Mafia strikes again! (concluded)

[Pra]

YOU look boring.

[Simetrical]

It looks boring now, was interesting as long as I was alive.

Because there are too few people. Allowing the dead to post (not that a few haven't taken that liberty to some extent anyway ) would make things much more interesting, I agree with pannonian/sapi/whoever said that at the beginning. But either way, right now we're mainly waiting on scottishranger to post in more detail.

[happyho]

It looks boring now, was interesting as long as I was alive.

Shh! Dead people don't talk.

Chandrashekar Azad, I was replying to your original post but since you edited it I need to reassess my answer. Also I thought we weren't supposed to edit our posts?

2 am it is. G'night.

[Pra]

Oh sorry about that!

[Pra]

new player, so I forgot that rule.

[scottishranger]

Ok, I shall unvote: The fuzz


My main reasoning for voting for the Fuzz, is that he has a good, if not excellent vantage point as which , if he were mafia, could be used to feign actual townie interest.

I really have no complaints against Estland, other than my penguin joke about 5 pages back. Though he has posted less than I would like to see, and I have yet to see the full arguments like Sim, Pra, or Pann have posted(though the same could be said of me.) I see no reason to lynch a person on those ground alone.(Though that could change next round)

[Pra]

I'd like to see Sim's reasoning on some of the others. I really can't find much on scottishranger due to lack of posts, nor can I find anything particularly revealing on Estlander.

They look clean for now.

[Simetrical]

I'd like to see Sim's reasoning on some of the others. I really can't find much on scottishranger due to lack of posts, nor can I find anything particularly revealing on Estlander.

That's why they're suspicious: lack of meaningful posts.

But okay. Now that I've asked both The Fuzz and scottishranger about Estlander, there's no point in keeping this secret anymore. Full reveal time: I'm not just a Mason but the cop as well. There's no reason for you not to believe me, since you can be quite sure I'm a Mason, as Chandrashekar Azad figured that out. That means I'm town and have no good reason to lie to you about anything, unless to throw the mafia off (and declaring you're the cop is not known to do that). My reasons for saying this now are:

• It doesn't look likely I'll survive the night, and I have an important piece of info to share.
• I'll probably end up leading another lynching today. If I'm right, that will make it doubly sure I'll get killed tonight; if I'm wrong, that will mean people will be unlikely to believe me tomorrow even if I do survive.
• Once I've revealed what I know, if the Mafia kills me, it will be revealed that I am indeed the cop, and so everyone will know that what I said is true, giving town a leg up. This may even increase my chances of survival overall: it becomes dangerous for the mafia to kill me. (Jubal_Barca said I can't commit suicide, only mafia/vigilantes/serial killers can, so I have no surefire way of revealing my role if I'm not killed somehow.)

Okay, so here's how things have gone for me. I was told from the beginning that pannonian was town, and he was told from the beginning that I was the cop. So on Day One, I defended him against attack, and thankfully he survived. (Chandrashekar Azad noticed this a couple of RL days ago and correctly surmised that I was a Mason on this basis.) Note that pannonian is a veteran mafia player, and remember that he supported Dinadan as scum over Arakorn. This is something to keep in mind.

[note: paraphrased PMs follow, which I gather is perfectly okay]

On Night One, pannonian and I discussed possible suspects (recall that Masons can talk at night). It was fairly clear Dinadan was the one to investigate, although pannonian also expressed suspicion of Annaeus, Evariste, and The Fuzz. I investigated Dinadan, and we got the answer back: yes, he was scum. That reduced pannonian's suspicion of Evariste, and he remarked (presumably on the possibility that he wouldn't survive the night: mafia kills occur at the very end) that his next target would be Estlander.

On Day Two, the two of us led a successful campaign against Dinadan, in the certain knowledge that he was scum.

On Night Two, pannonian suggested Estlander, The Fuzz, and scottishranger as investigation targets. I favored Estlander due to my accusations against him during the previous day. Unfortunately, we discovered that Estlander is not scum. He's the Inventor. That's the important information I have to share: don't waste your energy on him, suspicious though he may seem. This left us without an unambiguous target. pannonian said his suspicion remained on scottishranger and The Fuzz, and suggested The Fuzz as his first choice. pannonian got killed at the end of the night.

On Day Three, therefore, I targeted The Fuzz primarily, while directing some suspicion toward scottishranger. I also declared suspicion of Estlander, but that was a blind, using the following reasoning. All mafia would know Estlander was innocent; no one would know that I also knew that. Therefore, when I accused Estlander, I specifically asked the two prime suspects what they thought of him. If they were in fact mafia, their best (although not certain) choice would be to agree to target Estlander. That would put them under only marginally greater suspicion, since I was the one leading the attack, but greatly increase their chance of winning, by causing us to lynch another townie at this late stage.

So how did they respond? The Fuzz, interestingly, did not express suspicion of Estlander. Nor did he suspect scottishranger or Evariste, the next two on my list. Now scottishranger does not suspect Estlander either. Nor do Chandrashekar Azad, or happyho. But Evariste does.

So, we have an interesting new piece of evidence to add to the pile. Let's take a look at Evariste:

• He was the second vote on Dinadan. Telling? I think not. By that point two others, pannonian and Arakorn-Eir, looked like much more likely candidates, with four votes each. What to lose, except to bank on suspicion being thrown off yourself later? This doesn't indicate by any means that he's town.
• He voted for Dinadan again later with no reservations. But perhaps that just makes him clever. Less of a suspect, maybe, than if he had acted like The Fuzz and defended him, but still a suspect.
• Having unequivocally helped take down Dinadan, how does he suggest we find the next mafioso? Why, it's obvious: "look back and see who went along with [Dinadan] in general, and start there." How else would you track down a mafioso than by looking at vote patterns? Indeed.
• Then he did advocate against Estlander, now a known innocent, secondarily. His primary target was still The Fuzz.

I find this interesting. Hardly watertight, no, but Evariste is worthy of close scrutiny. Here's an interesting hypothesis: let's say that the mafia discussed on the first night what to do. Let's say that they figured that the best strategy is to appoint one survivor to target the other two, avoiding suspicion long enough to kill all the townies. (It's quite a good strategy, and one I might easily use myself if I were mafia ― although as has been noted, evidence points to my being a Mason this game, and if Estlander admits he's an Inventor, there's evidence that I'm a cop besides.) Now, say that the mafia consisted of Dinadan, Fuzz, and Evariste. Who would they pick to be the survivor? Evariste is funny and likable. He's surely the best actor of the three. Who else? And he had already voted for Dinadan the previous day! So Evariste targets Dinadan first, now Fuzz. Just a thought . . .

So, two things (these aren't votes, just bolded to get attention):

Evariste, I'd like to hear your comments on this hypothesis.

Estlander, please admit that you're an Inventor and so confirm that I'm a cop. (Technically that doesn't ensure I'm town, because there was a scum-cop in the last game. However, if there's a scum-cop there's probably also a regular cop, and there's also the Mason evidence. I think that if Estlander agrees, it's pretty clear that I'm telling the truth about everything.) Also, out of curiosity, what was that killing of Annaeus about? A misguided vigilante action?

[Pra]

Alright, so we'll probably need as much information you can provide in case you die. (We aren't allowed to lie when publicly announcing roles, right?

I'm 95% sure Fuzz is a mafioso, but after him, I really can't say. Evariste? scottishranger? Estlander (depending on whether or not he is an inventor)? If Evariste is suspect, why not me or happyho when we both have had similar patterns in voting and expressed similar suspicion?

The only one I am over 90% sure as being a townie is Sim. After that, perhaps Estlander (if he is an inventor.) Could he be a scum inventor? Realistically, that leaves
me (I'm know I'm a townie, but no one else has conclusive evidence of this),
happyho (irregular voting pattern but he has looked for the truth),
scottishranger (too quiet-but nothing else),
Fuzz (extremely questionable voting pattern and explanations),
and Evariste (voted for Fuzz and Dinadan-but expressed suspicion of Estlander, not anything conclusion either way.)

[Simetrical]

Alright, so we'll probably need as much information you can provide in case you die. (We aren't allowed to lie when publicly announcing roles, right?

Are you kidding? Of course we are. Otherwise you'd just be able to ask everyone their role and lynch those who wouldn't admit it. That's why I gave evidence.

If Evariste is suspect, why not me or happyho when we both have had similar patterns in voting and expressed similar suspicion?

happyho is just an unknown. He seems like town but is behaving too erratically to tell much. That's very risky whether you're town or mafia. I'm inclined to believe his explanation, for now.

As for you, first of all, your opinions have been more varied and less consistent than Evariste's. That's as would be expected of a townie, who doesn't know the answer in advance. You give a damned good impression of actually trying to reason things out logically. Mafia aren't actually reasoning out who's mafia and who's not, because they know in advance. Therefore they either have to give minimal reasoning, give flawed reasoning, or be good enough actors or rhetoricians to push special knowledge out of their mind and really act as though they're townies.

It could be you fall in the latter category, but that has to be our last resort as an assumption. If we assume all the mafia are perfect actors, our best strategy is to pick at random so that mafia can't swing the vote. For a 9-3 game, I've calculated that gives mafia an 85% chance of winning, and that's our best strategy under that assumption. So we had better hope the mafia are lousy actors.

Evariste, on the other hand, fits the model of a mafioso pretty well. He's quiet and doesn't give much logic for his decisions, but makes reasonable decisions along with everyone else. He doesn't draw undue attention to himself when he does post, which is relatively infrequently. He therefore gives us no reason to believe that he doesn't know who the mafia are, as you do (or I do for that matter). That immediately makes him a suspect. Combined with how well his behavior would fit with a pretty effective mafia strategy, it makes him my second choice now, below The Fuzz but above scottishranger. I'll wait for his response before voting again.

The only one I am over 90% sure as being a townie is Sim. After that, perhaps Estlander (if he is an inventor.)

If I'm a townie, you know Estlander is too, because if I'm a townie I'm not going to lie. Lying about whether someone's a townie wouldn't fool the mafia, who would know anyway, it would only give less information to the town. I've said he's not mafia and I know he's not, because I investigated him and was told by Jubal_Barca that he's not. It's marginally possible that he's a Godfather and so will turn up innocent despite being scum, but we can't afford to take those odds under the circumstances.

Let me stress: if the mafia kills me, despite the fact that it will confirm everything I say, do not lynch Estlander or you'll have more or less sealed the game. And happyho, do not vote before discussing if another townie is lynched, because that gives mafia an immediate win if you vote for a townie (there will be two of them out of three votes needed to lynch).

Could he be a scum inventor?

No, I specifically asked that. He's town.

[Pra]

How can you be so sure of happyho over Evariste? I guess Evariste's answers to your accusations will determine that?

[Enemy of the State]

Yeah, Sim is right. I am the inventor.
I'm sorry Annaeus for blowing you up. I don't know why i picked you, i was going to kill off Fuzz but something in my head told me the name "Annaeus" instead. As i said, I'm really new to the game and not the best detective. I didn't use logic. Annaeus, along with Fuzz just appeared suspicious to me.
Next mafia game ill post more, give better reasons and try an analysis.

When i came here, i knew i had to post something. But my head was empty

[Jubal_Barca]

I love modding these games...

[happyho]

Unvote Evariste.

I have to say that I still find that Evariste is likely to be one of the remaining Scum, he's been online several times and has not answered any of our concerns yet. Is that enough to convince me of his guilt? As I said before he seems as good a target as any. I am now relatively certain that Chandrashekar Azad is also a fellow Townie. Estlander and Simetrical can be confirmed as being innocent now, unless they are both Scum and are lying to trick us.

We aren't allowed to lie when publicly announcing roles, right?

Are you kidding? Of course we are. Otherwise you'd just be able to ask everyone their role and lynch those who wouldn't admit it.

Which means there is the very small possibility that they are both Scum and are trying to convince us of their respective un-Scumminess. Unlikely I know but a possibility.

happyho is just an unknown. He seems like town but is behaving too erratically to tell much. That's very risky whether you're town or mafia. I'm inclined to believe his explanation, for now.

As I said that was my 'strategy' at the beginning, but since some didn't seem to appreciate it as much as I did I decided to return to a more normal posting style. My hope was to seem too 'erratic' and 'silly' to be a threat to the Mafia, it seems to have worked so far. I'm still alive aren't I?

[Evariste]

Sorry for the late response. I was only paying half-attention to the internet while I was finishing Harry Potter. Boy was I surprised when Snape killed Dumbledore! (oops)

(And Happyho, I'm on TWC for the better part of the day, as I leave my computer on, and usually firefox.)



Sim, you're obviously a very intelligent person, and I'm very impressed with your hypothesis, and if I'm ever mafia in a future game, I would probably use it.

Unfortunately, I'm a townie, so it doesn't work out this time.


I feared that my speed and confidence in my accusations would eventually turn fingers in my direction, and I was right.

As I've said before, this is my first game of Mafia (outside of a few real-life rounds of a similar French game). At the start, I wasn't paying a whole lot of attention to the game, and I didn't really know what I was doing. That resulted in me, first, not participating in discussion much, and two, going along with the group in voting.

As the game (quickly) heated up, I realized a new strategy was necessary to ensure my survival, and to earn the trust of my peers. Immediately attacking the most suspicious member was the order of the day for me, and led to my vote against Dinadin. If you all remember, his first post (one of them anyway) aimed to stifle discussion. It doesn't take a seasoned player to understand that this is the exact opposite of what a townie would do.

With Fuzz, his fishy responses to accusations stirred up more suspicion, and his open msn conversation with Fuzz sealed the deal for me.

I suppose my strategy has been to follow an initial gut feeling, then pursue, and it's worked once, and hopefully, twice, as I am 99.5 per cent sure that Fuzz is the next Mafia.

That brings me back to your hypothesis, Sim. As I said at the beginning, it's very clever, and undoubtedly only brought up after much thought.

Still, I see some glaring weaknesses in it. First, it's very, very complex. A plan like this requires a huge amount of planning, three clever (and experienced) mafioso, and a good bit of luck.

Dinadin doesn't strike me as the type for this clever a deception, and his early suspicious activity confirms this. If your hypothesis was correct, surely he wouldn't have made his guilt so obvious so quickly.

The Fuzz could go either way, although I still see the MSN convo as damning evidence. Even so, I just don't see him as a mastermind of this order.

As for me, while I like to consider myself fairly intelligent (as well as funny, charming, and good-looking), this is my first game of mafia. I equate my plunge into this as an Allied solider invading Normandy: overwhelmed, scared, anxious, with a desire to keep my head down. I don't think be able to form a plan even half as clever until after the first round, or so.

I just don't see that sort of ingenuity coming from a Dinadin/Evariste/Fuzz mafia team.

Another thing, according to you, this plan would call for the mafia to be whittled down to one member by the end. Doesn't that put the mafia in an incredibly weak position? After all, it would only take one slip-up to out the last man, and then it's game over.

No, I think we're dealing with a very conventional (and, judging by the Fuzz and Dinadin, incompetent) mafia, here, removing perceived threats one by one. They took out Sapi, then Pannonian, and now my guess would be that they're going for Sim, as he seems the most reasoned one of us, so far.

About Estlander, I didn't know that he was the inventor when I campaigned against him, as I was going on his semi-random and infrequent posting.


I hope that addresses the hypothesis satisfactorily, and I urge you to all vote for Fuzz (but not yet, as I'm sure Sim has some more choice things to add).

After that, Happyho or Scottishranger seem the best bet for number 3, and going on the current Mafia's track record, they'll reveal themselves eventually (but probably intentionally).

[sapi]

Which means there is the very small possibility that they are both Scum and are trying to convince us of their respective un-Scumminess. Unlikely I know but a possibility.

Possibly - but it does involve putting all their eggs in one basket (if we lynch/kill one, both their covers are blown); and hell, if they can get away with it, they deserve to win

@Evariste - I see no reason for the mafia to be revealing themselves.

Unintentional mistakes may well be the order of the day...

[Evariste]

Oops, I meant to write "unintentionally."

Thanks for catching that, Sapi.

[Pra]

Here is my suggestion. We go after Fuzz now, if he isn't mafioso, I think that the tiny possibility that Sim and Estlander are in on it together is likely (possibly more likely with the amount of experience Sim has had), even though there is quite a lot of evidence in Sim's favour. (Perfect cover perhaps?)

If Fuzz is mafioso, then I *think* it'll be down to Evariste or scottishranger.

[Simetrical]

How can you be so sure of happyho over Evariste? I guess Evariste's answers to your accusations will determine that?

I can't be. I'm just guessing, frankly. That's what this always comes down to. happyho also hasn't presented a lot to defend himself. We need to pick the most likely two out of: The Fuzz, scottishranger, Evariste, happyho. I exclude myself and Estlander because I believe I've demonstrated for now that we're both innocent (and in any case I know we're innocent); I exclude you because you're such a model townie that if you're scum, I gladly concede the game to your awesomeness. So that means we need to select two of four, with only one possibility for mistake. Fairly good odds for us, but not surefire.

I have to say that I still find that Evariste is likely to be one of the remaining Scum, he's been online several times and has not answered any of our concerns yet.

Scum would want to answer our concerns and avoid a lynching as much as anyone, surely. I also suspect him, but that's an even poorer reason than mine.

Which means there is the very small possibility that they are both Scum and are trying to convince us of their respective un-Scumminess. Unlikely I know but a possibility.

Right, that's why I presented evidence that I'm a Mason and cop.

Still, I see some glaring weaknesses in it. First, it's very, very complex. A plan like this requires a huge amount of planning, three clever (and experienced) mafioso, and a good bit of luck.

No, it only requires one good actor, and regardless of inexperience I think you qualify there.

Dinadin doesn't strike me as the type for this clever a deception, and his early suspicious activity confirms this. If your hypothesis was correct, surely he wouldn't have made his guilt so obvious so quickly.

Mafia can't confer before the first night, so his activity on the first day that turned suspicion against him is irrelevant. I grant that you'd have probably had to think this up on your own on the first day, however, given that you voted for Dinadan then; I'll accept that you're not terribly likely to have done that.

The Fuzz could go either way, although I still see the MSN convo as damning evidence.

It was already pointed out that that conversation was occurring after Dinadan was dead. And you notice he had no PMs from the mafia (although he could have deleted them).

Another thing, according to you, this plan would call for the mafia to be whittled down to one member by the end. Doesn't that put the mafia in an incredibly weak position? After all, it would only take one slip-up to out the last man, and then it's game over.

Yes, it would be somewhat dangerous.

After that, Happyho or Scottishranger seem the best bet for number 3, and going on the current Mafia's track record, they'll reveal themselves eventually (but probably intentionally).

I would choose scottishranger as my second lynching choice. I don't know whether to go after you or happyho for third, at this point; I think I'll stick with you (although hopefully we won't ever get to a third)

Here is my suggestion. We go after Fuzz now, if he isn't mafioso, I think that the tiny possibility that Sim and Estlander are in on it together is likely (possibly more likely with the amount of experience Sim has had), even though there is quite a lot of evidence in Sim's favour. (Perfect cover perhaps?)

If Fuzz is mafioso, then I *think* it'll be down to Evariste or scottishranger.

I would include happyho on that list, but at the end. My list of choices, in order, would be: The Fuzz, scottishranger, Evariste, happyho. Of course, without further evidence arising, there's no way we'd ever get to the fourth member, since by then we'd have lost.

I have nothing more to discuss, and unless someone else does, I vote for The Fuzz. Let's hope we're right.

[happyho]

After reading all the posts and considering my options quite carefully I vote, The Fuzz also.