Eurobricks Mafia Nights: Players only

[Darkdragon]

If he'd actually argued in thread like Pandora said, maybe he would have been successful.

I totally agree, I think PMs was probably not a good way to go but just thought since Pandora asked why he would do it...I'd just explain why he might have done it that way.

[Pandora]

I totally agree, I think PMs was probably not a good way to go but just thought since Pandora asked why he would do it...I'd just explain why he might have done it that way.

Thanks, but they were pretty much rhetorical questions.

I was making the point that it was an inefficient thing to do. Why not try to get people to unvote him and vote for Hinck at the same time? Sorry, let me rephrase that - it would have made more sense to try to get everyone to vote for Hinck, especially the people who had voted for him. If he'd had a good enough argument, some of us might have.

[Hinckley]

I'm not even Italian. People always think I am. There's no rule against quoting PMs. Can you guys post what Flare sent you?

[CMP]

Probably because every vote tally announced that you weren't eligible to vote.

Never playing cards again...

I thought Flare's lynch was reasonable enough, I just hope people don't assume that if he comes up scum that those pushing for his mayorhood are all scum too. Hell, I think it's likelier scum are in the crowd if he comes up town. I found both the leaders, the timing, and the following of the vote on Hinckley, well, surprising. Reminds me a little of the campaign to get Flare for mayor. Mafia veteran(s) pushes really early/late for a vote on someone and people follow up quickly. Those are some interesting parallels, and now in hindsight I can see even better why people wanted Flare lynched.

Thanks, but they were pretty much rhetorical questions.

I was making the point that it was an inefficient thing to do. Why not try to get people to unvote him and vote for Hinck at the same time? Sorry, let me rephrase that - it would have made more sense to try to get everyone to vote for Hinck, especially the people who had voted for him. If he'd had a good enough argument, some of us might have.

Look at it from his perspective; he's being lynched for something others decided to do because his allegiance may hint at theirs, and those voters are all quite experienced. As a newer-ish player, the idea of focusing on the select group of people who weren't voting for him probably appealed to him more than his voters arguing against any defense he might've made in-thread, like Darkdragon says.

Its efficiency, well, you've hit the nail on the head there. But do you think he was actually truly suspicious or Hinck, or do you think he was just trying to save himself? It'd have a significant impact on any arguments he could make, and since I'm inclined to believe the latter....

[Piratedave84]

If he'd actually argued in thread like Pandora said, maybe he would have been successful.

Is that all he said, Dave? That Hinck was Mafia? Doesn't sound like game changing secret information that he couldn't have told everyone.

He said he was "appealing to my senses", not pleaing. Then he said something about me voting for Hinck since I also saw his scuminess when I had explained my logic earlier (it was based on him being "off") and concluded by confirming he was in fact trying to save his megablocks.

Not much .....

I'm not even Italian. People always think I am. There's no rule against quoting PMs. Can you guys post what Flare sent you?

Read and re-read the rules, you're right! Here:

(I could not figure out how to quote a PM; there is no option below his message)

Hi Piratedave,

I am messaging you about the eurobricks mafia (hence the subject ). Although this might sound like a desperate plea to be saved, it isn't supposed to a plea, rather an appeal to your sense. I'll up and front about it: I would like to suggest to you to change your vote to Hinckley.

Why? Well, to start off, I don't understand why you moved your vote from Hinckley to TinyPiesRUs. Yes, its annoying that he voted for you, but it won't make a difference in the current scheme of things, and your vote could be much better put at use.

Hinckley has been first pushing for me to mayor, and quickly after switches to lead a lynch against me. He has been acting very scummy and has not been acting in a town-type of way at all. Apparently you saw this as you voted for Hinckley previously.

That's all I have to say, and I hope that you'll consider changing your vote to Hinckley seriously as we only have a precious few minutes left in Day One.

I hope we can work together for town victory. Thanks

And if you're wondering if I'm trying to save my own butt, then yes of course (if I didn't apply to asking my fellow townsperson for help then I would be a complete fool). Thanks for listening.

Flare

[Hinckley]

Well, he was smart not to send that to me because I wouldn't have been convinced at all.

[Piratedave84]

Well, he was smart not to send that to me because I wouldn't have been convinced at all.

[Big Cam]

Never playing cards again...

I thought Flare's lynch was reasonable enough, I just hope people don't assume that if he comes up scum that those pushing for his mayorhood are all scum too. Hell, I think it's likelier scum are in the crowd if he comes up town. I found both the leaders, the timing, and the following of the vote on Hinckley, well, surprising. Reminds me a little of the campaign to get Flare for mayor. Mafia veteran(s) pushes really early/late for a vote on someone and people follow up quickly. Those are some interesting parallels, and now in hindsight I can see even better why people wanted Flare lynched.

That's not a bad way to look at it, but it won't always work. I for one voted for Flare for mayor simply because he was an unknown, then his attention came to me for no reason and at times he made less sense than me, so since I couldn't unvote him as mayor, I decided to go with the groups instincts and lynch him.

Look at it from his perspective; he's being lynched for something others decided to do because his allegiance may hint at theirs, and those voters are all quite experienced. As a newer-ish player, the idea of focusing on the select group of people who weren't voting for him probably appealed to him more than his voters arguing against any defense he might've made in-thread, like Darkdragon says.

Its efficiency, well, you've hit the nail on the head there. But do you think he was actually truly suspicious or Hinck, or do you think he was just trying to save himself? It'd have a significant impact on any arguments he could make, and since I'm inclined to believe the latter....

I think he was desperate and trying to save his own butt. By directing attention to Hinck (the one with the next highest votes and therefore the easiest sell) he probably thought he could convert people with a simple potato. Unlikely, but as a new player it was probably his best idea.

Well, he was smart not to send that to me because I wouldn't have been convinced at all.

What if he would asked 3 times, then would you vote for yourself?

[Hinckley]

What if he would asked 3 times, then would you vote for yourself?

Well, I'm pretty sure I'm not Scum, but if he asked nicely, maybe. It sounds like he was on his way to a pretty convincing case. But, I had gambled my vote away.

Do you guys think if he was on a team of Scum they would've advised him not to PM people who hadn't voted for him?

[Big Cam]

Well, I'm pretty sure I'm not Scum, but if he asked nicely, maybe. It sounds like he was on his way to a pretty convincing case. But, I had gambled my vote away.

Do you guys think if he was on a team of Scum they would've advised him not to PM people who hadn't voted for him?

I didn't think the scum knew who their counterscum were right off the bat? (Let me go re-read)

But yes, IF he was in communication with other scum AND he actually is scum, if any of them had played before, they would not have advised that action.

OK after re-reading it was the two teams of scum who wouldn't know who was who. So if I understand that correctly the team of killers know who they all are and the team of recruiters know who they are, but the killers and recruiters don't know when each other are.

Hmm, I hope Flare was scum. Hinck you raised a good point.

[Hinckley]

Cam, there are two teams of Scum, one with a kill Action, one with a converson Action. They're not aware of each other's identity, but there is probably more than one person on each team.

[Zepher]

OK after re-reading it was the two teams of scum who wouldn't know who was who. So if I understand that correctly the team of killers know who they all are and the team of recruiters know who they are, but the killers and recruiters don't know when each other are.

Hinck, don't you say playing stupid is a scum tell? Big Cam "didn't know there were two teams of scum"?

Anywho, as I said yesterday, I really don't think Flare was scum, but only morning will tell. His PMs seemed particularly unscummy (I also received one). As for the case against Hinck... also wasn't particularly compelling to me. I think most everyone is grasping at straws right now.

[Piratedave84]

Cam, there are two teams of Scum, one with a kill Action, one with a converson Action. They're not aware of each other's identity, but there is probably more than one person on each team.

Somehow I can't help but think the 2 teams will unite sooner than later; and this would/will royally suck!

SNIP

I think most everyone is grasping at straws right now.

Hence why day 1 is always a pain in the megablucks; hopefully the night will de fruitful and we will have something more tangible to roll with tomorrow.

[Big Cam]

Hinck, don't you say playing stupid is a scum tell? Big Cam "didn't know there were two teams of scum"?

I didn't not know, I was just a bit confused on who knew about who and when and where and why.

[Hinckley]

From the sign-up thread:

The killers are likely to either kill a recruiter or one of the few recruitable players in their early blindness. Recruitable players will be a minority and if they are successfully recruited, subsequent actions are less likely to be successful. So, that balances out their number bonus, in my opinion.

We were debating earlier if the Scum could recruit just anybody. It appears they cannot.

Anyway, as a couple of you have discussed, the abruptness of the case against me was weird. Something feels really off to me about it, much like I felt during Hearlake the night before I was converted. I didn't say this then and wished I would've in retrospect for the Town's sake. But, the things being said to me at that point were bizarre but blatanlty so and I even guessed that I would be converted if there was a Cult. Now, since Draggy and Shadows seem so convinced, in their accusations, that I'm Scum, it feels like they're up to something. Trying to manipulate me, manipulate everyone, maybe trying to appear Scummy which would be a rather Townie thing to do in this game. Shadows even claims to be Scum in his signature. In looking over their accusations, Draggy says that one sentence responses are my Scum tell although in Ragnarok he said that ranting when accused was my Scum tell. So, I guess my Scum-tell changes to suit him. Also in Ragnarok, he said it was my Town tell to be wishy washy about who to vote for. There's no mention from him in the analysis of my behavior how many people I wanted to vote for today. I do know that Shadows read my response to the accusation and went directly to his Messenger. Draggy points out that they don't PM each other, they use AIM or whatever, but if one of/both of them are Scum there would be other people to PM. Or Shadows was going to his messenger for other reasons. Maybe he had Townies to manipulate, Scum to plan with, a message with a fellow Townie, a message not having to do with Mafia... I know it's not a dire accusation and may mean absolutely nothing, especially for a staff member. But, something feels really off about the whole thing, really weird.

However, this post from Dragonator is most concerning:

As for puzzle pieces, mine is not at all helpful in solving it. If you want to find your scum I would think looking at who had the big pieces that made it possible to solve would be more helpful. Or perhaps you've already done that and haven't wanted to tell us because you're teaming up out the back somewhere?

He says, "if you want to find your Scum" instead of "if we want to find the Scum" and then continues to tell us that people who had the bigger pieces were more likely to be able to solve it, but offers no input as to who that may be. Are we supposed to do all his work for him or is he just not interested in helping the Town? It's an interesting perspective to speak from. Lazy or Scum, he's implying what we should do to find the Scum instead of helping to do it himself.

The quick following votes are reason for concern too, especially the one from Dave where he says he doesn't think I'm Scummy but votes for me anyway. Dave, your switching your vote to TPRU is weird. You've basically just gone back and accused your accuser. Some may say that's exactly what I'm doing right now, but I'm not defending myself necessarily, I'm analyzing what happened that I happen to be at the center of. Dave, you seemed really defensive. I know you're smart and it must be frustrating to have your abillities and intentions questioned, but TPRU had a good question and it was worth voicing. I wonder why you are spazzing so much about hating Day One. You say you hate it because everyone's defensive. I don't think everyone was defensive. I thought some where and you definitely were. Your behavior seemed overly sporadic today.

Tammo, what did you mean by this?

And Trumpet, while noobish, is just a tough read and not someone I'm comfortable with lynching at this point. Hinck's push on him makes me question his affiliation as well (although scum doesn't know their teammates...).

What did my push on TrumpetKing make you think about my "alliance" or was it Trumpet's "alliance"? I don't understand what you're saying here.

I'm not saying that everyone who voted for me is Scum. I have no evidence of that and I'm not convinced, myself, that any of them are. However, it all felt really weird and off (I feel I've said weird and off 100 times during this post. That makes me feel weird and off.)

Oh, weird. It says affiliation. I thought it said "alliance". Never mind that part, but the question still stands.

[Piratedave84]

The quick following votes are reason for concern too, especially the one from Dave where he says he doesn't think I'm Scummy but votes for me anyway. Dave, your switching your vote to TPRU is weird. You've basically just gone back and accused your accuser. Some may say that's exactly what I'm doing right now, but I'm not defending myself necessarily, I'm analyzing what happened that I happen to be at the center of. Dave, you seemed really defensive. I know you're smart and it must be frustrating to have your abillities and intentions questioned, but TPRU had a good question and it was worth voicing. I wonder why you are spazzing so much about hating Day One. You say you hate it because everyone's defensive. I don't think everyone was defensive. I thought some where and you definitely were. Your behavior seemed overly sporadic today.

Frankly when I intially voted for you it was solely based on how I knew you from Heartlake, and let's face it you were acting much differently (dicksish) and to me it was odd. Then I read Shadows point about this game not being all about meta gaming and I started to look for someone else to vote for and re-read the day thread. Then When TPRU voted for me because I tried to be helpful, I thought this was more worthy of my vote which let's face it was irrelevant. I PM'ed TPRU to explain my vote; I felt confident that he would not be lynched and I felt that his asking me why I wanted to be helpful was misdirected; why I got flak (from more than one player) for being helpful still kind of baffles me.

As for Day 1; I now realize I actually said pretty much the same thing twice

I DON'T LIKE DAY 1! I never know who to vote for or who to trust. As a general rule of thumb I never PM anyone on day one based on the fact I feel I can't trust anyone. Sure some people are more helpful than other, some are more vocal and some lay low early on and prove to be valuable assets in the follwing days but I most often regret my votes after day 1. I thought it would be different this time around seeing we had a night zero but it proved to be of little-help to me. Not one person here can say that they are always 100% confident in their votes on day 1.

[Hinckley]

Frankly when I intially voted for you it was solely based on how I knew you from Heartlake, and let's face it you were acting much differently (dicksish) and to me it was odd. Then I read Shadows point about this game not being all about meta gaming and I started to look for someone else to vote for and re-read the day thread. Then When TPRU voted for me because I tried to be helpful, I thought this was more worthy of my vote which let's face it was irrelevant. I PM'ed TPRU to explain my vote; I felt confident that he would not be lynched and I felt that his asking me why I wanted to be helpful was misdirected; why I got flak (from more than one player) for being helpful still kind of baffles me.

Sometimes Scum tries to appear helpful on Day One to avoid suspicion later. See The Forest II, or for an unsuccessful example, me in Ragnarok.

Not one person here can say that they are always 100% confident in their votes on day 1.

Again, this is why Draggy and Shadows's behavior seems suspicious to me.

[Piratedave84]

Sometimes Scum tries to appear helpful on Day One to avoid suspicion later. See The Forest II, or for an unsuccessful example, me in Ragnarok.

I know, we have seen this in Heartlake and I was in the middle of it all; my wanting to be helpful here was misinterpreted by some; I can onyl re-state was was said, I am a member of the town and I was only trying to be a helpful little townie!

I have a list of people I think solved the puzzle and I am very curious to see the conclusion to find out who sloved it and their allegiance.

[Hinckley]

Why not share the list now?

[Piratedave84]

I have; on day one, you were on it!

It was in the same post where I suggested electing a lurker mayor!

Now since this is meta-gaming-fetivus, there were 3-4 people looking at the thread at that time, I unfortunately only remember one for sure; Hinck. But there may have also been Badboy and Cecile, I unfortunately cannot recall for sure whom else was reading the thread.

going home; I'll be back later

[Hinckley]

No, unfortunately, I didn't solve it even though I love Talking Heads. : blush:

[Tamamono]

What did my push on TrumpetKing make you think about my "alliance" or was it Trumpet's "alliance"? I don't understand what you're saying here.

What I meant is that I think there's a good chance that you're scum this game, so thus I'm a bit wary of following your reads. However, the fact that Flare started PMing people to vote for you makes me kind of question that...

I don't know, am I wrong for trying to get team reads? I realize that the teams are separate, but they're not all scattered, right? So maybe a couple of 2-3 person teams? That allows for some team reads, I suppose.

And yes, it was affiliation.

[Hinckley]

What I wondered about was who you were trying to get a read on with that, me or trumpet King?

[Tamamono]

What I wondered about was who you were trying to get a read on with that, me or trumpet King?

Trumpet. I think I've made my read on you pretty clear.

[TrumpetKing]

Who is Pelly? Please do inform me!

Pelly was an NPC in Fraulein Bloodbrick. He kept a journal, which was shown often, and ended up killing a lot of people in the conclusion if I remember correctly.