Sigh.
Gordo said:
Okay. I feel it's safe to assume that we AT LEAST had two scum (not saying that there weren't more to start [in fact, chances are there were probably more]) to start D1 with: Cheeze, our Godfather, and Jungle, our inducturater (however you spell it). I feel it's in town's best interest to assume it's a recruiter role. But, logically speaking, I feel that it'd be weighted too hard against town for it NOT to be a one shot recruitment.
I agree with your latter points, and your first to some extent. But we definitely did not start this game with two mafia -- if town lynched mafia D1 and the vig shot mafia N1, the game is over before Day 2. This is not balanced. Granted, there could be a strange mechanic where the recruiting goes through even in lieu of the recruiter's death, but even in that highly improbable case, there's the CHANCE they wouldn't recruit, and thus the game would end. A balanced game does not end that quickly -- period.
Mentos is a veteran here and he knows this, and he also knows that the standard in a 15 man game is 3 mafiats. So, I think it's probable to the point that we can assume we started with three mafia, and I agree that any more than a oneshot ability would be tipped against the town, so I also feel that we started with three and have a potential of 4, with the recruit. This is fine balance.
What I dislike about this post is that although you admit there were probably more than two to start, the rest of your post operates under this assumption, thus you conveniently are able to assume that I am scum, and the last of the scum, as a recruit. Now, I don't see ill intentions on your part here, because I can see where you're coming from. But you must admit that doing your scumhunting on a 2+1 model is faulty in these circumstances.
Now, I've never been in a situation like this, but if a doctor protects player A during the night, and both player A and the doc are targeted for NK's, do both die or is player A still protected? I'm asking because what if the recruiter used his night action N2, but it didn't work since he was NK'd? Just something to put our fingers on.
I have no idea, as I can't recall this situation coming up in a game I played. I think that kind of thing is up to the mod, as they decide on night action priority. There is a status quo of sorts, but I don't pretend to be well-versed in it, so someone else can field that if they wish. It bears mention that not all night actions are given the same priority in regards to a kill, though, so inquiring about a doctor doesn't help much. For example, I'm fairly certain the status quo for a vig and a mafiat shooting one another would be the death of the vig and not the mafiat, while I believe an SK would win the same scenario against a mafiat.
Now, I doubt that the previous paragraph happened. Why? Because I'm going under the assumption that it's a one time recruitment. And I know that if I had one opprotunity to do something like that, I'd do it before I had no more opprotunity to. What I'm getting at, is that it's not too logical for me to watch play changes from D2 to D3. No, we should observe play changes from D1 to D2.
I see your rationale -- and I agree with it, to some extent, absolutely. But there are other factors to consider.
It could be more proscum to chance it and wait until N2 to recruit someone that has been treated as uniformly protown, for example. Then you have to consider things like whether the recruiter was under significant pressure at the end of D1, and whether they think they could survive D2. Risk vs reward is what everything comes down to when it comes to night actions, especially from the scum POV. And given the immediacy of Sir Bedevere's replacement, it's possible he didn't even send in a night action.
However, I do agree that it is more likely that if we are dealing with a recruit, they were recruited on Night 1, and as such I do agree that drastic changes from D1 to D2 should be given the heaviest consideration.
And who do I think the only difference in play was? None other than the player slot of RonEEke.
Okay.
Guide was just plain inactive at the beginning. Sad story, but true. When it came that he'd be replaced by a hydra, I was glad that we'd be getting two players (both who have a great history of the game, by the way) to replace instead of one. D1 was coming to an end, but I don't think that RonEEke did as much as he can in the end. I'll give a bit of leeway toward him, but he should know (or at least I do if I'm prepared to replace in) that he'll be needed asap. He didn't impress me with his activity D1.
Guide should not come into any arguments about playstyle whatsoever. He literally did not do anything, at all. I'm sure you're just setting the stage with that sentence, but I wanted to say that.
For our activity? No, we didn't do as much as we could. Yes, in fact, we played quite passively. I've discussed what I was going through at the time; I have no desire to make an AtE here, but I had no desire to play mafia when an immediate family member could have died. And I'm trying to state this as flatly as possible, to avoid pulling any kind of emotions into this. As I said, I had difficulty concentrating on things like mafia, which seemed trivial in comparison, and so I wasn't keeping up. It was all Ronike, who has probably been half as active as me at this point, all told.
But to get back to the passive play, how well do you remember D1, exactly? I remember reading D1 without any flips other than Swords and Praxis, and what I saw was absolute
muck. That's part of what made it so **** hard to get back into the game. All the hydras and unusual comments by almost everyone, and remarkably antitown statements/moments from at least one confirmed townie (Swords, and quite probably Tando, based on her recent play)? Then the reactions to all these moments?
Day one was like trudging through sewage, and without a single flip, I can say despite not being there that it must have been much worse.
My point is that there wasn't much to get proactive about, with the possible exception of the oh-so-scummy-looking Swords. I can completely understand why Ronike would have played somewhat passively, and in the end, you can't say he didn't provide stances, stay active, and do everything else you should expect from a player that had just airdropped into that mess, even if it wasn't up to whatever par you'd set for us.
D2 arises, and still barely active. I was kinda surprised by the lack of activity especially from a hydra, but it wasn't my first priority during the Day.
I think "barely active" is a bit of an exaggeration, if that's how you want to describe Ronike's play from D1-early D2. You may have raised your expectations in lieu of The Guide's complete absence, but that doesn't mean falling at all short of them qualifies as coasting or inactivity. He was active at the start, and then he got hit by whatever johns of his own came onto his plate, and meanwhile I wasn't around at all, for the same reasons as before.
I would hope that "you're being pretty inactive for a hydra" would cease to be seen as a valid point of scumminess now that Dr. Riddler has flipped town.
But then, out of nowhere, comes a spur of activity. Wanting to get Tandora lynched, trying to lure town away from any other lynches. But unfortunately, both of his scum buddies were put on the hot seat. He had to decide between bussing Jungle and Cheeze. And since Cheeze still had the godfather ability, he chose Jungle, with him having no more PR. But still, that was weak, and a way to fake contribute, since he knew his Tandora case was going nowhere, yet he didn't vote Jungle.
It was not out of nowhere at all, actually. For the nth time, Ronike said exactly when we'd be able to come back, allowing for our combined work schedules and some additional time to finish reading up, connect, and decide whom we found the scummiest. And in that time... we finished reading up, connected, and decided whom we found the scummiest.
Yes, our activity from early D2 to late D2 changed a lot. But you have failed to display this as anything more than a change in activity. How is becoming more active scummy? If becoming more active on D2 in juxtaposition to D1 is scummy, then why didn't we become active right out of the gate on D2's start? Wouldn't that make more sense? Wouldn't these points then lend credence to the reasons we've said we were inactive in the first place? You've offered nothing to link scumminess to the possibility of a N1 recruit. Nothing in regards to playstyle, reads, anything. Merely "they got active".
Except we got active well after the D2 start, so it's not exactly a solid point, is it?
Again, I accept responsibility for wanting to get Tandora lynched. We found her scummy, and so we tried to get her lynched.
However, I take serious issue with you saying we tried to "lure town away" from other lynches. Once again, you can state that town being briefly lured away from other lynches was a byproduct of our actions (trying to get Tando lynched). That would be a fact. But, as I said to Edreeses you can not attach your own intent analysis to a course of action and claim it as a fact. This is, to me, one of the clearest signs of tunneling.
Again, we were fine with a jungle lynch, and again, I told Ronike to move his vote if a Tando lynch would not happen. That is as much of Ronike's late Day actions as I can explain, in regards to that in particular. However, I've also talked to Ronike about his late D2 actions, and he specifically told me that the reason he wanted to stop the hammer (in addition to the fact that, as I said quite a while ago, being anti-quickhammer is an ancient mafia saw) was because he wanted to hear the case against Cheez. He hadn't seen one provided, and neither had I, and I still haven't, in all the agonizing rereading I've done since jumping back into this game. I'm pretty sure that means he would have been willing to move. I won't bother saying what I would have been willing to do because I wasn't there in that moment.
You can disbelieve these motivations, but you can't attach your OWN motivation and call it a fact. Really consider what i juts said and wonder if you're tunneling.
I'm going to assume you're not just tunneling your *** off, and that this is a theoretical scenario, a "what if RonEEke is the recruit" kind of thing. I'll indulge.
The main issue is that if you feel that a Cheez or jungle lynch was definitive, why should "two players that have a good history of the game" make such a transparent and obvious move? I'd like to imagine that most people in this game that have played with Ronike and I would consider us good players, and yet no one seems willing to confront the fact that pushing a different lynch entirely, on what is now assumed to be a townie, would do nothing more than tie us together as cleanly and obviously as possible. What's the best case scenario here? Tandora gets lynched. Then what? Seriously... what? There are three or four scum. We kill a townie overNight, and then we probably get lynched back to back to back. Any one of us would be under massive flames the next day, and based on the serious hate for Cheez, I'm completely convinced he'd go on D3. Then jungle, based on Gheb's posts and ferocity. And then oh hey, meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Only the fourth mafiat, in this scenario where I am but a humble recruit, would remain.
That's not how I play mafia. When I'm scum, I'm not in the business of setting myself up to be toppled by the failures of weaker scummates like a powerless domino in a chain of awful play, and I'm sure as hell not in the business of risking being that first domino -- in a manner that tethers me to my scummates so clearly, no less -- when the best case scenario is a single mislynch.
Think about that for a while. How much sense does that actually make?
Why not just skip the whole god **** thing and bus one of the idiots, who was only going to drag me down later on,
This is a reasonable interpretation, in this hypothetical scenario. In fact, I've been very interested since the start of N2 in people that were trying to ease in jungle's lynch instead of Cheez's. And yes, I'm aware I was one of those people. I don't care. I'm not going to ignore a fruitful avenue of investigation because I might sound hypocritical -- I'm not in the business of self-preservation, either. Not at the expense of protown movements.
That said, another possibility has come to mind for me, after jungle's flip, and after a whole lot of meditation. What if Sir Bedevere didn't recruit? What if scum, seeing that Cheez was a lost cause, was trying to save jungle instead? A godfather loss is certainly a massive blow to the mafia, but if a godfather and a recruiter that hasn't used his ability have been tied to one another, and one of them has to die? Assuming back to back lynches, saving the recruiter ultimately leaves scum with 2 mafiats, while saving the godfather leaves them with 1. Definitely food for thought.
What you've just described doesn't line up with the actions of someone trying to do a bus. Busing is meant to be a convincing act of faux-scumhunting that sends a scumbuddy into the grave.
Why wouldn't we have a better way to ease into jungle as a backup lynch if we planned to bus him? Why wouldn't we put our vote down, rather than just saying that we would be willing to move on it? Why wouldn't we take that lynch by the horns and ram it the **** down the town's throat in a fashion that weaves a tapestry of our being pure and undistilled protown scumhunting monoliths?
Y'know, rather than "ugh, if this lynch won't happen, then yeah, we'd be willing to lynch jungle too".
I hate to open up WIFOM, but can you really say that such fizzling and patchy play really fits the play of someone who holds the cards? Someone in a hydra composed of two players that "have a good history of the game"?
Now, it's D3, and to his amazement, Jungle was NK'd. Now, the inductorater (still don't know how to spell it ) role is out. So he's freaking out. He gives a "possibility" of the role to look good
This is still under the hypothetical that I'm a scum recruit? Yes, I agree that's what I would have done in this scenario, I guess.
Though I'm curious as to what your answer is to my being so positive and adamant about a recruiter when people were offering other possibilities? Such as Edreese's suggestions, or hell, Soviet Coffee's suggestion that Cheez might have been recruited and turned into a godfather? Why deny these false endeavors?
Yes, I know it's a WIFOM-y question. Still, really consider it. Does that actually sound more likely than that I am simply a townie, and I was stating my interpretation of the revelatory flip because a confirmed recruiter is
serious ****ing business that everyone needs to be looking into and considering?
and hopes to find someone to call a 180 degree turn in play. That person's Soviet Coffee
I think you're either misconstruing or misunderstanding me.
I wasn't accusing Soviet Coffee of a 180 degree turn in play, which would signify a possible recruitment. Again, I concur that if we have a recruit they were taken from us on N1, and again, Soviet Coffee has been one of my oldest suspects, and is presently my oldest living one.
But that's just one possibility. If Jungle's recruiter role is a sacrifice (exchanging his life for a townie to become scum), then I'm stumped.
That role is usually called a Yakuza, in my experience. And since mentos explicitly said that knowing the flavor would constitute knowing the role, and Sovereign sure as hell never died to convert some followers, I'm calling this a recruiter.
) role is out. So he's freaking out. He gives a "possibility" of the role to look good, and hopes to find someone to call a 180 degree turn in play. That person's Soviet Coffee (who no, I don't see too much of a difference). I don't think it's working, with the FOS's and the vote, and now, my FoS RonEEke.
