitly? I guess the best vote is on MO if he's being signalled. I will switch and support this

Remove Vote

Vote Monok Ochem

Just saw PS post


Despite Tiams multiple responses to my posts above I'm still not quite satisfied but PS got in and clarified the Leveling thing and warning a lil more. I'm happier about my vote switch.

I feel like Bek is subtly trying to stop us from reaching Level 5 too quickly. I understand that it seems like Scum are going to get more powerful by Level 5, but it also means that Town will get more power. I know what my Role tells me, and I'd certainly feel more comfortable hunting Scum from level 5 than I do right now.

EDIT: changed Day to Level, plus removed some formatting code crap.

This post has been edited by Denul: 02 April 2014 - 06:39 PM

[Bek Okhan]

ok let me know if I need to break this up into smaller parts? as we shooting for a 3.5 average post per active player per hour I have a lot to fill up for.

I'll try keep building the case I have in my notes while replying to any errors you guys spot in my analysis.

[Bek Okhan]

@ Denul: Keep reading. hope you see the logic behind that as you continue. scum wanted lethal powers and Day 1 level one wouldn't work for them. we shooting for level 5 as we speak so post up!

[Denul]

Rikkter, on 01 April 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

Reading comprehension fail. Go and read the OP about when level is announced.

Now that we're past 120 we have a bit of slack for actual play so long as our spamming player do things like manswer lost of things in a single post rather than the series of posts like they are...

This is completely unrelated to anything... but....

I WANT MANSWERS!!!!