Mafia Sunset - Day 1: The Beginning

[jluck]

The help should not question his boss's actions.

I have nothing to add on the whole nothingness that's being discussed at this point.

Let's talk about our options here; how are we going to catch those cursed feds? I've never had this setup where votes are secret; has anyone ever experienced this before?

Good to see you sir, I wold never forgive myself if I failed you (and lost my source of income).

I've never played a secret vote format, but it definitely benefits the agents. They can say anything they want in public while never committing to anything with a vote. We're going to have to watch conversation very carefully.

[TrumpetKing]

Ahh dahhn't mean tuh sound so accusatory, but wouldn't it make sense, if you are just here to establish character, as the normal Day and Page One consists of, surely you would have been able to say something that developed your character without leaving and coming back half an hour or so later. I'm just curious as to why you felt the need to do so if you're just building character.

Miss Tiffinay not drunk, and very clear headed I might add!

I find this midy suspicious!!

I'm not sure how not being drunk, and being clear headed makes me suspicious. Care to elaborate? And besides, it's not even all that early. We're nearly 1/3 into the day, and voting should be beginning soon, so we're going to need to start transitioning from the fluffing to the scumhunting.

[def]

Let's talk about our options here; how are we going to catch those cursed feds? I've never had this setup where votes are secret; has anyone ever experienced this before?

I personally haven't, but I think it's pretty crucial that people start giving ideas on how to work with this.

They can't exactly own the vote, but I expect that they will publicly have differing opinions, and privately all just lump onto whoever they want. But publicly, they will have differing opinions. This will make it really hard when we want to lynch an obvious scum bum, and it doesn't go through because some folks are lying to us all.

Day one lynch of scum is virtually impossible, unless all townies vote together.

I would love to hear some people ring in on what their strategy is, rather than just making hashtags and character comments. Otherwise, it's going to be a short, short 'situation'.

[TrumpetKing]

Just double checked the rules, I had forgotten voting is always open. Regardless, the transition is going to need to be made soon.

[Bob]

I'm not sure I really see a way around this whole private voting thing. Since there's apparently nothing wrong with talking about who we're going to vote for, we can always make our own tally based on how people say they're going to vote. For example, say everyone says they're voting for person A. Someone can make up a tally like this:

Person A: 13 (all players)

Person B: 1 (presumably person A)

And then if Person A isn't lynched we know that some people are lying. It's not an exact science, especially since there aren't public vote tallies. Although, will we get a tally at the end of the day? Knowing how many players deviated from the lynch is more helpful then knowing that players did deviate.

[badboytje88]

Why are you saying random letters and using the pound sign? What are these strange abbreviations and words you're using? You do know that it's 1985, right? Are you some sort of a weird time traveler?

I got the bjoots and the brains my friend. See one day in the furure we will all be connected 24/7. Like the flies in a spiders web. People will all be talking loke this. I can't help being a trendsetter #OMGtotallyjustsaidthat

I would love to hear some people ring in on what their strategy is, rather than just making hashtags and character comments. Otherwise, it's going to be a short, short 'situation'.

Wow way to point the finger. #fail

My strategy will be voting of the lurkers. If ya aint talkung ya aint helping. #TTYN

[TrumpetKing]

In a lot of cases, though, voting the lurker has been seen to be an easy lynch, but also tends to be unsuccessful. In what ways would such a strategy be more helpful? I wouldn't expect too many scum to hide in such a way.

[def]

Wow way to point the finger. #fail

My strategy will be voting of the lurkers. If ya aint talkung ya aint helping. #TTYN

Great! I'm voting for Bebe: loud in front, nothing of substance behind.

I'll look forward to seeing if anyone else can surpass this very obvious uselessness :smile:

[badboytje88]

In a lot of cases, though, voting the lurker has been seen to be an easy lynch, but also tends to be unsuccessful. In what ways would such a strategy be more helpful? I wouldn't expect too many scum to hide in such a way.

Well so far there is no one who stands out in my honest opinion. So voting for the people who aren't contributing seems like a logic thing to do in my book. #duh

Great! I'm voting for Bebe: loud in front, nothing of substance behind.

I'll look forward to seeing if anyone else can surpass this very obvious uselessness :smile:

Well go right ahead. I knew this would happen. Some people just can't handle my bigger than life personality. To bad for you, your loss. #hater #fail

But it won't get you any closer to victory unless you align with the killers.

[def]

But it won't get you any closer to victory unless you align with the killers.

So you think aligning to the killers means victory?

#oppsIoutedmyselfasascumbag

[badboytje88]

Well killing is bad so my guess is the killers are the bad guys. Good guys try to solve their problems in a more mature fashion.

[Adam]

I'm not sure I really see a way around this whole private voting thing. Since there's apparently nothing wrong with talking about who we're going to vote for, we can always make our own tally based on how people say they're going to vote. For example, say everyone says they're voting for person A. Someone can make up a tally like this:

Person A: 13 (all players)

Person B: 1 (presumably person A)

And then if Person A isn't lynched we know that some people are lying. It's not an exact science, especially since there aren't public vote tallies. Although, will we get a tally at the end of the day? Knowing how many players deviated from the lynch is more helpful then knowing that players did deviate.

This might be tip-toeing around Rule 3, so I've sought some clarification just in case. However, I think it's a very solid idea - you're right, we won't be able to know exactly who deviated and it won't be perfect, but at the very least we will have a rough idea of the different possible votes and some information to work with.

I would love to hear some people ring in on what their strategy is, rather than just making hashtags and character comments. Otherwise, it's going to be a short, short 'situation'.

We can come up with many reasons why having a hidden vote makes our job of catching scum difficult: it will be tough to analyze voter behavior and bandwagoning, harder to see when someone flip flops, etc. Back in New York, I never heard about any "situations" like this one, so I unfortunately can't toss up a strategy that I know for sure is effective. However, it's pretty likely that there will be more behind-the-scenes discussions than usual, which can lead to an especially quiet day. Lurking is always discouraged, but I think that activity and conversation is especially important for this "situation" because we need all the information we can get and behavior we can analyze.

Beyond keeping a prospective vote tally like Benito suggested (if allowed), it would probably be useful to keep a chart of who accuses who. Do you have any ideas?

[jluck]

This might be tip-toeing around Rule 3, so I've sought some clarification just in case. However, I think it's a very solid idea - you're right, we won't be able to know exactly who deviated and it won't be perfect, but at the very least we will have a rough idea of the different possible votes and some information to work with.

We can come up with many reasons why having a hidden vote makes our job of catching scum difficult: it will be tough to analyze voter behavior and bandwagoning, harder to see when someone flip flops, etc. Back in New York, I never heard about any "situations" like this one, so I unfortunately can't toss up a strategy that I know for sure is effective. However, it's pretty likely that there will be more behind-the-scenes discussions than usual, which can lead to an especially quiet day. Lurking is always discouraged, but I think that activity and conversation is especially important for this "situation" because we need all the information we can get and behavior we can analyze.

Beyond keeping a prospective vote tally like Benito suggested (if allowed), it would probably be useful to keep a chart of who accuses who. Do you have any ideas?

One concern I have with keeping track of who people claim to vote for is people may never reveal who they voted for, particularly in light of the rule structure.

However, tracking accusations could be beneficial in looking for inconsistencies, especially once the game gets up and running.

[Lady K]

One concern I have with keeping track of who people claim to vote for is people may never reveal who they voted for, particularly in light of the rule structure.

However, tracking accusations could be beneficial in looking for inconsistencies, especially once the game gets up and running.

Good idea. The one problem I see is that some might accuse others just to gauge the reaction of others without really being suspicious of that person. So keeping a tally might be helpful, it also might not reflect the real intentions of those players.

[Bob]

Scratch my idea, it's not allowed. Unless we're missing something huge and we're all idiots all of a sudden, I can't really see a way to make the secret voting work for us.

I'm also contemplating voting off Bebe. There's too much fluff in her statements. Even when confronted by Da Shen, she still uses the strange future-lingo, and she doesn't even try to defend herself. She may have even misspoke, but that could have been an accident. Typically by the 24 hour mark in the day it's time to move on from roleplaying, but she hasn't yet really. Try to convince me otherwise, but unless you can come up with a good defense I think I know where my vote is going.

[Lady K]

As far as strategy, well we as a group will have difficulty in working together because each of us works alone in a position of authority. The bad guys trying to bring us to what they call justice are used to working together in a very structured method. What we need to look for is those who want to work together are probably the ones we want to get rid of.

[Tamamono]

Vote Tally:

0 votes

39 hours until Sunset.

Mod Note: Remember, voting is mandatory.

[Lady K]

Ok Ya'll, we are running out of time here. Ideas anyone?

[Lady K]

So things are pretty quiet round here. Ya'll have any wild accusations?

[jimmynick]

Ok Ya'll, we are running out of time here. Ideas anyone?

The best idea is not to be wibbly-wobbly but to collapse a wavefunction and vote for someone who stands out to you. 39 hours is hardly running out of time (it's only halfway through the day) and it's rich that you're imploring us all to create a critical mass of doing-stuff without actually having enriched the uranium yourself.

[Mencot]

Aarg god damn it is hot out here in this suit!

In a lot of cases, though, voting the lurker has been seen to be an easy lynch, but also tends to be unsuccessful. In what ways would such a strategy be more helpful? I wouldn't expect too many scum to hide in such a way.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn´t but usually it is a "town" that gets voted out if going for lurkers.

Ok Ya'll, we are running out of time here. Ideas anyone?

There is still time and as all know also you new ones, day 1 is hard because there is nothing to go on. And this time there isn´t even the voting to go on so...

This is also my first game with this kind of voting technique and it does benefit the "scum" and also maybe some of the better players.

Not meaning players with lots of experience rather than players who has talent for this kind of play, playing in the shadows and are good on analyzing others.

So in this game it will be very important for "town" to find eachother and start analyzing.

How many scum do you think there is?

We are 14 players total, so a "scum" count of 3 would sound right, (max 4 but that could be overkill)

[jimmynick]

So things are pretty quiet round here. Ya'll have any wild accusations?

Whoa, there it is again!

[TrumpetKing]

Bebe does sound like a reasonable lynch for the day, but my suspicions for Juan, as well as now Alan, keep increasing. Has anybody else noticed how close they've been acting?

-When I accused Juan, he responded pretty defensively, and it seems as if Alan came in and defended him, calling me suspicious for making such an accusation, providing no evidence as to why it does.

-Just recently, Juan gave feedback on Abbot's idea of tracking accusations, saying it could work, and Alan came around and responded to Juan, applauding him for the idea, not Abbot. This is a bit more loose of evidence, but if he was giving credit correctly, I see no reason for him to make such a post thanking Juan, when Abbot's idea was just a few statements before.

In conclusion, I do find Juan and Alan suspicious, for grouping up so quickly and being highly defensive.

[Lady K]

Whoa, there it is again!

True. But in my own defense this is only my second game and first one with private voting. I was just trying to get the conversation going so we have some sort of info to go on.

Bebe does sound like a reasonable lynch for the day, but my suspicions for Juan, as well as now Alan, keep increasing. Has anybody else noticed how close they've been acting?

-When I accused Juan, he responded pretty defensively, and it seems as if Alan came in and defended him, calling me suspicious for making such an accusation, providing no evidence as to why it does.

Actually that was just me being very in character noticing that in one post you were very drunk and the next very not drunk.

-Just recently, Juan gave feedback on Abbot's idea of tracking accusations, saying it could work, and Alan came around and responded to Juan, applauding him for the idea, not Abbot. This is a bit more loose of evidence, but if he was giving credit correctly, I see no reason for him to make such a post thanking Juan, when Abbot's idea was just a few statements before.

I was just trying to add to the conversation, my apologies to Abbot for not giving due credit that it was his idea.

In conclusion, I do find Juan and Alan suspicious, for grouping up so quickly and being highly defensive.

Not grouping just posting order, but hey, that's just how it looked.

Bebe does sound like a reasonable lynch for the day, but my suspicions for Juan, as well as now Alan, keep increasing. Has anybody else noticed how close they've been acting?

-When I accused Juan, he responded pretty defensively, and it seems as if Alan came in and defended him, calling me suspicious for making such an accusation, providing no evidence as to why it does.

-Just recently, Juan gave feedback on Abbot's idea of tracking accusations, saying it could work, and Alan came around and responded to Juan, applauding him for the idea, not Abbot. This is a bit more loose of evidence, but if he was giving credit correctly, I see no reason for him to make such a post thanking Juan, when Abbot's idea was just a few statements before.

In conclusion, I do find Juan and Alan suspicious, for grouping up so quickly and being highly defensive.

Okay, let me try this again, learning experience here:

So I suspect you because in one post you were very drunk, then the next very not drunk. I found it suspicious. I was only acting very in character. My apologies to Abbot for not giving him due credit on his idea. And finally my posts just happen to roll in in the order they did, no intentions on my part.

[TrumpetKing]

I understand that your posts may come like that, but it seems awfully close, like an accidental slip. Not posting in character 24 hours into the day is hardly suspicious, also.