[TW MAFIA] Western Chronicles

[ixt]

ok enough screwing around remove my exalt vote, waiting on more people to speak up. wont vote again till more speak

[ixt]

unvote exalt

[Exalt]

Last game has nothing to do with this game partner, basing your views this game off the way people were or flipped last game is a no no

Good, then I won't have to VS you all game. You're too damn hard to kill anyway.

Last game has nothing to do with this game partner, basing your views this game off the way people were or flipped last game is a no no

Don't worry, you are safe to vote for me too. I wouldn't kill you unless you are scum, and I'm not so petty that I'd go after you in a new game over the results of the last one. I just like being right, so I had to flip you at all costs, seeing as I was sure you were scum and based every night action on proving that. If I was wrong, it would've been Jessup-level bad, and I'm not about to go to that level when I don't know that you're scum this time.

[WillBy]

I'm excited for this mechanic. That is, as long as people start talking. Seems like were taking a shot in the dark here..

Couple pieces of info I'll add:
1, the second place voted is mayor, Exalt. Do you want mayor or Marshall more?
2, these elected roles are in addition to normal roles

I'd also like to discuss setup stuff here. I'm almost certain that the people who assassinated our old marhsall/mayor are the mafia, which clues us that we at least have that to deal with that.

I'd be happy to be elected either role. I'd prefer Marshall, as single handedly lynching someone is tough. Besides myself, my initial reaction is to elect good players, hoping they are town and then immune to night kills. Thinking fis and exalt, as they both promise to be active, though I'd like to hear more about their plans for Trenchville

[ixt]

jumping too fast into conclusions here. of course having such a power role as marshall in the hands of someone more experienced is a good thing, but under the pretense that we know which side theyre on. if we mistakenly elect a mafia member, they can discuss amongst themselves who they think the power roles are so they can use this critical role to trump town's cards. in short we need to proceed with caution...but to sum up the names that have popped up so far. VOTH, EXALT, WILLBY, FIS

[midoent]

should have a debate!

[RoDNeY]

I'm not sure how people are voting on anyone yet considering only half of the players have even realized the game started. I wouldn't mind being either Mayor or Marshall, the first lynch is a shot in the dark anyways and i would rather push to make sure we have town players elected instead of giving scum a night 1 upper hand.

So far i'm the only one in this entire thread to come right out and say that i'm town, also think of the statistical unlikely-hood that i would be mafia two games in a row. If we cannot decide on who is town for sure to be elected Mayor or Marshall i will gladly take one of the positions

Oh and if i am elected i will build a wall, its gunna be yuge

[Exalt]

I'm excited for this mechanic. That is, as long as people start talking. Seems like were taking a shot in the dark here..

Couple pieces of info I'll add:
1, the second place voted is mayor, Exalt. Do you want mayor or Marshall more?
2, these elected roles are in addition to normal roles

I'd also like to discuss setup stuff here. I'm almost certain that the people who assassinated our old marhsall/mayor are the mafia, which clues us that we at least have that to deal with that.

I'd be happy to be elected either role. I'd prefer Marshall, as single handedly lynching someone is tough. Besides myself, my initial reaction is to elect good players, hoping they are town and then immune to night kills. Thinking fis and exalt, as they both promise to be active, though I'd like to hear more about their plans for Trenchville

I think Mayor is better actually, for multiple reasons. Marshall seems like a glorified jailkeeper to me, and I'm not 100% sure what the best way to use that ability is. Do you jailkeep scum, or jailkeep obvious town? If scum, does that actually help town at all, aside from removing their vote for the next day? If it does land on scum, it just means some other scum player does the NK, and the jailed player gets an excuse to lurk the entire day phase. I can think of plenty of players who would love that scenario as scum. If we used it to protect town players, they lose their PR if they have one, they lose their vote the next day (meaning scum have a greater odds in lynching town), and they cannot say anything at all to help town make decisions the next day. The entire thing seems like a lose-lose to me in a lot of ways. I honestly don't know if I'd even use the action at all N1. The Bodyguard thing is nice, but the action seems unhelpful in a lot of scenarios.

Now, compare that with the Mayor. Essentially, they get to lynch whoever they want without dealing with things like No Lynches, choosing between two possible bad wagons, and trying to convince the actual town players who they should be voting for while removing the scum's ability to force a lynch elsewhere. It's easily the most powerful role possible of the two, and if given to the right town player, it's a huge win, especially with the added Bodyguard feature. If it's given to scum though, then it's possibly really bad, since you can be sure one of the best town players will die. The only thing I can think of that would stop scum from going for it is that it will bring a ton of attention to them, since they are forced to make a decision and stick with it without any excuses. That player will probably get tons of heat on them if they make a bad decision, and if that decision looks scummy, they'll likely be investigated or just lynched the next day, so it's risky. Still, I don't want an inexperienced player getting the role, because they likely wouldn't be the first NK if they are town anyway (so bodyguard feature doesn't matter to them), and if scum, they could just claim ignorance and inexperience as to why they lynched a townie, and at worst for them, scum lose a possible weak-link player that took a sacrifice to kill town's best.

I don't think we get to choose though who gets what. I'll just take votes as they come and hope for the best. If I did get Marshall, I'd have to think about how best to use the role, because I don't really know yet. At least with the Mayor, it's based on normal scum hunting and intuition, since it's pretty black and white as to what you should be doing. Marshall is more ambiguous.

[ixt]

well duh, plus whoever gets mayor will bear the burden phase 2 if they choose incorrectly

[WillBy]

So far i'm the only one in this entire thread to come right out and say that i'm town, also think of the statistical unlikely-hood that i would be mafia two games in a row.

Saying you're town is a scum move obviously.

and I think the statistical likelihood of you being scum is between 1/4 and 1/3

[Exalt]

I'm not sure how people are voting on anyone yet considering only half of the players have even realized the game started. I wouldn't mind being either Mayor or Marshall, the first lynch is a shot in the dark anyways and i would rather push to make sure we have town players elected instead of giving scum a night 1 upper hand.

So far i'm the only one in this entire thread to come right out and say that i'm town, also think of the statistical unlikely-hood that i would be mafia two games in a row. If we cannot decide on who is town for sure to be elected Mayor or Marshall i will gladly take one of the positions

Oh and if i am elected i will build a wall, its gunna be yuge

Actually, from my experience, the first player who claims to be town tend to either be brand new players (ixt last game) or scum, because town players don't tend to give a shit about whether other players think they are town, but rather who is scum. We already know you aren't a new player too.

Also... How can you explain saying this:

Last game has nothing to do with this game partner, basing your views this game off the way people were or flipped last game is a no no

with this:

I'm not sure how people are voting on anyone yet considering only half of the players have even realized the game started. I wouldn't mind being either Mayor or Marshall, the first lynch is a shot in the dark anyways and i would rather push to make sure we have town players elected instead of giving scum a night 1 upper hand.

So far i'm the only one in this entire thread to come right out and say that i'm town, also think of the statistical unlikely-hood that i would be mafia two games in a row. If we cannot decide on who is town for sure to be elected Mayor or Marshall i will gladly take one of the positions

Oh and if i am elected i will build a wall, its gunna be yuge

Are you being sarcastic, or is this a serious take? FYI:

"The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during a given period, it will happen less frequently in the future (or vice versa)."

"Gambler's fallacy is the false belief that a random process becomes less random, and more predictable, as it is repeated. This is a false belief as the odds of rolling a certain number are the same for each roll, independent of previous or future rolls."

[WillBy]

I think Mayor is better actually, for multiple reasons. Marshall seems like a glorified jailkeeper to me, and I'm not 100% sure what the best way to use that ability is. Do you jailkeep scum, or jailkeep obvious town? If scum, does that actually help town at all, aside from removing their vote for the next day? If it does land on scum, it just means some other scum player does the NK, and the jailed player gets an excuse to lurk the entire day phase. I can think of plenty of players who would love that scenario as scum. If we used it to protect town players, they lose their PR if they have one, they lose their vote the next day (meaning scum have a greater odds in lynching town), and they cannot say anything at all to help town make decisions the next day. The entire thing seems like a lose-lose to me in a lot of ways. I honestly don't know if I'd even use the action at all N1. The Bodyguard thing is nice, but the action seems unhelpful in a lot of scenarios.

Now, compare that with the Mayor. Essentially, they get to lynch whoever they want without dealing with things like No Lynches, choosing between two possible bad wagons, and trying to convince the actual town players who they should be voting for while removing the scum's ability to force a lynch elsewhere. It's easily the most powerful role possible of the two, and if given to the right town player, it's a huge win, especially with the added Bodyguard feature. If it's given to scum though, then it's possibly really bad, since you can be sure one of the best town players will die. The only thing I can think of that would stop scum from going for it is that it will bring a ton of attention to them, since they are forced to make a decision and stick with it without any excuses. That player will probably get tons of heat on them if they make a bad decision, and if that decision looks scummy, they'll likely be investigated or just lynched the next day, so it's risky. Still, I don't want an inexperienced player getting the role, because they likely wouldn't be the first NK if they are town anyway (so bodyguard feature doesn't matter to them), and if scum, they could just claim ignorance and inexperience as to why they lynched a townie, and at worst for them, scum lose a possible weak-link player that took a sacrifice to kill town's best.

I don't think we get to choose though who gets what. I'll just take votes as they come and hope for the best. If I did get Marshall, I'd have to think about how best to use the role, because I don't really know yet. At least with the Mayor, it's based on normal scum hunting and intuition, since it's pretty black and white as to what you should be doing. Marshall is more ambiguous.

Mayor is d1 only though for actions. Not really worth a debate which role is better. The real strength is bodyguards for town and investigation immune for scum.

[ixt]

lol where u get the numbers. i thought u said it yourself each game is a "clean slate". you have to PROVE that you have town's best intentions in mind, not by reasoning saying "oh he was mafia last game, he's more likely town" although its a common start to make. and of course, saying youre town doesnt instantly mean you are. but, nothing those who have spoken MYSELF, RODNEY, WILLBY, EXALT. MIDO (somewhat), FIS. those not on the list, get your grove on yo.

[WillBy]

Mayor is d1 only though for actions. Not really worth a debate which role is better. The real strength is bodyguards for town and investigation immune for scum.

Reread, mayor also gets +1 vote (traditional mayor). So that's nice too

[Missa]

My thoughts:

Ixt voting for me because he can read me easily? You insisted I was mafia the entire last game and bandwagon voted lol.. but hey, it'd probably work out because I do put an insane amount of thought into every move I make on this game. I worked hard last game to make smart votes but sure!

I'm on board with fis and lynching ixt immediately (lol)

Realistically, I'm looking towards either Voth, Rodney and his scum wall, Exalt, or maybe Undercut or Will? That's a lot of people, but they seemed to play pretty smart and cleverly last game and made good or clever moves. They seemed to play thoughtfully and smart. I'm not going to base my votes on how selflessly people acted last game because that's separate and people play to win -- but how they seem to think and reason and play the game as a whole.

It's all I have to go on thus far. Exalt was extremely analytical and thorough and I was quick to trust him and it wasn't a mistake. Im sure ixt feels the same way, considering he was all over him, too, Haha. Voth made me sweat, so I'd be interested in him if he seems town this game. I think he can force necessary actions and role claims if need be.

Rodney might he biased because his posts were fun to follow -- hopefully he can give us a reason to consider him town.

Undercut is experienced and seems logical, but is he scum this time? It's going to be hard to feel people out on day one, esepcially as a newer player, but I seemed to do just fine last game. Let's hear from some more of you guys?!