Ace Attorney Mafia - Game Over (Won the Lawsuit!)

[Green Poet]

I agree with most of Eury's second content post, particularly her replies to Riptor, save this bit:

Secondly, there is a limit (or should be- if it's not an obvious/accepted rule, it SHOULD be) to how much mods can and CANNOT answer players in terms of some specifics of roles/rules, as it may unintentionally leak out information that us players are meant to find out throughout the game ourselves. And if it so happens to leak out or break out someone's role in the process of him trying to unnecessarily clarify things, then that just ruins the aspect of gameplay for someone playing the game for little to no reason. Stop trying to be spoon-fed answers by the moderator, and stop trying to role/theory craft as opposed to actually scum hunting and trying to break open the game that way.

I don't think there's anything objectionable about asking a mod to clarify if their definition of "investigation result tampering" lines up with one's own. It clarifies misunderstandings and benefits every player.

It is up to the host to protect the integrity of their game. Someone being overly/aggressively nosy about setup specifics, or clearly trying to break the game via mod interactions, can be denied further answers or simply modkilled at the discretion of the host.

[Ken Masters]

That'd be a factor, sans the fact that I'm not taking what happened with the mod into consideration, seeing how it was an Alien Situation.

[Eurykins]

Gonna be a bit busy for a few, so replies will be a bit slower.

Actually hey eury

Why didn't you unvote Refa?

Uh, I don't actually remember. I thought I did in my other bigger post? My brain was fried and I don't quite remember, so gonna double check real quick.

PEDIT: I'm dumb and apparently 16.5 hour shifts kill my brain cells for 24+ hours.

##Unvote: Scumbag Refa 'cause RVS votes are derptastic.

[solrocknroll]

Polydeuces has been modsubbed for Dragonflare7

[Dragonflare7]

I'm going to be catching myself up for right now, I have a lot to read. (These ISO's are very helpful though)

[solrocknroll]

I'll be away at school until pretty much an hour from Phase End, so I won't be able to update anything until then. I might extend it slightly in order to be able to provide accurate Votals when I get home.

[Elieson]

Unofficial Votals?

Riptor (2): GP, kirsche
Rainbow/Proto (2): Quote, JB
Elieson (2): Refa, SB
Eurykins (1): Elieson
Sad kirsche (1): Riptor
SB (1): Proto

Votals will come eventually, but you have 23 hours until phase end

according to this, there's under 8 hours remaining in phase.

I really don't think Riptor is scum. I think he's being himself. Nothing seems fake about his play, even if I disagree with it in some areas.

I know I'm not scum.

I honestly don't have much of an opinion on Proto. Looking back, I can see how it may have been weird for him to say things about Kirsche, but we were all saying weird things about kirsche so I can't really apply fair weight to it.

##Unvote (eurykins)

I'll be here until Phase End but I need to think. I'm not confident enough to have a vote out right now. Eury's responses aren't setting well with me but I can't quite put my finger on why. Rereading her walls right now

[Elieson]

Actually

you know what?

Riptor, on 15 Aug 2016 - 12:35 PM, said:

I'll debate on that.

Context: It's Day 1---> No 100% leads

---> No real scum confirm

---> Possibility of lynching Town is very high on a random vote.

Solutions: Lynch inactives ---> Possibility of lynching Town is very high
---> No real information gathered from voting patterns

---> Easy excuse (just did it because everyone else did)

---> Poissibility of lynching a power role is medium

Lynch Kirsche ----> Suspected by quite a lot of people to be Scum

----> Claimed a role that is impossible to test

----> Possibility of lynching Town is uncertain

----> Miller claim grants him the validity of a VT, the least harmful Town lynch for Town

Objectively speaking, Kirsche is my best bet on Day 1

> Lynch inactives - So you want to kill off people who haven't said anything D1. Okay, this is pretty damn easy if nothing else. Lazy too.

> Lynch Kirsche - From what I can tell, most of the people suspecting him is purely off of Role and Rule spec'ing.

- Secondly, if a Miller exists, then it's highly likely that a cop does as well. If that's the case then it's not impossible to prove/test.

- Yes, losing someone basically a VT isn't as high of a loss as a power role, but it's still a loss. And what associative reads are you expecting to come from Kirsche's slot, if he ends up flipping town? There's more to lynching him than "Oh well it's just a Miller role" going down the drain. It's the player behind the role/slot.

I feel like this post in general is pretty much just tunneled on lynching Kirsche. I don't like it, and it shows very little to no interest in even trying to case the more active players currently in this game, and also pans off inactives as another easy lynch option.

Riptor, on 15 Aug 2016 - 3:37 PM, said:

Fine, mr Hate.

From my point of view, a claimed miller is a good lynch on day 1, yes.

Do I think that we should insta lynch, no, not really.

But you can be sure as hell that I will vote Kirsche by the end of the day, and I think that everyone should consider it a safe bet if no "better" targets are selected.

From my point of view, anyone absolutely eliminating the chance of Kirsche being scum is fishy as fudge to me.

Now, adressing some points.

Mod-drama: Missed it. Cool beans, miller it's not a tampering role (even though it's wrong). Does that mean that Kirsche is actually a Miller? HELL NO. It's a super convenient claim, that cannot be proven false in anyway unless we have a lie detector, which I seriously doubt we have all things considered.

Why not more option on my Solutions stuff?: Because those were the two main solutions given at the moment. I think I don't need to explain why No lynch is a terrible idea, and other suggestions didn't catch my eye like Kirsche did.

1. Why is someone claiming miller a good lynch? A legitimate Town miller is basically stating, "Do not waste scans/night actions on myself, and I am telling you NOW that I will read as scum wrongly. However, there is NOTHING more I can do except to put it out in the open, and to then focus on scum hunting for the rest of the game", and saying that they're a good lynch target completely reads wrong to me. It's basically like a town-sided role like a Bomb or any other reactive role (IE. Paranoid gunner) to not target them, because anyone on townside to do so would suffer the consequences and it's much better to put it out in the open ASAP to avoid conflict like that, than to have to explain it come D2. (In which cases, it would then seem a hell of a lot scummier, IMO.)

2. Why are there no 'better targets'? Since this game started, you've ONLY literally have said/typed posts about Kirsche and why you find him scummy. Why are you not looking at any of the rest of the player base in this game? The lack of interest you're displaying for the rest of the players here- active or not- creates a tunneling aspect to your posts that highly limits the amount of thoughts/cases that could be made during this time. What about Refa, or SB, or Elie, or GP, or me, or Quote? Or anyone else here that you could ISO surf and get a feel for?

This whole bit is what didn't seem right (plus the part after it). All this seems like perfectly logical reasoning to vote for Riptor, but Eury didnt. Even if she forgot that her vote was on Refa, she had ample reason to vote for Riptor based on what she's actually stated.

I'm ok with this

##Vote Eurykins

[Kriemhild]

"The way" isn't a real answer here though - people have claimed negative utility roles like that in previous games, and there's no reason to jump to the conclusion that kirsche didn't just slip up.

The way = No punctuation except at the end + the "don't lynch me pls" bit sound like stuff I would see in joke claims within the first post. Given that I interpreted the rules as suggesting that Millers don't exist, I figured Kirsche was making a joke claim.

If anything, it's stranger that you would vote for kirsche after he confirmed it wasn't a joke, because he would know that whatever he was saying was contrary to the rules.

Kirsche chose to stick with the claim while challenging the definition of "tampering". Whether his claim was legit or not, he chose to take the stance that his claim was not contrary to the rules. But then Green Poet's clarification from Enigmar destroyed his stance (from my perspective), so I voted for him.

I can kind of see you not wanting people to pursue a false lead, but why were you so vague about it then?

I don't think it's normal for someone's first post to be a detailed explanation of why someone else's joke first post is a joke post. It seemed like a joke first post to me, and I saw people appearing to take is seriously, so I expressed that I thought it was a joke post.

I had to ask you three times about this to get any kind of response because you literally blanked me (but seemed to have noticed that I kept badgering you in your last post!) which doesn't add up if you wanted to dissuade others from wagoning.

I blanked the rest of the game because I was busy for the rest of the day. My first post after my Kirsche votepost was my wallpost, where I responded to everything relevant to me that came after my votepost. Also, I didn't want to dissuade others from wagoning after a) Kirsche confirmed it wasn't a joke, and b) Green Poet reported the mod response.

a) People don't place a lot of stock in RVS suspicions in later days though. The payoff here would be that you look better early on in the game anyway, which is why I could see scum!Proto making this play.

Why would I look better early in the game if Kirsche is actually scum? I still don't understand this.

b) kirsche being town here would not change the fact that the rules implied that millers weren't real. Unless you decided he was a neutral you would have to assume he was lying if you were mafia.

Okay, so your argument is that I would not have even considered Kirsche as being Town Miller, which makes this case non-applicable then.

c) The rules! As town, I would tend to assume that the guy lying about being a miller is scum, whereas mafia would be able to skip that step and consider other possibilities instead.

So town would go straight to assuming that the guy is scum without considering other possibilities? If you think it's abnormal for Town to consider other possibilities against a first-post claim that contradicts the rules, then I don't know what to say. If what I think is a natural thought process seems abnormal to you, then there's little I can do to convince you otherwise. But if that's your stance on this, then I'm even further skeptical of whether you're thinking like a Townie at all.

Explain to me how I'm forcing it. I've explained my reasoning already and you're just ignoring it, for whatever reason.

Ignoring it...? I thought my earlier wallpost addressed everything you said about me. I even just ran your ISO right now and made sure that my wallpost covered everything you said that related to me. What exactly what I was ignoring?

At first I wanted to know because anything is a good lead in RVS. Afterwards, I thought it was curious that you ignored my post and thought that you might be struggling to come up with a response.

The first time you asked, I changed my stance in my next post due to relevant Kirsche/GreenPoet posts. I didn't ignore any of your posts after that; I was simply inactive for nearly a whole day, causing my next post to be delayed.

Fine, mr Hate.

From my point of view, a claimed miller is a good lynch on day 1, yes.

Do I think that we should insta lynch, no, not really.

But you can be sure as hell that I will vote Kirsche by the end of the day, and I think that everyone should consider it a safe bet if no "better" targets are selected.

The problem is that you're intent on voting Kirsche and are refusing to look anywhere else. And your arguments against Kirsche are entirely due to claiming Miller, which is terrible reasoning. I could understand if you had other issues with Kirsche, or if you disbelieve his Miller claim for reasons that aren't contradictory to the mod clarification, but from the look of your posts, that doesn't seem to be the case at all.

From my point of view, anyone absolutely eliminating the chance of Kirsche being scum is fishy as fudge to me.

And I don't think anyone is doing that. The clarification only states that a Miller claim is not contradicting the rules. Nobody is assuming that he is definitively a Miller.

Now, adressing some points.

Mod-drama: Missed it. Cool beans, miller it's not a tampering role (even though it's wrong). Does that mean that Kirsche is actually a Miller? HELL NO. It's a super convenient claim, that cannot be proven false in anyway unless we have a lie detector, which I seriously doubt we have all things considered.

The mod clarification does negate your arguments about tampering though. Despite this, you continue to tunnel on Kirsche and your reasoning is simply because Miller is a convenient unprovable claim? Like I said, that's a terrible vote, to lynch the Miller claim simply because of the Miller claim and with no other reasons.

Why not more option on my Solutions stuff?: Because those were the two main solutions given at the moment. I think I don't need to explain why No lynch is a terrible idea, and other suggestions didn't catch my eye like Kirsche did.

There are 12 other players in the game besides Kirsche. All of them are valid options. Your refusal to look at anyone else while tunneling on Kirsche for no reason other than his Miller claim is a problem with your play. It is not the responsibility of other players to tell you who you should consider lynching, this is something you are expected to analyze and express opinions for on your own. Your refusal to do so, while advocating a lynch based on reasons that have 0 contribution to associative reads, makes your play as being very unproductive for the Town.

Also, be careful with you word twisting.

I don't want to "lynch a Miller". I want to lynch a claimed Miller that I suspect to be Scum.

Little changes like that are really important.

And why do you suspect him to be Scum? From reading your posts, your only argument was about the definition of tampering, which was voided by the mod clarification. If you have other reasons, please share them.

And ftr Riptor, in case you missed it, Kirsche implied that his role isn't composed solely of Miller alone, which suggests that he's not just a VT that scans as scum. Did you conveniently miss that too or do you still want to tunnel on Kirsche simply because of the Miller claim alone?

[Kriemhild]

Elieson, it could just be that Eurykins doesn't consider Riptor's behavior as being scummy, but that it could be terrible townplay, which is also what I am considering as well. But if he continues to insist on being unproductive, I might start voting for him too.

[Kriemhild]

*as being necessarily scummy

[Jaybee]

Wait, how did Proto backtrack? How would you expect him to help more at the time? I have my own issues with Proto (that he needs to answer so I can get an actual read off on the guy) but these don't seem valid to me.

Also would like you to answer my question from earlier.

i interpreted miller's ability to coexist with the rules exactly as kirsche did

My logic was along the lines of: If Proto thought kirsche was joking, that's a reason in itself to go on kirsche for fucking around in a not-so-obvious manner that does affect the game. If he didn't think kirsche was joking, and he did have those reservations about the role, then vote kirsche (which he did, later).

---

i don't think riptor is scum? like i find myself agreeing more with kirsche's points but i don't think riptor is scum, but his arguments are he's too focused on that perceived scumslip (goddamn this sounds familiar).

though, given that a kirsche lynch honestly isn't very likely, what are your views regarding the other potential lynch targets? I really only see Proto and Eury??? and those are still weak wagons, but they're probably stronger than kirsche.

---

So I'm willing to drop the case on Kirsche now, but I still don't think the Miller claim is legit.

Normally I would expect this to be said through PMs, but since Enigmar posted it publicly in the thread, it suggests that Green Poet's quotes of conversing with the mod are legit. This makes me strongly feel that Green Poet is Town, or at least non-Mafia, because I can't imagine scum asking the mod about that.

I wasn't continuing RVS though. My vote for Kirsche was a serious legit vote. Kirsche saying that he wasn't joking means that it was a serious Miller claim, and combined with Green Poet's post that the mod confirmed 100% accuracy of investigation (which I quoted in the vote post btw), Kirsche seemed pretty much confirmed scum. If Kirsche's claim was an actual joke as I initially thought, then I wouldn't have considered him as being scummy for making such a claim, so I did not vote until after he confirmed that it wasn't a joke claim and with Green Poet further providing evidence that incriminated him.

uhhhhhhh if you don't think the miller claim is legit then that means you think kirsche is scum, ja?

I meant you were continuing RVS by voting Fox. though i guess your approach for dealing with potential joke claims is different from mine so w/e

how does that show that GP is town again? clarifying the rules isn't a town or scum thing to do. me is not follow

c) The rules! As town, I would tend to assume that the guy lying about being a miller is scum, whereas mafia would be able to skip that step and consider other possibilities instead.

I've explained this already in a previous post. Scum can skip the step because they know who scum is. You don't need to know if the townie fakeclaiming miller is a good idea to recognise it as the most likely possibility based on what you thought the rules meant.

i am 0% following your argument

@jb where did i meta people???? i hate it when people poke me ed1 like that

oh if you meant wrt kirsche that's fair but literally why would he make a mistake like that dude i didn't think he would scumslip THAT easily is all.

sorry for the twitterposting. still reading

ya

do you have anything else to say tho

From my point of view, anyone absolutely eliminating the chance of Kirsche being scum is fishy as fudge to me.

Cool beans, miller it's not a tampering role (even though it's wrong). Does that mean that Kirsche is actually a Miller? HELL NO. It's a super convenient claim, that cannot be proven false in anyway unless we have a lie detector, which I seriously doubt we have all things considered.

fite me irl

It's an easy/convenient claim to make? In what way? It is actually provable with the right roles, and an alignment cop can prove he's either miller or scum. unless this is some fucking meta play where kirsche is town but not actually a miller in which case ???????????????????? Like if you're saying it's a convenient play then there needs to be some obvious benefit to it that I am not seeing at all

and how would you know whether or not we have a lie detector?

So I'm willing to drop the case on Kirsche now, but I still don't think the Miller claim is legit.

Normally I would expect this to be said through PMs, but since Enigmar posted it publicly in the thread, it suggests that Green Poet's quotes of conversing with the mod are legit. This makes me strongly feel that Green Poet is Town, or at least non-Mafia, because I can't imagine scum asking the mod about that.

I wasn't continuing RVS though. My vote for Kirsche was a serious legit vote. Kirsche saying that he wasn't joking means that it was a serious Miller claim, and combined with Green Poet's post that the mod confirmed 100% accuracy of investigation (which I quoted in the vote post btw), Kirsche seemed pretty much confirmed scum. If Kirsche's claim was an actual joke as I initially thought, then I wouldn't have considered him as being scummy for making such a claim, so I did not vote until after he confirmed that it wasn't a joke claim and with Green Poet further providing evidence that incriminated him.

uhhhhhhh if you don't think the miller claim is legit then that means you think kirsche is scum, ja?

I meant you were continuing RVS by voting Fox. though i guess your approach for dealing with potential joke claims is different from mine so w/e

how does that show that GP is town again? clarifying the rules isn't a town or scum thing to do. me is not follow

c) The rules! As town, I would tend to assume that the guy lying about being a miller is scum, whereas mafia would be able to skip that step and consider other possibilities instead.

I've explained this already in a previous post. Scum can skip the step because they know who scum is. You don't need to know if the townie fakeclaiming miller is a good idea to recognise it as the most likely possibility based on what you thought the rules meant.

i am 0% following your argument

@jb where did i meta people???? i hate it when people poke me ed1 like that

oh if you meant wrt kirsche that's fair but literally why would he make a mistake like that dude i didn't think he would scumslip THAT easily is all.

sorry for the twitterposting. still reading

ya

do you have anything else to say tho

From my point of view, anyone absolutely eliminating the chance of Kirsche being scum is fishy as fudge to me.

Cool beans, miller it's not a tampering role (even though it's wrong). Does that mean that Kirsche is actually a Miller? HELL NO. It's a super convenient claim, that cannot be proven false in anyway unless we have a lie detector, which I seriously doubt we have all things considered.

fite me irl

It's an easy/convenient claim to make? In what way? It is actually provable with the right roles, and an alignment cop can prove he's either miller or scum. unless this is some fucking meta play where kirsche is town but not actually a miller in which case ???????????????????? Like if you're saying it's a convenient play then there needs to be some obvious benefit to it that I am not seeing at all

and how would you know whether or not we have a lie detector?

[Jaybee]

Elieson, it could just be that Eurykins doesn't consider Riptor's behavior as being scummy, but that it could be terrible townplay, which is also what I am considering as well. But if he continues to insist on being unproductive, I might start voting for him too.

but you believe he is town?

so first you drop your vote on kirsche though you think he's still q scummy, and now you're considering voting riptor though you're (i think) townreading him

???

---

i'm not sure about elie's vote on eury because it could honestly be attributed to a simple slipup

[Elieson]

Elieson, it could just be that Eurykins doesn't consider Riptor's behavior as being scummy, but that it could be terrible townplay, which is also what I am considering as well. But if he continues to insist on being unproductive, I might start voting for him too.

I guess I can see it from that side.

With the second red-statement, I can 100% see it from your angle. I can't really bend it around backwards to see it if I analyze this on its own though.

I don't like it, and it shows very little to no interest in even trying to case the more active players currently in this game, and also pans off inactives as another easy lynch option

1. "I don't like it" is ambiguous, but still shows a lack of support. Could be equal parts "I think you're bad town" and "I think you're scum
2. "pans off inactives as another easy lynch option" feels more like something you'd say if you thought someone was doing something scummy. I can't see town saying that with town intent towards a townread.

Please correct me if you think I'm wrong but that's where I'm at with Eury. I'm still not finding Riptor to be scummy because I just feel like his efforts are genuine and full of energy towards progressing the game, especially since he's played mafia for all of what, a few EiMM games? Wanting to remove the miller IMO is a safe option if there's literally nothing else better to do FYPOV and I think that's just where his mindset is right now. Like I said; I don't support it, but I can at least see where he's coming from, and I can see the town mindset behind it.

[Kriemhild]

Nice, Joshaymin, you managed to doublepost in a single post!

i interpreted miller's ability to coexist with the rules exactly as kirsche did

I didn't think this was likely at the time, but I still considered it, so I asked Kirsche for details about his Miller role. fyi he says he shows up as "guilty", which is an outright false result, so its existence suggests that investigations are not 100% accurate. However, Enigmar clarified the rules and explicitly named Miller and Godfather as being excluded from the rule statement.

My logic was along the lines of: If Proto thought kirsche was joking, that's a reason in itself to go on kirsche for fucking around in a not-so-obvious manner that does affect the game. If he didn't think kirsche was joking, and he did have those reservations about the role, then vote kirsche (which he did, later).

Well, first-post claims are often jokes and are not meant to be taken seriously. I'm mayor, claimtome. So if Kirsche was joking as I initially thought, I wouldn't vote him for that. But since he wasn't joking, his confirmed-serious claim appeared contradictory to the rules, further confirmed by Green Poet's confirmation from the mod, which led me to vote him.

i don't think riptor is scum? like i find myself agreeing more with kirsche's points but i don't think riptor is scum, but his arguments are he's too focused on that perceived scumslip (goddamn this sounds familiar).

I think he could be scum, but I do think there's a good possibility of him being Town that really wants to lynch Kirsche (for terrible reasons imo).

uhhhhhhh if you don't think the miller claim is legit then that means you think kirsche is scum, ja?

Yes. It's kinda like, I think it's more likely for him to be lying scum than for him to be honest Miller. But it rests entirely on his Miller claim and my interpretation of what Enigmar told Green Poet (about investigations being accurate)I don't think it's productive for me to go after Kirsche solely based on that, especially after Enigmar's clarification about tampering.

I meant you were continuing RVS by voting Fox. though i guess your approach for dealing with potential joke claims is different from mine so w/e

Uh, I never voted for Fox...? But my first vote (for Eurykins) was indeed a RVS because I didn't think Kirsche's claim was serious.

how does that show that GP is town again? clarifying the rules isn't a town or scum thing to do. me is not follow

Green Poet requested clarification to confirm that Kirsche scumslipped, from her perspective. If she were scum, she would know whether Kirsche was scum or not regardless, and would not need private clarification from the mod to definitively decide that Kirsche was scum. Enigmar kinda confirmed that the private clarification happened (though the authenticity of her quotes are not confirmed), so I'm leaning towards Green Poet as being very likely Town, or at least, non-Mafia.

i am 0% following your argument

I felt the same way too~

[solrocknroll]

hi I am back

[solrocknroll]

Elie's Votals are still accurate though.

[Refa]

>Complains about idlers

>Motivation dies six hours later

Yeah, I don't even have an excuse for this. Give me a few to catch up, honestly didn't expect Elie to react that way and still not sure what to make of it.

[Eurykins]

I will be at work until 4pm CST. Will likely be unable to be online til about 5pm. Will post when I get home if there is time.

[charlie_]

I was busy until a couple of hours ago and forgot about this game. How long do we have?

[Elieson]

Phase ends in 3.5 hours (5pm CST).

[Elieson]

>Complains about idlers

>Motivation dies six hours later

#SFMafia

honestly didn't expect Elie to react that way and still not sure what to make of it.

Don't lynch me. Even if you disagree with my thoughts, and think I'm scum, weigh both of the options and just don't lynch me.

[Refa]

Uh, what are the votals? I haven't been keeping up but I'm not inclined to vote you from what I've read so far.

[Dragonflare7]

I believe they are on page 7 if I remember correctly...

[charlie_]

Calling something stupid that is stupid isn't scummy dude. Elie was working on something and didn't read the post from a mod, of course I'm going to throw shade on it.

You seem really intent at looking at one thing here and there. What about my actual arguments and logic? Why should I keep pushing an ED1 case when I have answers hanging from someone else that need answering?

You can deconstruct an argument without calling it stupid though, and the way you did it. It feels like an attempt to push people around to get what you want explicitly rather than trying to make them play smarter? Idk if this is making sense but it bugs me when you take into account the fact you threatened to vote him if he kept it up.

Also I'm not saying that you should still want to push the case, although I guess you could see it that way? I don't feel like your actual cases have been particularly strong but that's par for the course on day 1 and the posting style feels more like attempting to look helpful when you're actually kind of stifling discussion in other ways which is conflicting.

@Elieson, yes that was my vote. I don't think you actually looked back on kirsche yet, so I'd like you to do that soon.

Honestly the GP/Riptor exchange reads like townfighting. It feels like the classic earlygame GP case that hits a townie (big sorry) and the way that Riptor defended themselves makes me feel like they're confident they're doing the right thing so I don't suspect him right now. At worst he's scum playing what he thinks is *optimal* townplay here and I don't think that's the angle that scum normally go for anyway like this.

More posts are in the mail.