Game 6: Black Flag Nightless

Mason A. is slightly town, and seems kinda familiar.

Aw geez, the point of this is to remain anonymous, and I don't want you guys to figure out who I am. The nice thing about this game type is that there are no night-phases, so being pro-town won't get you killed like I always am.
Anyways, there doesn't really seem to be very much discussion... is anyone else here? What do you all think about each other? There hasn't been much that people have said, so I don't really have a read on anyone...

Oh, awesome, the game has started!

Satchel, I am curious as to what part of Mason's first after-the-game-started post seemed town. Mason urges us to not hastily bandwagon others and to discuss before we vote. Well, that should be the case for all Forum Mafia games, so I don't think there was anything particularly scum or town-motivated in that post alone. What did you see there, Satchel?

I do think that Mason brings up a good point in the post above. Because this game specifically has no night phases and thus no opportunity for the Mafia to selectively kill off active members of the town, all players, especially town-sided members, should be actively participating. We can't get any reads on other town members if nobody speaks up, so I hope that the discussion won't stall (didn't jinx that, right?).

Yuriko, what is there to be confused about this early? If you need any explanations, I'm sure several of us here can help you - just ask!

I'd agree. We all should try to participate as much as we can, as there are no investigative roles. But truth to be told, I'm not sure if I have anything to say.

Vote: Areal I.

Lets get the talk started. We don't have many people talking, and we almost have 1/5 of Day 1 over. Guys, discuss?

Areal /did/ make like 5 no content posts this day, albeit nobody else was on at the time.

Lynch Bailey
We here that you are villy. Want to demonstrate that for us?

What this says to me is that scum buddying with each other is extremely risky - because being seen as a block of two or more can easily get the entire scumteam incriminated, even if the last scum is out of the action. Normally a scumteam could have one or two members diverting attention from the last scum member who has fit in with the town better, but in this setup that strategy is not salvageable because scum loses if dropped to one member.

These are my thoughts about the setup - what are your guys' other opinions on this? I appreciate Duplica's willingness to rally us together because with enough discussion and logic, we have a good shot at deducing the scum.

I agree with Jeanette here. The Mafia will probably tend to play different playstyles (or after reading my post, they might try to play the same so I guess that hypothesis doesn't work...) This game can be rather town-sided, although a few slip-ups can cost us the game.
With that said, I think it'd be better for everyone who placed votes based on activity to remove them before the deadline (since plurality does apply), as we can afford no-lynches since no town members will die.

sorry for all of the no-content posts, just got excited about this

i do agree everyone should participate and that we should thoroughly discuss before we lynch, especially because we have 5 days per day

i don't think we have any leads yet, but i think Mason A. seemed town to Satchel because Mason suggested something that could help the town, although this is definitely not a definite lead

I hope everyone here has fun!

Hey Areal, what do you think about Duplica's vote on you? Do you have a suggestion on who else to place a vote on?

I disagree with Mason about placing votes off players. In the same way that Mafia can no longer night kill, Town will only hurt themselves by restricting themselves with their main weapon: their lynch. We learn nothing if we don't use our vote.

Regarding Satchel, let's let him speak for himself first. But from my impression, Mason had brought up something typical in all Mafia games (let's discuss before lynching!) so I don't see how that immediately means a town read. If anything, scum are the only players right now that actually know who IS town (and obviously who is mafia). Areal, you say that we have no town or scum leads right now, yet you support Satchel's town read? Interesting. And Satchel, your side of the story would be most appreciated!

I'd just like to fix a misconception that occurred. Rather than saying that we shouldn't lynch at all (that would ruin the point of the game) I suggested that we do not keep votes that are solely based on activity on people before deadline, as it could lead to the death of townies that may not have been acting scummy at all.
We do need to use our lynch, but what I was trying to say is that we should not use our lynch without evidence and good reasoning that points towards someone (E.G. don't vote someone solely based on gut feelings, and don't put in votes at the last minute unless you have good reasoning for them).
Anyways, I am getting more of a town read from Jeanette, simply because she is trying to spur discussion and she is trying to get the opinions of others, but I don't really have any other reads at this moment.

Jeanette C. wrote:Areal, you say that we have no town or scum leads right now, yet you support Satchel's town read? Interesting.

Also forgot to mention something regarding this: I believe what Areal was attempting to do was explain the reasoning behind Satchel's belief that I am town, rather than agreeing or disagreeing with it.

Thanks for the clarification, Mason. At least for me, my vote is flexible and I would be more than willing to change to an alternative as deadline approaches.

After rereading Areal's explanation of Satchel, it DOES seem like she is taking a more neutral stance than when I first read it. However, my immediate thoughts after first reading Areal's post was 'Why is she buddying with Satchel this early?'. I think this was compounded with the fact that Satchel has yet to say a word, so why speak for him when asking for Satchel's reasoning himself? That's how it came across to me.

Also, my reaction to Mason about avoiding a no lynch stems from all games on the PS server in which ultra fast NLs predominate. Looking through medical mafia is the same way

What you say certainly makes sense; to be honest, I originally read it the same way as you but did not realize it until you brought it up. However, I would like if Satchel, or in fact ANY other people would speak... It seems like a majority of the conversation is you, me, and Areal...

Jeanette C. wrote:Also, my reaction to Mason about avoiding a no lynch stems from all games on the PS server in which ultra fast NLs predominate. Looking through medical mafia is the same way

Yeah, I recall there always being extremely fast nl's without discussion. That's also why I encouraged (at least I recall that I encouraged) discussion before no lynching.

Yes, I would like to hear anything from Huromi, Bailey, Hajime, or the (not even confirmed) Chaz. In particular, what are your thoughts on Satchel's very early claim of Mason as town? Given that at that point Mason only had one game related post.

Right now I'm reading Mason as town for elaborating on his points, clarifying meanings if they are unclear, and generally being productive.

Areal leans slight scum to me for rapid posting and sticking up unnecessarily quickly to Satchel - the wording/tone definitely sounded defensive even if that wasn't the intention. Areal, please address this when you come online, as well as my earlier question about Duplica's vote on you.

Similarly, Satchel leans slight scum to me until further defense.

Duplica is slight town/null, everybody else is null to me.

Mason is correct; I was speaking from a neutral stance and explaining why Satchel may be having that read. I didn't necessarily want to be defensive, but I also didn't want a lynch on him because of that; it's not really a scummy statement in my eyes.

It seems to me that Duplica's vote (no offense Duplica) was lazy and hasty and really had no thought behind it, similar to the ones that Mason had warned against. Currently I think nothing of it.

It seems to me that jeanette and Mason are either town or really good mafia, but that's basically because no one else is here and Jeanette writes college-level theses every time she comes online.

So really, until aj gets more people online, there isn't much we can do.

Reading back about Duplica, it doesn't seem like she (the avatar is a girl) did much than spur discussion with a vote. I assume that that probably means she hasn't come online assuming that not much more will be said day one, but it bothers me that she won't listen to the non-voting-haste advice that was previously posted.

Yeah, sorry.

Unvote: Areal I.

There was nothing much in that lynch, its just to get some conversation started. (Although, there is still not much people talking >.<)

@Areal I.
Yeah, I had a long day and I don't think where I stay is the best place for activity, but at least forum mafia allows me to play =P

@Everyone
This setup is basically 7 Town + 1 Mafia Goon + 1 Mafia Doublevoter (7vs3). I'm sure, we can actually afford a mislynch as Day 1 goes by. Currently, I think the only lynch would be Bailey.

Lynch Bailey

Assuming someone is mafia, if their team doesn't want one of their mafia to be lynched, they will have to vote 1 more than the vote on their friend count on someone else. Of course, after reading my post the mafia might just let Bailey (if he is mafia) die, but that would be a disadvantage. Also Bailey, when you come online, what do you think of the lynches?

The thing is, once we lynch a mafia we would have an advantage over them (Kinda). This game would depend on the play of mafia; Would they let one of their mafia members get lynched, or will they play safe?

This is my view of the current game.

Will respond with more in a bit, but I don't get how you say there is a mafia doublevoter? The three mafia aren't obligated to vote together and so I don't think you can just lump two of them together, even if they become lovers.

well i might as well try to vote to spur some more discussion             wait thats been done  , i'm not good at discussion, so i shall flee *Hajime U. Flees*

Duplica W. wrote:
@Everyone
This setup is basically 7 Town + 1 Mafia Goon + 1 Mafia Doublevoter (7vs3). I'm sure, we can actually afford a mislynch as Day 1 goes by. Currently, I think the only lynch would be Bailey.

Lynch Bailey

Assuming someone is mafia, if their team doesn't want one of their mafia to be lynched, they will have to vote 1 more than the vote on their friend count on someone else. Of course, after reading my post the mafia might just let Bailey (if he is mafia) die, but that would be a disadvantage. Also Bailey, when you come online, what do you think of the lynches?

First of all, I agree that we can afford a mislynch - that's kind of the point of nightless setups, in that I'm sure along the way we are bound to have mislynches but all we need is to lynch two Mafia before we lynch four Townies (given the 3:7 ratio at the start and the win conditions). So technically we get three mislynches.

The rest of your post I am confused about though, Duplica. I brought up the Mafia doublevoter simplification above - although that part doesn't affect your final paragraph here. Your entire point of view sounds like you already see the lynch on Bailey as a foregone conclusion - do you really think Bailey will for sure be lynched today? Yes, she is the only one with votes on her right now, but I made clear that I am up for any alternatives, plus I'm sure when/if Bailey comes online she will defend herself.

Also, I am curious about your thoughts on Satchel - the discussion over Satchel's first game post has kind of revolved around Areal, Mason, and I - so I would appreciate outside perspectives on us three and Satchel.