Just going to edit this with thoughts on the role descriptions, I like what I see so far, good work guys.
"Sheriff and Mayor will hide the roles of the elected players so that a Detective role check will show them as Sheriff/Mayor and nothing else." Interesting
You might want to take the veteran clause out of paramedic.
On March 14 2009 14:26 inertinept wrote: well you might have quit but I will be the bigger man here. i just want to know why you wont let me in the game when i havent done anything wrong.
Seems to me that he has pretty clearly stated his reasons. InertInept, can you please keep this to pms if you're going to keep it up?
On March 15 2009 00:55 inertinept wrote: lol the only reason you guys say im crying is because your not the SINGLE person being not allowed to play. how would you feel if everyone was allowed to play(even people that messed up games worst previously) except you?
nice job being a bunch of ass kissers.
Actually reading through the thread and comparing people who asked to sign up with the player list, you're not the only one. So calm down and cool off. Maybe next game Chuiu will let you play (Though at this rate..), just show you can be mature about it and accept that what you did was not something people want to see in Mafia (Admitting to being mafia is completely lame in these games. It's not as if voted haven't been turned around completely at the last minute, check out game 2 with the Ghar vote for an example of this.).
Ugh I hate it when people do this. But just checking in so I'm not presumed inactive, goddamn I've got a lot to read I'll get to it when I get home in about 6 hours or so!
Thankyou masterofchaos for that post, saved me a lot of time, I have more to say but for now just getting in before final vote count:
I vote for MrBabyHands
I'm a huge fan of behavioural analysis and he seems to know what he's doing here and really this game, complex plans trying to set up an inner circle or w/e are just going to be a waste of our time and risk too many blue roles. Behavioural and clue analysis is going to be the way to go.
Most of the plans that have been put forward so far have massive holes in them, I'll get into the stuff that hasn't been covered by other players soon.
On March 19 2009 07:18 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: There are at least 4 possible links from the day one post to Pikachu, the shockwave clue is one of the least persuasive of them so y'all are selling this a bit short - if you find something better, share, but I'm under the impression the mayor has to choose a day 1 lynch so this is the best I've got:
1. Shock wave is a Pikachu move
"He got to the door just before the explosion and was caught in the shockwave."
"They approached Chuiu slowly and he backed up to a safer distance keeping the gun aimed at them. When they stopped he lowered the gun slightly and told them to put their hands behind their backs and get on the ground, then he yelled at the third person to get out of the car."
It could be that Chuiu lowers the gun a bit because he realizes one of them is short so he aim it at them a little better. This one isn't that great or important.
3,4. One mafia can grab a gun with his hand behind his back - this same mafia stands up at rest and then runs while leaned over.
"One of the mafia complied and began lowering down to the ground, Chuiu raised his gun at the other and yelled at him to do the same. But while he did so the mafia lowering himself sprinted toward Chuiu and with his hands still behind his head grabbed the gun and threw it to the side."
Notice that Pikachu stands up straight on two feet while at rest, then runs parallel to the ground - Pikachu would have no problem sprinting while lowering to the ground: (I knew my tv tuner would serve a purpose someday!)
Also, Pikachu would have no problem grabbing a gun with his hands behind his back because he grabs them with this mouth:
5. This same mafia can throw a gun to the side without using his hands:
"with his hands still behind his head grabbed the gun and threw it to the side"
6. This same mafia uses a tackle move:
"He tackled Chuiu to the ground and then ran over to the gun and armed himself with it."
On March 19 2009 08:21 Pika Chu wrote: Now there's no mention that the guy has lowered himself in order to sprint OR that he sprinted while being lowered/leaned.
Eh?
But while he did so the mafia lowering himself sprinted toward Chuiu and with his hands still behind his head grabbed the gun and threw it to the side
Pretty clearly states that he's running while lowered.
On March 19 2009 08:21 Pika Chu wrote: Now there's no mention that the guy has lowered himself in order to sprint OR that he sprinted while being lowered/leaned.
Eh?
But while he did so the mafia lowering himself sprinted toward Chuiu and with his hands still behind his head grabbed the gun and threw it to the side
Pretty clearly states that he's running while lowered.
Sorry, english ain't my native language and i'm not too good at it anyway.
But what i understand from that sentence is that the second time he mentiones "lowering himself" is that he's making reference to the guy who was lowering himself in the past sentence, not in any way that the guy is lowering himself in order to sprint.
I'll try to explain it even better and will do so by replacing the verb lowering with wanking.
One of the mafia complied and began wankingdown to the ground, Chuiu raised his gun at the other and yelled at him to do the same. But while he did so the mafia wanking himself sprinted toward Chuiu
The mafia guy wasn't wanking himself to sprint towards Chuiu. It's a reference to the exact guy who was wanking in the last sentence. It's used to identify the person not describe an action. Chuiu just didn't wrote it down in the best manner, which would have been "But while he did so the mafia guy who was lowering himself, sprinted towards Chuiu".
You're right, "the mafia lowering himself" is a reference to person A, however the reference here is describing his activities at the same time, meaning that he is still lowered as he is sprinting toward Chuiu.
Using the wanking example:
He's not wanking himself to sprint, but since it doesn't say he stopped wanking and the tense is present it's safe to assume he's still wanking as he's sprinting towards Chuiu. Or in the case of the clue, the guy is still lowering as he sprints, hence leaning forward.
On March 19 2009 09:11 fusionsdf wrote: The second reason, and pyrr is going to hate this, is if he all of a sudden starts giving bad analysis or stops analyzing, we will increase our suspicion of him being mafia.
In other words hes analyzing clues to save his life ha ha ha
Just a note about the whole Pika Chu//Pikachu situation, if you remember from Game 2 crazie-penguin was literally a penguin in all the stories, and it was the subtle things like not being able to speak, having 'wings' instead of hands that were what gave it away. Much like grabbing a gun with a tail and running close to the ground match the actions of a character with the body of a pikachu.
On March 19 2009 08:39 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Ok, I have some reading to do to get fully caught up from my working into drink fest last night.
But.
Why are people voting for mayor/sheriff choices based off day 1 clue/behaviour analysis? I know that its a good way to catch mafia on both counts, but heres the issue.
Day 1 clues will have only 2-4 clues total each insanely vague, and each to a different mafia, never more clues pointing at it. Also, chuiu typically has his clues as specific words, so using an entire sentence isn't his style bases on past games.
Next, we have barely any posting habits to follow on someones behaviour to have it exactly down at this point, it is just as hard to prove someone is mafia off the little posting done.
I understand both areas are equally important, but for day 1, neither are truely reliable.
because its going to be impossible to organize town this time, so the goal is to put someone in mayor/sheriff we want to keep alive.
clue analyzers are people we want to keep alive.
The second reason, and pyrr is going to hate this, is if he all of a sudden starts giving bad analysis or stops analyzing, we will increase our suspicion of him being mafia.
In other words hes analyzing clues to save his life ha ha ha
Hes going into way to much detail to push the clue through though, look at how many videos he used to prove his point, if you need like 4-5 videos to prove it, its trying to force something down ones throat.
Anyone who has played mafia has knows clue analysis is super weak first day, and behaviour analysis is easier for mafia to do to pick out blues first day.
We need to elect someone who will try to get the town organized and who can analyze but not be the center of the town. As neither sheriff or mayor can be town rallying point.
He didn't need the videos to prove the point, the points he was trying to prove were clear if you had played enough SSB or were familiar with Pikachu. They were there for people who weren't so familiar, he even proved through Chuiu's own posts the likelihood that Chuiu was aware of these things.
All this said, I'm not a fan of making Pyrr sheriff/mayor because I think just because someone can do clue analysis that they should be mayor is faulty. I do however agree with the work he's done so far (In the sense that I think it's likely to be correct, or is at least of decent quality).
On March 19 2009 09:24 Bockit wrote: Just a note about the whole Pika Chu//Pikachu situation, if you remember from Game 2 crazie-penguin was literally a penguin in all the stories, and it was the subtle things like not being able to speak, having 'wings' instead of hands that were what gave it away. Much like grabbing a gun with a tail and running close to the ground match the actions of a character with the body of a pikachu.
but having his hands behind his head to indicate the tail isn't very likely, if they were behind his back maybe
How is he going to "grabbed the gun and threw it to the side" with his hands behind his head if he doesn't have some other way to grab a gun beside his hands? Pyrr has suggested a tail and has provided a lot of supporting evidence and supporting clues to match a theme for this.
On March 19 2009 22:30 Rice wrote: also... if we're going to use the hands behind head clue, 3 Lions would be capable of disarming a person with a pair of hands behind his head.
That's a very good point, I must admit I hadn't spent TOO much time looking through the list, I mainly post when I see things which I think are wrong, such was my belief about the pikachu clues (I was against the notion that they had no plausibility). I think you'll find I wasn't advocating a lynch, just defending the clue analysis.
All that said, having done some more thinking about it, I think that it might be incorrect to assume this is a creature with 4 legs, because if it put its hands behind its back and managed to run while leaning forward, it's going to fall flat on it's face? I guess what we take from this is that there is (the possibility of) a persona who has the ability to grab things without his hands, indicating possibly extra limbs, tail, extendable tongue who knows.
These lists that Ace has come up with are very interesting, it's almost like creating detective lists without detectives. What makes them useful I guess is this concept of Propensity To Be Targetted (PTBT).
If we make a list of 7 hypothetical people, on average we have 1 mafia (rounded down) in the list. If amongst these 7 people, there is a high PTBT then that list is very quickly going to be brought down to 2 or 3 people. At which point we're looking at 1/2 or 1/3 people are mafia (That last bit is the bit I'm unsure on, while I did a decent level of maths in HS, I haven't really touched it in 4 years >_>).
I'm not sure how well this holds up, I mean, why not just break the whole thing into lists of 4 or so people and try and stack PTBT, maybe the whole thing works because it's perceived to work. Actually now I think about it, it only works if you use a small amount of these lists, otherwise you dilute the whole process and it approaches 1/5 chance of anyone being mafia again.
I'm not sure what you can conclusively draw from this, I get the feeling I'm trying to look for something like 'mafia can't really target the people on these lists because then they are exposing their own players' giving the people on these lists a perceptual protection from being targetted but I'm not sure I'm there yet.
That was a bit of a ramble but I guess see what we can do with it while we wait for the morning's clues.
On March 20 2009 00:47 Night[Mare wrote: Well at least you must have a suspect, you cant believe every player is an innocent soul.
You're right mate, i do. But that does not mean i'm going to make it public until i have at least some weak clues connecting to it.
Actually, please do post what suspicions you might have. Worst case scenario is it promotes activity, gets people posting. The more people post the more info we have to work with for behavioural analysis. And also thread activity goes up. We've had games crippled by inactivity in the past and I think we'd all like to avoid that this time round. Obviously it's still the first day/night cycle and activity is high, let's just keep it high.
On March 20 2009 10:49 Qatol wrote: Let me be clear on this, since everyone seems more confused about medics protecting the target. That is not the reasoning here. The reason I want hits called out is to avoid DTs rolechecking the targets and to avoid vigis stacking hits. The second being by far the more pressing issue.
Addressing this, and everyone worried about mafia canceling out a vigi hit:
Vigilante - You may, only once during the game, kill a player of your choice during the night. A clue will be left behind just like a mafia killing pointing to you. If your hit overlaps with mafia or another vigilante then I will cancel it and they will kill the person instead. [b]In both cases you will not know who caused your hit to be canceled and you will be able to use your hit anytime after that during the game.[b]
It doesn't matter if you call your hit out, if your target is mafia, they can't kill their own guy, your hit will go through. If your target is innocent, then if mafia kill it first, your hit is refunded. If a vigi also targets the player, one of the two hits is refunded.
I think all this discussion on the topic is pointless, there is so little to be gained from claiming your hits before hitting them player as a vigi and about as little to be gained by not claiming. I say we leave it to the vigis and focus on something a little more relevant, like, I don't know, clue/behaviour analysis. We have nearly 30 pages of posts to work with already here.
On March 20 2009 12:07 JL13 wrote: This is a good compilation of what's been discussed so far. Also, remember one of the mafia, that killed Incognito, stayed behind to make sure he was dead. That brings the total to four mafia.
1) Guy charging 2) Guy helping 3) Guy driving 4) Guy making sure Incognito was dead.
Also, there's a sentence when Chuiu describes the three men running away to the car: "He noticed they weren't leaving right away, what could they be waiting for?"
My feeling is that the "they weren't leaving right away, what could they be waiting for?" isn't a clue, it seems to me just a way to say they were waiting for Chuiu to arrive. I could be wrong but I think the other clues are stronger if the dts are all going to be clue checking.
On March 20 2009 11:44 Qatol wrote:
Since nobody else is takling about this, I will get things started: The guy offering to help Chuiu up The guy charging at Chuiu while having his hands behind his head The third guy not getting out of the car The shockwave from the builiding explosion (I highly doubt this is a clue, but it was discussed) The item Incognito finding staying lost
I think what was more important about that last clue you mention in the list, isn't the item that's lost but that once Incognito caught sight of his soon-to-be-killer he knew it was lost forever.
"He turned himself around to face the man and knew that whatever could be found was lost"
Then again, it's possible that this is simply a case of him knowing he is going to die and that he won't be able to find it.
Combining the efforts of Dreamflower, Qatol and JL13 on this recent page we get something like this:
Strong chance of being clues
Guy offering to help Chuiu up He reached out his hand as if to help Chuiu up, Chuiu grabbed his hand with a puzzled look on his face and began to get up. But then the mafia pulled him close and stabbed him in the chest. (I'd almost think Dronebabo was playing with this one sounded similar to his signature)
The guy charging at Chuiu while having his hands behind his head But while he did so the mafia lowering himself sprinted toward Chuiu and with his hands still behind his head grabbed the gun and threw it to the side
The incognito lost item not going to be found He turned himself around to face the man and knew that whatever could be found was lost
Possibly clue
Waiting around the car He finally caught up with them a few moments later as they were getting in a car. He noticed they weren't leaving right away, what could they be waiting for?
Things nobody is really willing to support as clues yet
The shockwave from the builiding explosion He got to the door just before the explosion and was caught in the shockwave.
Building crumbled in on itself Except for the explosion in City Hall. The sheriff, Chuiu, ran out of his office across the street to see the building crumbling in on itself.
So if any of the 3 dts are still unsure what to do and are looking for clues to check up on, or people to match clues to, take a look at the Strong clues just listed.
On March 20 2009 12:32 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: dreamflower, i like the idea of betrayal regarding the man that helped Chuiu up and then stabbed him. Why would Chuiu, the sheriff and hardened crime fighter, accept the help up from a criminal? It could be someone he recognized or knew that betrayed him by siding with the mafia. So we should keep an eye in the day posts for someone that kills in a deceitful way, by tricking his victims into thinking he is going to help them.
I suggested a possible clue link from the 4th mafia that stayed behind, waiting for Incognito, to the name "Lurker." It sort of fits, but I want to bring it up again so others can see it.
Also: what kind of person could run with their hands behind their head and also grab a gun and throw it to the side? Perhaps someone who is very "Versatile." It's possible but i don't think Chuiu usually writes clues like that. I'd imagine that mafioso to be hinting towards some kind of animal, like a monkey, or someone with multiple appendages.
If it helps Versatile is also synonymous with being ambidextrous. However for both their hands to be behind their head, and then grab something suggests another pair of hands doesn't it?
Yeah I agree that the clue definitely suggests some extra body part or force being used. Versatile's name just jumped out to me on the list when I was thinking about that particular mafioso.
On March 20 2009 12:39 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote: Yeah I see pikachus and lions put their hands behind their heads all the time don't you
edited to show how dumb day 1 clue analysis is. its good work you guys are doing but i don't know if it will produce any results. i'm going to sleep now.
hahah excellent point. Don't worry, eventually someone will say the gladiator link in my profile is a clue because a mafioso killed someone with a knife (oh if only MidnightGladius was playing)
On March 20 2009 12:55 JL13 wrote: Actually, I think the "whatever could be found, was lost" is the strongest clue. My brief explanation is explained on Page 28. I think it fits Chuiu's writing style, especially from last game pretty closely. Also, Incognito is helping out with clues as well, so the story is a mesh of their combined efforts.
That quote stood out to me the most and seemed the most awkward sentence throughout the story.
You're right it did stand out pretty strongly from the rest of the text. I'll just edit it around now.