Batmafia!!! Game Over

[ZoesMad]

As for mafia I think Izu is being too fucking non-chalant with this to be serious. Like, iirc in Time Travel Mafia he role played his character as well but \o/

As for other things I think Diego was being too focused on having something to nitpick about, but that can be chalked up to him never playing an NOC game before and not knowing what RVS was.

Nobody's really done anything scummy in my eye yet people are just getting on someone's case for the wrong reasons, yet there isn't scum intent that I can see behind it.

[Refa]

@Refa: Even if it's a joke claim and he likes the Joker a lot, I believe he still could have spent like one minute typing up a clarification regarding his claim. It's scummy that he chooses to leave his apparent claim ambiguous and leave everyone trying to guess what he's implying. Also, in the off chance that his claim is serious, masking it in this joking manner does not help at all. He should clarify his claim and explain why he's claiming in the latter case.

I'm not complaining about your vote (it's forced and I don't agree with it, but I'm not seeing the scum intent in your vote and all RVS cases are forced to some extent, so I'm not bothered), so you explaining where you're coming from doesn't mean anything to me. Explain to me where the scum intent is in making an ED1 JoaT claim and then leaving it ambiguous. I agree that he should clarify whether or not his claim is a joke, though, since it seems to be confusing some people. Actually, that's the only bad thing that he's been doing (PEDit his reaction to the votes on him is weird, though; I don't think he'd give up that easily as scum though, speaking as someone who was on his case during his last scum game). If it were later in the game, you'd actually be onto something but it's not.

That's why I follow my rules, and not what Mafiascum says. I even let clear at the beginning that it was MY PERSONAL RULE.

I didn't say you should agree, or like it.

You gave three reasons as to why people random voted, I provided a fourth legitimate reason as to why town would do so (okay, scum votes in RVS all of the fucking time as well but the point is that it can be productive especially early on when there's nothing to go off of).

[Kriemhild]

Izhuark is drawing a lot of attention. I don't really find it scummy, but his reactions sound like "you guys are no fun, fine, go ahead and lynch me", which is extremely annoying. Because a) he might actually be Town trying to be funny, and b) even if he is Town, his attention would draw in easy opportunistic votes from scum, so even if we lynch him, I can't foresee his flip providing too much info wrt interactions.

I'd rather not lynch him, because I do think he's Town trying to act silly and then giving up once he realized how serious the votes on him were. A Mafia member would likely avoid drawing in this much attention, and would probably at least try to rectify their behavior at this point.

I hope Izhuark starts playing seriously once he gets back, but I'll otherwise ignore him for now and won't vote for him.

[Ken Masters]

As for other things I think Diego was being too focused on having something to nitpick about, but that can be chalked up to him never playing an NOC game before and not knowing what RVS was.

1- Nitpicking is always worth it when the full picture seems blurry.

2- I've probably played more Mafia games (and variations than 85% of the people here.

3- Of course I know what RVS is, I just think is bullshit

[Balcerzak]

My, my! I wasn't sure if I was actually going to be able to play, but here we are. Seriously though, I'm looking forward to the game, and things seem to be starting off on the right foot. To wit, we've already practically been dragged kicking and screaming out of the RVS, thanks to the efforts of a pair of star players. Excellent work there, Izhuark and Diego, seriously. RVS is somewhat of a necessary evil, and the quicker it's done with, the better.

Right now I don't like the cut of Mancer's jib. Obviously, there's not a lot of content yet to work with, so the case isn't going to be extensive by any means, but let's do what we can. Given Mancer's 116, look at where and how he presses Izhuark to reveal more information. Ewww. Real town play would be telling Izhuark to just shut up, he's done his part already getting the discussion ball rolling. Scum want to get free information about town roles under the guise of looking town, which is what this feels like.

##Vote: MancerNecro

[Ken Masters]

On second thought, I think I was way too rash in my vote. Looking at this situation from another angle, an invesitgative role could easily scan him and see what's up with him, so we can focus in people that, you know, actually play the game as it was originally intended.

Besides, he clearly doesn't care if he's lynched and that's scary on the possibilty of him being Town (and more important, if he's a PR) so I believe we should let the Night to decide his unfunny fate.

##Unvote: Izhuark

[Refa]

##Unvote

##Vote: Great Lord Diego

I don't buy your unvote, it reads as unnatural and you being eager to please the several people who voiced their dissatisfaction with the Izhuark wagon. Just because an investigative role could scan him doesn't mean they would or should; they should target people they actually think are going to be incriminated as scum. The unvote doesn't make sense FYPOV because you don't think he's playing the game properly, especially when there's noone else you could have even vote. Finally, your logic in the last sentence is baffling. While I do agree that scum generally cares more about survival than town, there's no way in hell that an important PR wouldn't care if they got lynched. Anyways, 1) he's not in danger of being lynched 2) that same logic could apply to any other player and you could basically use that as an excuse to not join any lynch.

[🔥YOLOSWAG🔥]

##vote mancer

[Ken Masters]

Wrong, my change comes from my conviction of always posting (and consecuancially) acting my thoughts as they go through my head. This is not only to generate activity, but to always leave an statement of where do I stand when something happens.

And that's what happened.

I recognized that I was being rash for no reason when the situation of a player not wanting to cooperate ended in nothing. And thus, I acted in consequence.

You think I care what the other players want? After inmediatly shutting down the awful RVS stage at the beggining? No, I just care of what I can do to take down a mafioso before my possible death.

Leaving personal justifications aside (that obviously cannot be disproven due to you not being in my head, so we shouldn't consider them as a factor) I do see where you're coming from.

Is true that he was never in danger of being lynched, so I personally decided that even the sligthiest risk wasn't worth it. And I insist with the PR possibility because in my vast experience, I've met people crazy enough to go that far and beyond in regards to PR managment (so basically I'm playing awfully safe due to how I think the set-up was built)

And in regards to that last line, I really never saw the potential excuse that it spawned. Thank you for bringing it into the light, because I totally missed it.

[Ken Masters]

LMAO I totally forgot to include the non-personal part, my B

As I said, we're early, so the early action I took of voting him was the mistake. Pressuring someone who has no problem dying never works. True, it could be a facade, but my position is that I'm not taking unnecesary risks, and thus, I unvoted him.

In regards to my suggestion of a possible investigation on him, investigative players should ALWAYS search for the most controversial/problematic/whatever player as early as possible, and that's to start with a strong basisaand quickly disperse the smoke that could have clouded the first day.

So yeah, I stand by everything I said with no problems

[ZoesMad]

Wrong, my change comes from my conviction of always posting (and consecuancially) acting my thoughts as they go through my head. This is not only to generate activity, but to always leave an statement of where do I stand when something happens.

You know by natural he means that its not natural for a townie to think like that. Not whether those thoughts came into your head, but that they came from a scum perspective rather than a town one. I also agree with him. You're also subtly trying to get investigative roles on Izuhark and controlling them, which doesn't seem like townie behavior to me.

##Unvote:

##Vote: Great Lord Diego

Refa said everything else.

@Bal and YOLO I think Mancer was also part of the initial "get tf out of RVS" phase of the game and his case shouldn't get picked apart as much.

[MancerNecro]

@Refa: My case on him wasn't for his JoAT claim (which I agree that there isn't any or much possible scum intent behind it). My case is for his being deliberately unhelpful even when asked to clarify himself. I agree though that scum would not want to draw this much attention to themselves so early on in the game so I'm starting to agree with the points raised that Izhuark could just be a sub-optimal town player.

@Bal: What do you think of the interaction between Izhuark and Diego in the exchange that you mentioned? You mentioned that they did a good job moving us out of RVS but you never stated your opinions on their exchange. I would agree that optimal town play would be to ask Izhuark to stop posting as he had and I'm not going to give myself any excuses as to the actions I have taken in trying to get Izhuark to clarify himself. That's a legit read and is probably one of the most legit and original reads in this game so far.

@Gaius: Do you then think that my case on Izhuark is good or bad? You mentioned that my case shouldn't be picked apart but did not mention whether you thought that my case was good or bad. That phrase feels to me like a subtle act of leaving yourself open to either vote and lynch me or defend me later on in the game (depending on the situation). This really feels to me like a position that scum would like to leave themselves in: A position where they can both push hard on and withdraw away from a player.

##Unvote: Izhuark

##Vote: Lord Gaius

@Diego: Should you really be unvoting? While I don't disagree with your reasoning behind not wanting to participate in RVS, I can't exactly agree with your reasons why players who participate in it are scummy. Also, based on how firm your read on Izhuark seems to be, your sudden unvote seems very forced and weird. You also seem to be scum reading and disliking him despite the unvote (which seems to be to appease the players who found your case on Izhuark scummy). Still, you have shown an eagerness to move town out of RVS and I can understand your reasoning behind wanting RVS over and done with quickly.

[Green Poet]

I do not feel that Diego's unvote and newly remissive attitude is genuine. In short, it reads as though he was advised by scumbuddies to back off of the Izuhark issue.

1- Nitpicking is always worth it when the full picture seems blurry.

2- I've probably played more Mafia games (and variations than 85% of the people here.

3- Of course I know what RVS is, I just think is bullshit

This is a demonstration of the initial self-confidence we saw from Diego.

"I won't participate in RVS. My experience and policy tells me that we should not, and Izuhark is scum because he is frolicking in it. You should all believe the same." (paraphrased for argumentative effect.)

Diego insists that his method is the optimal one for finding scum, and this insistence and headstrong approach is what makes me doubt the reasoning behind the unvote. A few reasons:

(1)

On second thought, I think I was way too rash in my vote. Looking at this situation from another angle, an invesitgative role could easily scan him and see what's up with him, so we can focus in people that, you know, actually play the game as it was originally intended.

Every single player on the playerlist can be investigated to confirm whether or not they are town or scum. This is no Izuhark-specific reason to drop the issue.

"We can investigate Izuhark to determine whether or not he is town or scum, therefore we should discontinue pressure on him in-thread now, as it will be sorted out during the night by investigatives."

Ultimately, this is as an easy way to drop Izuhark's case, for no actually uniquely compelling reason. Hence, it becomes likely that Diego's motive for dropping the Izuhark case is the counsel of scumbuddies.

(2)

I recognized that I was being rash for no reason when the situation of a player not wanting to cooperate ended in nothing. And thus, I acted in consequence.
You think I care what the other players want? After inmediatly shutting down the awful RVS stage at the beggining? No, I just care of what I can do to take down a mafioso before my possible death.

The post that this was excerpted from is entirely a defense. Diego does not proceed to replace his Izuhark vote with one on someone else.

This is telling, because the premise of his defense is that Diego wishes to hunt a mafioso efficiently, outside of what others want or think. Where is the new vote, then? Why bother on defending yourself if you believe your actions and thought process was justifiable (and if you don't quite care about other's thoughts regardless), to the point that you do not offer a replacement case on a new primary scumspect?

If Diego currently does not suspect Izuhark, then he has zero listed scum reads. This is not what I expect to see from someone who opens the game with what can be seen as the first serious vote and post, who insists on the focus and dedication of his scumhunting method.

##Vote: Great Lord Diego

I'm also unsettled by Mancer's reactions to Izhuark's early responses, but that is something that is secondary to my Diego case, and I lack enough from Mancer to come to a conclusion as to what I think his reactions were motivated by.

[Izhuark]

Wow didn't tought it would go so quickly.

Balcerzack : I must admit that i tought i could act very strangely at the very beginning of D1 to force the game to start like in i kinda did in new Arkam mafia. (tough in new arkam mafia it was unintentional :s)

But my main reason was genuinly to have fun because my role claim is serious and this role was really too silly for me to not mess as much as possible with it would it be in thread or thanks to the actions it give me even if they are strictly useless. so yeah i'm a jack of all trade with oneshot silly useless actions (Announcer, visitor, fruit vendor) and some minors post restrictor (just forcing the player to act in weird way : 1. Forcing him to use gif and lolcats in one of his major gametought post 2. forcing him to replace the word scum town and itp by three other words.)

I don't really have any time to scum hunt now so i will comeback later read the thread again and see if i keep my vote on diego because a wagon is seriously building up on him.

[Dreamer]

So. Let's think.

@Diego. Strange.

2- I've probably played more Mafia games (and variations than 85% of the people here.

He said it himself, that he did played mafia before, but he still made a mistake on the first day? That's stupid. Especially since he admitted it. But above the stupidity, it is something strange. It's not something I would have expected.

But despite the many good arguments already given here to vote for Diego i'm not going to do that. It is a obvious vote, AND IT IS THE FiRST DAY. No night actions have been taken yet and I prefer to wait.

Let's see what happen when I come back.

[MancerNecro]

@Dreamer: Do you think that Diego is scummy for the mistake he made? I also don't like how you handled not wanting to vote for Diego. The main basis behind our scum hunting should be from day time discussion and not from our night actions. Despite this though, I feel like you are more likely to be a new player than a scummy player because I do not perceive any scum intent from your post. Also, what do you think of the other players in the game?

[Mitsuki]

All the PMs have the same title and I'm getting so confused [Votals 1]

Diego (4): Izhuark, Refa, Gaius, Green Poet

Mancer (2): Balcerzak, Yoloswag

Gaius (1): Mancer

Refa (1): Proto

Tiny Goddess (1): Gilgamesh

59 hours and a half until Batman's Wedding! It takes 9 votes to lynch someone.

[The3rdCorinthian]

*Finally wakes up*

*Reads thread*

...Hot damn, you guys work fast.

Anyway, not got a 100% read on anybody yet, but If i had to go I'd have to go with Deigo, followed by Mancer. Deigo has certainly done more scummy things, with a lot of suspicion on him for his rather sudden izuhark change, and as for mancer, I'm getting a scumread. One of the things I would like to know is the reasoning behind Swags mancer vote, since, well, there isn't any given. I'll try and do some more reading, but i have a bit of work that i need to be getting on with. So, I'll end with my vote.

##Vote: Deigo

[Kriemhild]

Deigo's unvote was so awful, like, wow. Yeah, I know I'm late to the party but I find it to be scummy as hell. Early on, his posts had some slight but really noticeable vibes of being arrogant and self-centered ("you're all in my scumlist for participating in RVS, which I believe is BS", "I played more Mafia games than 85% of the people here", etc). There's nothing inherently scummy about that, but it makes his Izhuark unvote look absolutely ridiculous.

Investigative role can scan him? The investigative role can scan any of the other players, why the hell would Izhuark be a better choice than other players?

He might be Town or even a PR? Guess what, 90% of the lynches in Mafia games are on players where there is always a possibility of them being Town and even having a PR. If you're gonna follow through with your logic, you might as well spam No Lynch votes until some Cop or other role provides incriminating evidence. I'm a player who prefers to No Lynch in D1 due to the lack of objective data (yes, I've been criticized a lot for this), and I find your logic to be completely and utterly full of BS.

I don't like the way he reacted to Refa calling him out on it either. The "conviction of always posting thoughts" is great, but that makes the Izhuark unvote even more unnatural, since the thoughts you posted there were awful reasons for unvoting. The "slightest risk not being worth it" is still really crappy play. Diego continued to stand by everything he said, which makes him really suspicious imo. It honestly feels like he's hiding his actual reasons for unvoting Izhuark, but he's trying to maintain that his actions are perfectly logical and reasonable for such a "vastly experienced" player as he is. And the only reasons I can think of for concealing your actual reasons to vote are a) Town PR gained info through their abilities and they don't want to reveal that, or b) Scum acting for scum benefit but trying to justify their actions through Townish excuses. Since it's Day 1, I'm betting on the latter.

##Vote: Diego

Refa quickly pointing out how unnatural Diego's vote is cool, but my reads on him are neutral, because either faction would benefit from calling out on Diego's unnatural unvote.

Izhuark is still Townish for me, because I can't imagine him trying to attract so much attention as scum. Especially since he did so in an awful way, because inexperienced scum tend to try playing it safe.

I like how Green Poet thoroughly analyzed everything she responded to, especially Diego's unvote. Although I disagree that Diego was acting based on advice from his scumbuddies (I think he was really self-centered and acted on his own, but he screwed up while trying to cover his scummy motivations behind his actions). Still, I'm getting town vibes from her analyses.

Mancer has been pretty active for a while, so I find it weird that he's talking about Diego's RVS stance so late. I'm guessing he skimmed through all the non-Izhuark posts before and was catching up on everything else that happened. I find his Gaius vote weird too, because all Gaius said was that Mancer's case shouldn't get picked apart as much, and as vague as that might be, I'm not seeing why Mancer finds this to be significant enough to warrant a vote. With Diego being so scummy, it feels like Mancer is trying to divert attention away from him. I'm getting slightly scummy reads from Mancer.

I'm not really reading much from Gaius himself though. Neutral for me.

Dreamer unwilling to vote makes sense, since a quick bandwagon isn't a good idea. However, Dreamer should still post her thoughts on the Diego bandwagon ("good arguments" and "obvious vote" sound like pure sheeping only). I'm reading neutral on her but she should express her perspective more.

Nobody else stood out to me so far.

[Kriemhild]

##Unvote: Diego

I realized that voting for Diego might lead to an early hammer, which is baaaaad. I want to hear other players' perspectives on the game first, on both Diego as well as on the other players. Don't just stay silent and exploit the easy lynch to justify not discussing everything else.

[Refa]

Right now I don't like the cut of Mancer's jib. Obviously, there's not a lot of content yet to work with, so the case isn't going to be extensive by any means, but let's do what we can. Given Mancer's 116, look at where and how he presses Izhuark to reveal more information. Ewww. Real town play would be telling Izhuark to just shut up, he's done his part already getting the discussion ball rolling. Scum want to get free information about town roles under the guise of looking town, which is what this feels like.

##Vote: MancerNecro

Whoops, I missed this post the first time around. Anyways, I don't see why Mancer asking Izhuark to clarify his claim is scummy. What you said about how Town!Mancer would tell Izhuark to just shut up only works if he thought Izhuark was town (in which case, he wouldn't need to press a townread for more information). Also I did the same thing WRT saying that Izhuark should reveal if his claim was true/false so I don't get why Mancer is worse in this regard.

##vote mancer

Random or serious? If random, what are your thoughts on the game (and why didn't you post them)? If serious, why?

Wrong, my change comes from my conviction of always posting (and consecuancially) acting my thoughts as they go through my head. This is not only to generate activity, but to always leave an statement of where do I stand when something happens.

And that's what happened.

I recognized that I was being rash for no reason when the situation of a player not wanting to cooperate ended in nothing. And thus, I acted in consequence.

You think I care what the other players want? After inmediatly shutting down the awful RVS stage at the beggining? No, I just care of what I can do to take down a mafioso before my possible death.

LMAO I totally forgot to include the non-personal part, my B

As I said, we're early, so the early action I took of voting him was the mistake. Pressuring someone who has no problem dying never works. True, it could be a facade, but my position is that I'm not taking unnecesary risks, and thus, I unvoted him.

In regards to my suggestion of a possible investigation on him, investigative players should ALWAYS search for the most controversial/problematic/whatever player as early as possible, and that's to start with a strong basisaand quickly disperse the smoke that could have clouded the first day.

Yeah, when I said natural, I meant a natural thought process for town.

Re:Bolded, if you think Izhuark is mafia then your unvote makes even less sense. I mean, I can get your reasoning for why you'd recalcitrant to pressure someone who doesn't care if they get lynched, but at the end of the day you unvoted someone who you are scumreading (not bad on its own) and voted noone in his place (this is the bad part).

I don't agree with your investigative player logic (I believe they should target strong players that they're suspicious of, that way it's a win no matter the result) but that's just gonna devolve into mafia theory so gonna drop it,

@Refa: My case on him wasn't for his JoAT claim (which I agree that there isn't any or much possible scum intent behind it). My case is for his being deliberately unhelpful even when asked to clarify himself. I agree though that scum would not want to draw this much attention to themselves so early on in the game so I'm starting to agree with the points raised that Izhuark could just be a sub-optimal town player.

@Bal: What do you think of the interaction between Izhuark and Diego in the exchange that you mentioned? You mentioned that they did a good job moving us out of RVS but you never stated your opinions on their exchange. I would agree that optimal town play would be to ask Izhuark to stop posting as he had and I'm not going to give myself any excuses as to the actions I have taken in trying to get Izhuark to clarify himself. That's a legit read and is probably one of the most legit and original reads in this game so far.

@Gaius: Do you then think that my case on Izhuark is good or bad? You mentioned that my case shouldn't be picked apart but did not mention whether you thought that my case was good or bad. That phrase feels to me like a subtle act of leaving yourself open to either vote and lynch me or defend me later on in the game (depending on the situation). This really feels to me like a position that scum would like to leave themselves in: A position where they can both push hard on and withdraw away from a player.

##Unvote: Izhuark

##Vote: Lord Gaius

Fair enough (talking about your Izhuark read).

Actually, your response to Bal is legit, especially that last sentence. I don't see you being totally OK with Bal's vote as scum and not willing to defend yourself (the action itself isn't townie but moreso the motivation behind it). Would like other people casing you to comment on this, because I also had a bad gut feeling about your previous actions as well (but I couldn't even put it into words, so I didn't post it) but this makes me feel a lot better about you.

Would sheep your Gaius case.

Izhuark, why did you claim? Your claim being serious is the first thing about you that bothers me because I can't see the town motivation for it. Yeah, I get that your role is useless, but so are vanillas and they're not expected to claim on ED1 either. Not relevant to my issues with you but you should create a Dinosaur Comic for your announcement IMO. =)

[Refa]

When I was talking about Mancer's Bal response, I meant his second to last sentence.

Also can you guys (@The BATMODS) put ISO's in the opening post?

[🔥YOLOSWAG🔥]

@Gaius: Do you then think that my case on Izhuark is good or bad? You mentioned that my case shouldn't be picked apart but did not mention whether you thought that my case was good or bad. That phrase feels to me like a subtle act of leaving yourself open to either vote and lynch me or defend me later on in the game (depending on the situation). This really feels to me like a position that scum would like to leave themselves in: A position where they can both push hard on and withdraw away from a player.

##Unvote: Izhuark

##Vote: Lord Gaius

who else finds this legitimate?

[MancerNecro]

@Proto (I assume that Formina Sage is Proto?): If you notice, there's a five hour gap between this post and this post where I was inactive (because I went off to do my work in the office). Between those two posts is where most of the points regarding Diego's RVS stance that I actually had an opinion on was mentioned (the points mentioned were made in the later part of this post, this post and the second paragraph of this post). Before that, I did not actually have much of an opinion on his RVS stance.

If I was trying to divert attention away from Diego, I wouldn't mention him in that same post where I unvoted Izhuark and voted Gaius. In fact, I made a mention of Diego after my vote on Gaius! I think that attention would be drawn to that paragraph and Diego instead of the opposite.

Also, what part of my Gaius vote seems weird to you? Do you find it forced? Is the case weak? I also do not like the way you are tying Diego and I up with associative reads even before Diego flips. It seems as though you are already assuming that Diego is scum and expecting him to flip as such.

##Unvote: Lord Gaius

##Vote: Formina Sage

My read on Gaius still stays but Proto seems to be more likely to be active in the next few hours so I feel that my vote will be doing much more this way. Gaius should still step in to answer the question I asked of him.

[MancerNecro]

My reads are as such currently (in order from most scummy to most townie), for clarity's sake:

Proto > Gaius >>>>> Diego > Everyone else >>>>> Izhuark > Bal > MancerNecro (obviously)

Sorry that I'm posting this as a separate post.