Mafia - Red Scare Game Thread

[Smashmouth]

How about refuse to vote at all? Not much different then a nolynch, but if a day started and nobody placed a single vote, maybe that could trigger it

Or maybe a unanimous no lynch?, i.e. everyone voting the same way, for no lynch

My thinking here is that, as long as there's people willing to accuse someone of being a commie, the red scare still exists..

Im down with that cause im not changing my vote

[Smashmouth]

I'm not buying CTM as scum at this point. I don't think there's a genuine connection between him and EY. Lynching CTM tells us nothing about EY, IMHO. Only EY can tell us about EY. He had more of a meltdown than usual for him, and had it early. I'd like to hear back from him, and have him tell us whatever the mod lets him tell us.

JiF, if EY was lying about his role (and I understand your case vis-a-vis the lack of mod-kill), where did he get the idea for the role from? He was the first one to mention it, starting a cascade of understanding (it seemed to me) amongst a large group of townies.

I'll say this about CTM; I think he's a safe lynch in that he doesn't seem to have a role that kills others upon being lynched. But I could say the same thing about Vic and Smash, and see better reasons for lynching one of them.

Have you been reading ?

[The Crusher]

Alright, I'm back. Selling my house..blah blah...no internet...blah blah. I won't be absent again.

I've caught up on the 8 million pages since I left. To address concerns of not knowing me or being an alt or whatever.

My RL name is Steve. I work for a large pharmacy retailer. I like the color red. I like long walks on the beach. I like to read. A lot. I don't like baseball. I like football, but I'm a Dolphins fan.....sorry guys. I'm a dork. Anything else you'd like to know?

********

Ok, now to the game. I've toyed with a Bastard Mod game where there were no mafia. If I were to create a Bastard game within the Red Scare timeline, I would make it so that we all were innocents. This begs the question (which has been asked already) "Then how the hell do we win if No Lynch doesn't work?"

My answer is that I think one of the following scenarios exists:

1. No mafia and we are all town, but win 1 of 2 ways:

a. eliminate the folks like what EY and others have claimed

b. we are all town but win alone

2. There is a mafia, but like Smashmouth suggested, without a NK.

I truly think that there is no mafia in this game. I'll think on it more to try any figure out win conditions for the town in that scenario. We all could be the same, or we could have multiple town-aligned roles (like the silencer - I'm not claiming that btw), but with different restrictions placed on us. That still leaves the win condition for the town unanswered. I don't have that answer, but I'm thinking. Any ideas?

Welcome back Steve. I too like walks on the beach as long as its on the way to a snack bar.

unvote: Verbal

Hopefully he can help us figure out this mess.

[slats]

Ok, now to the game. I've toyed with a Bastard Mod game where there were no mafia. If I were to create a Bastard game within the Red Scare timeline, I would make it so that we all were innocents. This begs the question (which has been asked already) "Then how the hell do we win if No Lynch doesn't work?"

My answer is that I think one of the following scenarios exists:

1. No mafia and we are all town, but win 1 of 2 ways:

a. eliminate the folks like what EY and others have claimed

b. we are all town but win alone

2. There is a mafia, but like Smashmouth suggested, without a NK.

I truly think that there is no mafia in this game. I'll think on it more to try any figure out win conditions for the town in that scenario. We all could be the same, or we could have multiple town-aligned roles (like the silencer - I'm not claiming that btw), but with different restrictions placed on us. That still leaves the win condition for the town unanswered. I don't have that answer, but I'm thinking. Any ideas?

I'm not sure of the numbers, but I have a feeling that lynching everyone with "the EY role," will result in everyone dead. Maybe even before they're all lynched.

I keep asking how you would possibly win a game that you generally win by eliminating all the bad guys if there are no bad guys in the first place. I don't get it.

How about refuse to vote at all? Not much different then a nolynch, but if a day started and nobody placed a single vote, maybe that could trigger it

Or maybe a unanimous no lynch?, i.e. everyone voting the same way, for no lynch

My thinking here is that, as long as there's people willing to accuse someone of being a commie, the red scare still exists..

I would think that all of us not voting would result in a random lynch. As for a unanimous vote, the voting ends when a majority is reached so it would be impossible to get that. I guess we could have a 7-0 vote in favor of no lynch, but I'm still not seeing this as a win option.

[The Crusher]

How about refuse to vote at all? Not much different then a nolynch, but if a day started and nobody placed a single vote, maybe that could trigger it

Or maybe a unanimous no lynch?, i.e. everyone voting the same way, for no lynch

My thinking here is that, as long as there's people willing to accuse someone of being a commie, the red scare still exists..

Thats interesting. Sorta like trying to find the key rather than hysterically bumping one another off.

[Pac]

How about refuse to vote at all? Not much different then a nolynch, but if a day started and nobody placed a single vote, maybe that could trigger it

Or maybe a unanimous no lynch?, i.e. everyone voting the same way, for no lynch

My thinking here is that, as long as there's people willing to accuse someone of being a commie, the red scare still exists..

How about everyone simultaneously posts at exactly 8:06 PM tonight voting you off? (That's 5:06 for you Vic)..

It might not win us the game but I think everyone would feel a lot better.

[slats]

Have you been reading ?

I thought so. I definitely didn't get the EY role concept from you, and didn't believe it from Vic - who backtracked on that idea, anyway.

[Vicious89x]

I thought so. I definitely didn't get the EY role concept from you, and didn't believe it from Vic - who backtracked on that idea, anyway.

I didnt' backtrack anything. What I said is I have reason to believe that EY was telling the TRUTH. That I had plenty of reason to think that what EY was alluding to was plausible.

You've made a case on completely misunderstanding me and spinning it that somehow I was saying something I'm not then I said I was and then I'm not.

I responded to CTM saying I think there's more then 1/2 of us here who might have EY's abilities. So you said I was trying to "lump myself" in with that group. I dont' see where I "backtracked" on said claim.

Like I said, at this point I'm ok with getting lynched as it'll give an indicator to the rest of the town on the flavor of the game and how INCREDIBLY wrong you are on this. And the fact that you just spun a gigantic web to back me into a corner.

[Pac]

Could the scare be EY's silly threat and subsequent disappearance? Are we NOT supposed to kill him despite the percieved "scare" his abscence has caused? BTW I don't think this is possible but since we're throwing stuff out there...

[slats]

I didnt' backtrack anything. What I said is I have reason to believe that EY was telling the TRUTH. That I had plenty of reason to think that what EY was alluding to was plausible.

You've made a case on completely misunderstanding me and spinning it that somehow I was saying something I'm not then I said I was and then I'm not.

I responded to CTM saying I think there's more then 1/2 of us here who might have EY's abilities. So you said I was trying to "lump myself" in with that group. I dont' see where I "backtracked" on said claim.

Like I said, at this point I'm ok with getting lynched as it'll give an indicator to the rest of the town on the flavor of the game and how INCREDIBLY wrong you are on this. And the fact that you just spun a gigantic web to back me into a corner.

I'm not discounting that as a possibility, but it's definitely not the way it read to me.

But what you're saying now is that you definitely don't have this role that takes out others upon a lynch, right?

[Vicious89x]

I'm not discounting that as a possibility, but it's definitely not the way it read to me.

But what you're saying now is that you definitely don't have this role that takes out others upon a lynch, right?

Decipher. It's part of the reason we are having a misunderstanding.

[JustInFudge]

Slats - below are the posts that I think we read differently and I will tell you what I thought while reading them prior to your case.

I'd say more then half.

I myself was surprised EY wasn't killed.

I took this as, he thinks that probably more then half of us have the power to kill upon lynch, not saying he does, but considering it being a possibility.

And the 2nd part was, we all have obvious restrictions of what we can say. And he probably would have been killed if he gave that much of a signal of what he can do with his role.

I think at this point if this power is out there and being considered as a real threat then it's safe to say we perhaps play forward with the game and if the person who is lynched has the power, they do not use it. At this point there could be only one Mafia member, yes the "odds" are stacked against them but from day to night he could get 3 kills with a set-up, revenge kill and NK.

If all are in favor of proceeding playing as "normal" but agree to keep it in their pants I think that's the best course of action.

I never saw him trying to claim a specific role, so I took this post as him trying to figure out what role EY, and others possibly have and how it works.

The 2nd part I thought he was referring to if you had a night action, correct me if I'm wrong but you and Irish were trying to make it seem like he meant he had a day action he could holster.

What I'm saying is there is more then one person with that capability. If that is the case why don't you think of a set up that the "Red Scare" was built on paranoia and finger pointing???

You kill said townie revenge power. Townie retaliates and kills someone else. 2 dead townies. If there is a mafia or a SK or let's just call it a bad guy, they kill another one, 3 dead. Then you're at square one because what more do you know? Nothing, all that's left is people dead and the town at a serious disadvantage.

I think it'd be more intelligent to take heed to what it seems we've picked up from EY, JiF and CTM.

But go ahead, lynch me.

And then I thought this post was pretty clear on what he was trying to say that was misinterpreted.

Thats what I read differently.

[slats]

My answer is that I think one of the following scenarios exists:

1. No mafia and we are all town, but win 1 of 2 ways:

a. eliminate the folks like what EY and others have claimed

b. we are all town but win alone

2. There is a mafia, but like Smashmouth suggested, without a NK.

On second thought, "choice a" could be accomplished without wiping out the entire town if we lynch people with that role, and they in turn take out another person with that role on their way out.

That's not to suggest I buy that as a win condition just yet, either, but it can be done.

[The Crusher]

How about everyone simultaneously posts at exactly 8:06 PM tonight voting you off? (That's 5:06 for you Vic)..

It might not win us the game but I think everyone would feel a lot better.

synchronizing my watch now.

[Verbal]

we all have obvious restrictions of what we can say.

I agree with you here. It might be more of a restriction for some, but not others.

[CTM]

I would think that all of us not voting would result in a random lynch. As for a unanimous vote, the voting ends when a majority is reached so it would be impossible to get that. I guess we could have a 7-0 vote in favor of no lynch, but I'm still not seeing this as a win option.

Yeah.. That's what I meant by unanimous..

As for why it's a win condition, i think "scares" like this propogate because people are willing to accuse others. If nobody accuses anyone, the scare is robbed of it fuel. I know it's a simplification of the events, but if the girls in Salem never accused anyone of witchcraft, that unforunate stain in our nations history wouldn't have happenned.

In mafia, the way to accuse someone is to vote for them.

I'm game for a 7-0 vote for nolynch if we can get everyone else to unvote.

[Vicious89x]

slats- think of my first post saying "I'm surprised EY wasn't killed."

Now think of me not really saying anything about myself.... just try and put those two together.

And JiF, actually I meant any townie kill action, day and night. So if you're a vig or anything of that nature you keep it in your pants, because of the #'s basically. I think we don't have the luxury of killing off innocents if I have reason to believe that what EY was alluding to is the truth, that means to me that this game is inherently set up AGAINST the town.

It's built for us to shoot ourselves in the foot, over, and over.

[Irish Jet]

correct me if I'm wrong but you and Irish were trying to make it seem like he meant he had a day action he could holster.

Eh?

My case on Vic was that he posted this:

Originally Posted by Vicious89x

Oh so vote for me, call me a liar (which I'm not) and then throw in a clause saying "oh dont' use it from the grave."

I think if YOU get me lynched I'll do whatever the hell I please.

It looks awfully like what EY posted. Vic clearly showed that he has no understanding about this role and how it works yet here to me it looked like he was implying that he had it.

[CTM]

How about everyone simultaneously posts at exactly 8:06 PM tonight voting you off? (That's 5:06 for you Vic)..

It might not win us the game but I think everyone would feel a lot better.

won't you be with your "lady friend" at 8:06, or are we giving up that ruse already?

[Irish Jet]

Yeah.. That's what I meant by unanimous..

As for why it's a win condition, i think "scares" like this propogate because people are willing to accuse others. If nobody accuses anyone, the scare is robbed of it fuel. I know it's a simplification of the events, but if the girls in Salem never accused anyone of witchcraft, that unforunate stain in our nations history wouldn't have happenned.

In mafia, the way to accuse someone is to vote for them.

I'm game for a 7-0 vote for nolynch if we can get everyone else to unvote.

Interesting idea. Could turn out to be a complete waste of time though and I'm not sure if it's worth it.

What's really getting me is the 3.6 thing. IMO that HAS to have to something to do with the game setup and I can't see where that comes into a game with all townies.

[CTM]

Interesting idea. Could turn out to be a complete waste of time though and I'm not sure if it's worth it.

What's really getting me is the 3.6 thing. IMO that HAS to have to something to do with the game setup and I can't see where that comes into a game with all townies.

Maybe just adding to the paranoia?

I really don't know. Hard to get in doggins head it is..

[slats]

Slats - below are the posts that I think we read differently and I will tell you what I thought while reading them prior to your case.

Originally Posted by Vicious89x

I'd say more then half.

I myself was surprised EY wasn't killed.

I took this as, he thinks that probably more then half of us have the power to kill upon lynch, not saying he does, but considering it being a possibility.

And the 2nd part was, we all have obvious restrictions of what we can say. And he probably would have been killed if he gave that much of a signal of what he can do with his role.

CTM was counting up the people who seemed to have this EY role, said maybe about half the game. Vic came in with the above post, which I definitely took as him adding himself into that group when he said "more than half." As in, "add me to that number, too."

Originally Posted by Vicious89x

I think at this point if this power is out there and being considered as a real threat then it's safe to say we perhaps play forward with the game and if the person who is lynched has the power, they do not use it. At this point there could be only one Mafia member, yes the "odds" are stacked against them but from day to night he could get 3 kills with a set-up, revenge kill and NK.

If all are in favor of proceeding playing as "normal" but agree to keep it in their pants I think that's the best course of action.

I never saw him trying to claim a specific role, so I took this post as him trying to figure out what role EY, and others possibly have and how it works.

The 2nd part I thought he was referring to if you had a night action, correct me if I'm wrong but you and Irish were trying to make it seem like he meant he had a day action he could holster.

See, I saw this as talking about a night action power that he could not have, not in my interpretation of the EY role. I don't believe the people with that role have the option to holster it.

Originally Posted by Vicious89x

What I'm saying is there is more then one person with that capability. If that is the case why don't you think of a set up that the "Red Scare" was built on paranoia and finger pointing???

You kill said townie revenge power. Townie retaliates and kills someone else. 2 dead townies. If there is a mafia or a SK or let's just call it a bad guy, they kill another one, 3 dead. Then you're at square one because what more do you know? Nothing, all that's left is people dead and the town at a serious disadvantage.

I think it'd be more intelligent to take heed to what it seems we've picked up from EY, JiF and CTM.

But go ahead, lynch me.

And then I thought this post was pretty clear on what he was trying to say that was misinterpreted.

Thats what I read differently.

This was where I believed he was backtracking from claiming that role -a role you don't seem to think he's even claiming to have- and then he posts this:

Decipher. It's part of the reason we are having a misunderstanding.

He seems to be claiming to have it again, no? I don't think that's possible, unless he just didn't read his role PM thoroughly.

[slats]

That didn't post clearly:

Originally Posted by Vicious89x

I think at this point if this power is out there and being considered as a real threat then it's safe to say we perhaps play forward with the game and if the person who is lynched has the power, they do not use it. At this point there could be only one Mafia member, yes the "odds" are stacked against them but from day to night he could get 3 kills with a set-up, revenge kill and NK.

If all are in favor of proceeding playing as "normal" but agree to keep it in their pants I think that's the best course of action.

I never saw him trying to claim a specific role, so I took this post as him trying to figure out what role EY, and others possibly have and how it works.

The 2nd part I thought he was referring to if you had a night action, correct me if I'm wrong but you and Irish were trying to make it seem like he meant he had a day action he could holster.

See, I saw this as talking about a night action power that he could not have, not in my interpretation of the EY role. I don't believe the people with that role have the option to holster it.

Ah, better.

[Klecko73isGod]

I'm with Pac. Let's just all lynch Chan at 8:06 tonight.

[Vicious89x]

Eh?

My case on Vic was that he posted this:

It looks awfully like what EY posted. Vic clearly showed that he has no understanding about this role and how it works yet here to me it looked like he was implying that he had it.

Add in the fact that I continually say I have reason to believe EY. Add in the fact I want us to keep our townie kill powers holstered. Add in what verbal said:

I agree with you here. It might be more of a restriction for some, but not others.

[Vicious89x]

That didn't post clearly:

See, I saw this as talking about a night action power that he could not have, not in my interpretation of the EY role. I don't believe the people with that role have the option to holster it.

Ah, better.

I'm saying I have reason to believe you can holster abilites just like a vig. You think EY couldn't holster his ability?

[Pac]

I'm with Pac. Let's just all lynch Chan at 8:06 tonight.

after we dispatch of him we can steal his idea of a unanimous no lynch vote next game day.

[Pac]

I'm saying I have reason to believe you can holster abilites just like a vig. You think EY couldn't holster his ability?

I for one.... don't.

[CTM]

I'm with Pac. Let's just all lynch Chan at 8:06 tonight.

That's surprising consider you both operate solely on reptillian brain

[slats]

I'm saying I have reason to believe you can holster abilites just like a vig. You think EY couldn't holster his ability?

Yes, that's what I think.

[Klecko73isGod]

I'm a gay douchbag.

It's about time you admit it.

[Pac]

Yes, that's what I think.

I think you're wrong.

[Vicious89x]

Yes, that's what I think.

Think of it like this.

Why would he specify the direction of his venom AT CTM. If it is anything it's either a choice ability or one that is random, like a random lynch. It would make no sense that if he can't holster that he'd know EXACTLY who to direct it at.

It was a clear cut threat. YOU

I don't believe you walk around saying that unless you plan on using it.

[Pac]

Think of it like this.

Why would he specify the direction of his venom AT CTM. If it is anything it's either a choice ability or one that is random, like a random lynch. It would make no sense that if he can't holster that he'd know EXACTLY who to direct it at.

It was a clear cut threat. YOU

I don't believe you walk around saying that unless you plan on using it.

I think you're correct.

[JustInFudge]

Think of it like this.

Why would he specify the direction of his venom AT CTM. If it is anything it's either a choice ability or one that is random, like a random lynch. It would make no sense that if he can't holster that he'd know EXACTLY who to direct it at.

It was a clear cut threat. YOU

I don't believe you walk around saying that unless you plan on using it.

Agreed.