Official USMB Mafia Game #2: Enter the Godfather

[Grandma]

I'm not claiming to be the cop. I'm claiming that the cop should stay under cover until the role blocker is identified or killed. Then they can reveal themselves and be protected by the dr. He/she should also leave us hints about who they've investigated. None of us non-mafia should reveal our specific roles.

That still leaves 2 scum alive and well. Is the cop being set up?

Avatar, you got some 'splainin' to do.

 

[R.D.]

I'm on my phone until late Tuesday ... I hate it. I'm reading and thanking but I don't think we should take silence as scummy.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Sorry, I'm brand new at this, I'm fine with the pseudo voting but how will it work again? Two votes-one real and one you intend to change? My problem with this is that if they are both bolded, they will be counted since Wake counts all bolded votes. Am I missing something?

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm not claiming to be the cop. I'm claiming that the cop should stay under cover until the role blocker is identified or killed. Then they can reveal themselves and be protected by the dr. He/she should also leave us hints about who they've investigated. None of us non-mafia should reveal our specific roles.

That still leaves 2 scum alive and well. Is the cop being set up?

Avatar, you got some 'splainin' to do.

For suggesting the cop stay hidden? Thought it was good strategy

 

[Grandma]

Sorry, I'm brand new at this, I'm fine with the pseudo voting but how will it work again? Two votes-one real and one you intend to change? My problem with this is that if they are both bolded, they will be counted since Wake counts all bolded votes. Am I missing something?

A pseudo vote would be like penciling it in, basically listing your main suspect but not quite voting for a lynch. I suggest not bolding it.

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm on my phone until late Tuesday ... I hate it. I'm reading and thanking but I don't think we should take silence as scummy.

Nor do I. It didn't help the town last time

 

[Grandma]

I'm not claiming to be the cop. I'm claiming that the cop should stay under cover until the role blocker is identified or killed. Then they can reveal themselves and be protected by the dr. He/she should also leave us hints about who they've investigated. None of us non-mafia should reveal our specific roles.

That still leaves 2 scum alive and well. Is the cop being set up?

Avatar, you got some 'splainin' to do.

For suggesting the cop stay hidden? Thought it was good strategy

No, for suggesting that the cop reveal him/herself. Very good strategy if you're mafia, take out the cop and maybe the doctor too.

 

[Wolfsister77]

Thanks Grandma, I get it now.

I don't think we should go after lurkers too early. That didn't work so well last time.

I also am not going to immediately suspect Avatar because I'm thinking of the odds and how likely he will be to be scum twice in a row? I'm not saying it can't happen but it just doesn't seem as likely to me at this point. He plays the game well and could be vital to town if we hold off lynching him just because he won last time.

 

[Mertex]

Sorry, I'm brand new at this, I'm fine with the pseudo voting but how will it work again? Two votes-one real and one you intend to change? My problem with this is that if they are both bolded, they will be counted since Wake counts all bolded votes. Am I missing something?

The last time when we decided who we wanted to vote for we would post:
Vote: SoandSo

If there were enough votes (consensus), Wake could close it and start the lynch even if the deadline was several days away.

This time, we post:
Temp vote: SoandSo
and when we all agree on the same one, or that we are not going to change our vote, we make a post that says" :
Vote: SoandSo

Wake cannot run with a lynch until we all agree and change enough psuedo votes to real votes.

 

[Mertex]

Sorry, I'm brand new at this, I'm fine with the pseudo voting but how will it work again? Two votes-one real and one you intend to change? My problem with this is that if they are both bolded, they will be counted since Wake counts all bolded votes. Am I missing something?

A pseudo vote would be like penciling it in, basically listing your main suspect but not quite voting for a lynch. I suggest not bolding it.

That would work, too.

 

[Wolfsister77]

I'm fine with that strategy Mertex as long as everyone else is and we are all on the same page. No miscommunication. Or Grandma's might be even easier.

 

[Mertex]

Thanks Grandma, I get it now.

I don't think we should go after lurkers too early. That didn't work so well last time.

I also am not going to immediately suspect Avatar because I'm thinking of the odds and how likely he will be to be scum twice in a row? I'm not saying it can't happen but it just doesn't seem as likely to me at this point. He plays the game well and could be vital to town if we hold off lynching him just because he won last time.

Okay, now you are beginning to sound suspicious as mafia scum, trying to protect the Godfather or roleblocker.

Perhaps that is exactly what Wake figured, that we would not suspect Avatar because he was scum the last time....hmmmm, Wake may have thought he did such a good job the last time that he may want to see if he can do it again.... however, the first one is always just a hit or miss kind of vote, because we can't analyze their vote...all we have is their word, which is worthless since we know everyone lies.

 

[Shaitra]

Silence is only one way to hunt for scum. You can also look at how a player says things or doesn't say something. We caught Moonglow so quickly because he said your town instead of our town for example. I don't expect it to be that easy again.

 

[Mertex]

I'm fine with that strategy Mertex as long as everyone else is and we are all on the same page. No miscommunication. Or Grandma's might be even easier.

Yes, I agree, just not bolding it (however, Wake bolded it for those who forgot to bold it the last time), so that is why I suggested putting psuedo in front of it, unless we can get [MENTION=44124]Wake[/MENTION] to agree not to bold it and that if it is not bolded, he cannot accept it as a final vote, and then make sure everyone knows not to bold it until they are darn sure that is what their vote is going to be.

As long as we all know beforehand how we are going to do it and everyone understands I think it will work better than last time.

 

[CaféAuLait]

I'm with Mertex on the pseudo voting, and with keeping more to the deadlines. I'm usually on very late, almost never before 4pm eastern, more like 8pm or later, and I miss all the action.

Hello all!

Sounds like me Grandma, I am on late as well do to where I live and of course today being Sunday--- many are off to do brunches, visit family, etc...

Hope I don't miss too much of the "action".

 

[Wolfsister77]

I'm fine with that strategy Mertex as long as everyone else is and we are all on the same page. No miscommunication. Or Grandma's might be even easier.

Yes, I agree, just not bolding it (however, Wake bolded it for those who forgot to bold it the last time), so that is why I suggested putting psuedo in front of it, unless we can get [MENTION=44124]Wake[/MENTION] to agree not to bold it and that if it is not bolded, he cannot accept it as a final vote, and then make sure everyone knows not to bold it until they are darn sure that is what their vote is going to be.

As long as we all know beforehand how we are going to do it and everyone understands I think it will work better than last time.

This is fine by me if everyone agrees. As long as there is no confusion.

 

[Grandma]

We have until Wednesday the 28th to vote for the first lynch. No need to rush into it.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Silence is only one way to hunt for scum. You can also look at how a player says things or doesn't say something. We caught Moonglow so quickly because he said your town instead of our town for example. I don't expect it to be that easy again.

True, you and Avi were scum last time, didn't Cereal Killer catch Moon with Moon's "your town" comment?

hummmmmm 'we caught'. Does that mean you are scum again?

 

[CaféAuLait]

Thanks Grandma, I get it now.

I don't think we should go after lurkers too early. That didn't work so well last time.

I also am not going to immediately suspect Avatar because I'm thinking of the odds and how likely he will be to be scum twice in a row? I'm not saying it can't happen but it just doesn't seem as likely to me at this point. He plays the game well and could be vital to town if we hold off lynching him just because he won last time.

Okay, now you are beginning to sound suspicious as mafia scum, trying to protect the Godfather or roleblocker.

Perhaps that is exactly what Wake figured, that we would not suspect Avatar because he was scum the last time....hmmmm, Wake may have thought he did such a good job the last time that he may want to see if he can do it again.... however, the first one is always just a hit or miss kind of vote, because we can't analyze their vote...all we have is their word, which is worthless since we know everyone lies.

I don't think Wake picks, he said he uses a random name generator.... so it would have to have been luck for Avi to have been picked again... wouldn't it?

 

[Mertex]

Silence is only one way to hunt for scum. You can also look at how a player says things or doesn't say something. We caught Moonglow so quickly because he said your town instead of our town for example. I don't expect it to be that easy again.

True, you and Avi were scum last time, didn't Cereal Killer catch Moon with Moon's "your town" comment?

hummmmmm 'we caught'. Does that mean you are scum again?

The last game we had two sets of Mafia, Red and Blue. Shaitra was red, had no way of knowing that Moonglow was blue mafia. She might have voted for him hoping he was a Townie, though, but he turned out to be blue mafia.