Cold War Mafia - GAME OVER!!

[CallMeLiam]

Day I, Vote Count I

DavidParker - 1 -

RedCoyote

Lowell - 1 -

PoisonIvy

PoisonIvy - 3 -

DavidParker, XScorpion, bvoigt

bvoigt - 1 -

pappums rat

Sathoris - 1 -

LynchMePls

Furcolow - 2 -

jmj3000, LlamaFluff

LynchMePls - 1 -

Sathoris

Not Voting - 14 -

Beasts of the Sea, themanhimself, EGL, ThAdmiral, Artem, Furcolow, Lowell, XScorpion, smargaret, Scott Brosius, julienvonwolfe, gonnano, bvoigt, Stephoscope, nachomma8, Ghostwriter

With twenty-four of you alive thirteen votes will lynch. The day will end on Sunday February 20th at 9am GMT.

[XScorpion]

How so is stating i played a alternative game and disclosing that i believe there maybe a miller bad exactly?

Your blatant lack of knowledge about this set up is scummy, especially your suggestion that the mafia is Soviet without giving any reasons. This setup is not Soviets vs. Americans. Town are just trying to eliminate the threats to town, it's the other factions who are concerned about what country you're from.

[GhostWriter]

1) how did you start playing mafia?
2) Are you better as scum, or town? Why?
3) What are your thoughts on the current setup?

1) Well, you see, I invented the game, a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
2) Scum. As you can tell by my wiki-record, I am most often scum, and have never lost a game as scum.
3) Beware that you actually brush up a bit on the Cold War. Who was with who? Who wasn't?

[XScorpion]

Beware that you actually brush up a bit on the Cold War. Who was with who? Who wasn't?

Explain this.

[GhostWriter]

You all seem to be debating things about who was or wasn't on the "bad" side of the Cold War. Look at the mod's post. Who during the cold War era could have benefited from causing the war to heat up? We're too focused on Capitalism vs. Communism/America vs. Russia when we think of that. What if it isn't that? What if the Russians in this game want the war over, and other countries around that time didn't, as they'd have something to gain by making it bloody?

I don't actually know, since I didn't read up on it. I specifically mentioned it because I hadn't done it and it would seem like something I should have. Figured I could get someone else to do it for me by mentioning it. I'm thinking maybe Japan, probably Germany. Both would have reasons to be upset after WWII.

[LlamaFluff]

NO MORE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS

I am completely serious about that, I have no idea how many times I have to reitterate it.

[GhostWriter]

That would by why my answers are clearly not answers.

[bvoigt]

No. Im saying i have no qualms about being investigated if someone deems me worthy of it. Im not going "Oh! COP COP!! Pick me! Pick meee!" Do not twist my words.

Why would you even feel the need to mention this?

[Scott Brosius]

RQS is useless and tends to delay scumhunting in my experience. It also tends to be longer than RVS which provides more fluff. I agree with Llama that it just tends to produce faketells that scum can run with.

Vote: Furcolow

[LimMePls]

^^This.

Unvote
Vote: poison ivy

[LimMePls]

This referred to bvoigt's post.

[Artem]

NO MORE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS

I am completely serious about that, I have no idea how many times I have to reitterate it.

Maybe you should elaborate a little? I've been in several games before where a series of questions have been asked by what eventually turned out to be a scum player. I think it's an easy way to appear to be doing work, without actually doing any, so scum tend to resort to this tactic. In that sense, I'd agree that it's a scumtell against furcolow.

However, I don't get why it's bad to answer these questions? The answers put some information out on the table, which can be cross-referenced against later in the game. I guess I'll withhold mine in case I'm missing something.

*thread updated as I was posting*

RQS is useless and tends to delay scumhunting in my experience. It also tends to be longer than RVS which provides more fluff. I agree with Llama that it just tends to produce faketells that scum can run with.

I don't know if I agree with this, necessarily, because isn't voting / bandwagoning someone for asking RQS already qualifies as scumhunting?

With an

FoS: furcolow

, I would like to

Vote: PoisonIvy

, however, because of this:

No. Im saying i have no qualms about being investigated if someone deems me worthy of it. Im not going "Oh! COP COP!! Pick me! Pick meee!" Do not twist my words.

Why would you even feel the need to mention this?

I don't think anybody is going to admit to having qualms about being investigated, so saying that is null information. What it does do, however, is plant an idea inside a cop (or similar role)'s head and sends them on a WIFOM chase about whether or not you should be investigated. At the moment, I find this to be scummier play than furcolow's questions.

[EGL]

VOTE: Vote: RedCoyote for being Red... as in Communist.

***Mod: Fixed them tags ***

[themanhimself]

Hm, the problem with the ivy wagon is that as scum her PM should have her against peaceful players, not against Americans or soviets so her assuming that the set-up is Americans vs soviets makes me honestly think she just didn't read it all that closely

[smargaret]

VOTE: JMJ

Legitimate suspicions aren't enough for him to vote DP or Ivy, but a completely random vote is okay? This does not compute.

[bvoigt]

Hm, the problem with the ivy wagon is that as scum her PM should have her against peaceful players, not against Americans or soviets so her assuming that the set-up is Americans vs soviets makes me honestly think she just didn't read it all that closely

Look at the rules post, though:

[4] A possible mafia win condition is: "You win when only Soviet players remain alive or nothing can prevent this"

[Stephoscope]

Hey julien; long time, no see, here's a vote for old time's sake.

Vote: julienvonwolfe

[gonnano]

I agree with the points that XScorpion has brought up against PoisonIvy. There really is no reason to be talking about night actions at this point, and saying that you don't like to read the rules and aren't interested in the setup is like saying that you aren't interested in figuring out who the scum are.
VOTE: PoisonIvy

I'll abstain from answering furcolow's questions -- I generally see RQS as a waste of time, and it looks like this is a game where I can avoid participating in it.

[Nachomamma8]

V/LA lasting longer than expected, but I will make a post in here tomorrow.

[LlamaFluff]

NO MORE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS

I am completely serious about that, I have no idea how many times I have to reitterate it.

However, I don't get why it's bad to answer these questions? The answers put some information out on the table, which can be cross-referenced against later in the game. I guess I'll withhold mine in case I'm missing something.

There is nothing to be gained by town in the answers to the questions. They will however create quite a bit of noise, and possibly hint at a role or two given their response, if someone answers something that eventually becomes obvious VT doesnt know.

Breaking them down...

1 - Completely irrelevant to the game. Doesnt even add to experience reads much.
2 - This is a great noise creator, and again will add nothing to scumhunting. It also can start to create some case pushing on responses as opposed to actual scumhunting, unlikely with this question, but potential is there.
3 - The one I really hate. This game looks like scum probably has a decent ammount of information since it appears both US and Soviet can be town aligned. If that is true there are quite a few ways for scum faction(s) to exist, if someone answers this with high accuracy, it can be a big point to scum in thinking they are a power role, since they are a second tier setup role. To explain the tier things, you have Scum-Town Power-VT in how much they know about the setup. Usually scum roles heavily suggest what town roles are around, town roles can usually make a decent guess at the setup, VT is in the dark. There are SO many ways this question can benifit scum, and so few it can benifit town.

I still want the furcolow wagon over a PI one. I like what smargret pointed out about jmj too, who also is an acceptable wagon. Conflicted on the PI wagon, have a VI-ish read so am going to abstain on joining it until I get something clearer down. I can see town or scum saying everything she has.

[themanhimself]

Hm, the problem with the ivy wagon is that as scum her PM should have her against peaceful players, not against Americans or soviets so her assuming that the set-up is Americans vs soviets makes me honestly think she just didn't read it all that closely

Look at the rules post, though:

[4] A possible mafia win condition is: "You win when only Soviet players remain alive or nothing can prevent this"

Well I think that was an example, the actual win cons (unless there are various non-conflicting ones which doesn't make a lot of sense) are about peace and war, not nationality.

[EGL]

What was wrong with my tags?

*** Mod: You opened a vote: tag but closed a bold tag. ***

[EGL]

My pm from mod stating my role also made it rather clear, as it was a town pm, that there is probably town-aligned players of different nationalities (ie: people of other nationalities who only want peace, which makes sense thematically)

I find it interesting you explicitly state the PM you got was a town PM. It seems like subliminal messaging or something.

Anyway, my role PM didn't explicitly state that there are town aligned players of different nationalities. Town role PMs could be different in that some might explicitly state this and some might not.

I do find you have a point though on PoisonIvy thinking that it's America vs. Soviets due to the town win condition saying to eliminate threats against peace.

I'm going to maintain differing levels of skepticism that either of you have received pro-town roles, with a higher level of skepticism toward PoisinIvy than you. I would, however, like to point out I didn't like your three short posts in response to RedCoyote voting for you. They seemed defensive.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: PoisonIvy

FoS: DavidParker

[EGL]

NO MORE ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS

I am completely serious about that, I have no idea how many times I have to reitterate it.

You don't get to dictate these things, you know.

[DavidParker]

@EGL: Those 3 posts "seem defensive" because they are defensive.

It didn't explicitly state, but it sure implied it. (hence why I use "probably")