Fire Emblem Mafia - Game Thread - Concluded

[Nicklesbe]

padib said:

Thanks Nickles, I think this is great detective work. I'm going to help you boost your confidence by explaining some of your questions. A confident town is a winning town, so believe in yourself and be okay with making mistakes. Town doesn't know who is mafia so we're bound to make some mistakes. We'll stay strong with those mistakes.

Smeags on day 1 no lynch

When Smeags posted about the no lynch approach, his 1st paragraph was about a game he had played in the past which supported prof and outlaw's advice. He uses that previous game as an example to show how deferring a lynch to day 2 is harmful to town. His second paragraph supports his idea that a day 1 no lynch simply leads to one less townie (killed night 1) on day 2. So he's consistent here, let me know if this is still unclear.

That said, I very much agree with your thoughts that there is a big difference between a helpful day 1 lynch and a day 1 "lynch anyone". The second option is worse than a no lynch and on that you are RIGHT! However, between a normal, careful day 1 lynch and no lynch, the 1st option is much better.

I get it now ty for clearing that up. I'd much rather have a careful lynch but I don't like the idea of bandwagoning and anyone that wants to rush the vote just to get day 1 over with and vote for who ever just seems really excited to kill to me.

prof play

Multi-threading

I understand you had an issue with prof multi-threading his accusation (first sparks, then whiteeagle). Keep in mind that's not scummy play, it's really prof's style of play. One thing we know about him is that he likes to keep personal notes on all players, and so that leads him to ask many players challenging questions so he can create profiles for most players in the game.

No math

Prof also has a tendency to mention he has backing for something but not providing that backing. It's again just his way of playing (meta-game). He gets ambitious with an idea, might draw up some graphs, might lose them and forget he lost them, might want to find it but then might want to find a hundred different things, and you end up with some grand theory that he may or may not have supported with numbers and you just need to take him as he is

Your case on prof

I'm glad that you took some time to look at your case on prof. Sometimes when a player breathes down our back, we see any and everything they do as scummy. I think you're doing well considering that and I'm glad you took a moment to look more clearly at your original case.

I still think you were right about him causing users (especially hylian) to clam up though, so you weren't all wrong!

RCT

prof buddies up with RCT

I like the links you brought up here. I have a question for you. Do you think that prof as mafia would want to obviously buddy up with a mafia partner in the game thread? Usually, the accusation towards a more advanced mafia is distancing. Do you think that prof, knowing we may accuse him of distancing, would buddy up with his mafia ally (e.g. WIFOM) by reverse psychology?

I don't discount the possibility of it. I wouldn't say it was exactly obvious, it seemed like the distancing was more obvious since he intentionally antagonized him and was quickly voted for. So he might have buddied up as a ploy to make that distancing less obvious.I'm not expert on the whole WiFOM thing so I don't know. I just find it strange he got friendly, didn't defend himself when in all other cases he was quick to and assumed that RCT would unvote him unprovoked and as far as I can tell without so much as an apology. I do know if I was RCT and someone called me a noob when I wasn't I would likely keep them voted until 11:50 of the last day of the day just on principle alone, but then I can sometimes be prideful.

prof lashes out on hylian and you

Do you think that prof lashed out on you and hylian because you voted for him? Do you think it might be possible that prof instead lashes out on users that aggravate how he sees things (regardless of whether he is right or wrong)? Would that apply to how he lashes out on Khan even though Khan unvoted him?

I can see that for being the reason he lashed out as he did but I think being voted for at least contributed to it. I think there might have been instances where he didn't lash out but did still defend himself. I still don't see why he didn't defend himself with RCT. 

RCT slows prof from making damage

This is a very interesting observation. Do you think that a concerned townie would try to stop prof in his tracks? If that's true, then why are we all sharing our reads? I think you might be on to something. There is no reason why a concerned townie would want another townie to withhold their reads.

I think getting everyones POV and opinion is important. It's been very important for me so far and has lead to me unvoting theprof. So again I find that highly suspicious. Even if he's not working with theprof he might of feared theprof's analyses on him and other mafia so he wanted to dissuade him from doing so.

RCT's inactivity

You mention that not all inactivity is the same, I agree with you. In this case though, RCT is neither a mod, nor do his posts contain much consistency on a ratio count with his total posts. Coupled with his suspicious behavior, what do you think of an RCT vote?

At this point I wouldn't be against it and he is definitly my strongest suspect so far. Very little activity, and impression of blood lust, not taking the vote seriously and bandwagoning. Definitly my top suspect but I also would like to see more input from others before I vote for sure because I don't want to overlook or miss anything.