I liked being sleepy, brutally murdered in his sleep was how he always wanted to go.

As for Kurupt, I think the mafia pushed the bandwagon (HC especially) and some townies were a bit silly in jumping on. Standard mafia tactics when given that kind of situation, Kurupts playstyle is always the same and if you're going to lynch him you need to have a better reason than just playstyle.

When HC gets back from his flit to Europe I want to know why he suicided. Couldn't see how I could win from that point!

BTW, Jozline, I really did drop out of the discussion because I got sick and lacked access. But it was pretty damning.

good game.

yay go town!
jozline: haha sorry, i was sure you were the other mafia hehe, and I promise I wasn't trying to be difficult. I honestly thought you were ignoring things i'd said.

HC, if you investigated him for defending James, why would you not have looked at me instead? LP made one comment and I brought it up a few times, apparently enough that both tick and lp thought I might be a scumbuddy of hers trying to cover for her.

Most of the confusion arose from you saying that. I thought you were referring to the typo thing, as that was all i could think of from happening on day 1. you said it wasn't but then seemed to imply you were referring to the 'scottish man' thing whjatever that is. But that only happened on day 2, so i didn't see how that could have any bearing on peoples night choices from night 2.
You seemed to be deliberately not understanding those so I got more suspicious!
well done lp not investigating me!

I can understand HC's suicide from a tactical perspective. He was definitely going to get lynched, and by cutting it short he avoided having to explain his actions, i.e why he didn't find james suspicious, and it also meant james didn't have to risk putting or not putting a vote on. HC's suicide effectively ruled out any analysis of the lynch, i.e who did and didn't lynch. It was inconsequential in the end, and james was screwed unless LP investigated me.

Hehe, it's ok Tick, I knew either you had to be mafia, or we were just not communicating well at all. I was actually talking about a few things, taking up for the typo thing, and also just being seen as generally buddying up to her. I probably got muddled a bit there and said something off. (Sometimes I confuse myself) But yeah, we just weren't getting each other at all

Thanks for a great game Mono! Despite 2 suicides in this one, it was still very enjoyable. (Yes, I do agree that HC's suicide was tactical, but still, suicides kinda suck. That one not so much, as it was for game reasons,not just emotional dwarfism)

I am all for reinstating the blacklist if this keeps happening. That's twice in a row he's done that and it's very annoying and childish, and it really can throw a game off badly. I also, as I've stated in game, think that not voting him because he always acts like an ass is a bad way to go, Lacero. It just means that he can always be like this, and never be accountable for anything he says in game, and when he is mafia, we'd all be 'not voting' him because he's sus, when he really is!

LP did damned good with rooting out the baddies, did he not? Geesh, you go boy! I'm glad that my protection Night 1 kept you alive to do that for us, your investigations were really crucial in this game.

Great game guys

Hey, thanks for protecting me Night One, Joz'! Looks like HC was gunning for revenge after all! Missed me!

Mono: I actually investigated Jozline Night 3, and was told she was a good guy, rather than investigating James and being told she was a bad guy, as you've reported up there.

James : I think you might have been in a better position on Day Three if you hadn't killed on Night Three. I would have known that one living player was innocent, but there would then have been two players left, and you might've been able to convince us to lynch the other one.

However, if I'd targeted the same player as you did, then my investigation still wouldn't have helped. So it was a gamble, it didn't work this time but it might have.

Whenever a Townie suicides I see it as sign that they're really frustrated, and it makes me Sad This can be a bloody frustrating game, true, but there's no point taking it all that seriously.

I think the set-up might've favored the Town a little heavily. With the set-up being completely open the Mafia didn't have much room for role-claim shennanigans. I might try running a similar vanilla game in which the players are told what roles might be present, but not guaranteeing that they are.

Jozline:

I am all for reinstating the blacklist if this keeps happening. That's twice in a row he's done that and it's very annoying and childish, and it really can throw a game off badly. I also, as I've stated in game, think that not voting him because he always acts like an ass is a bad way to go, Lacero. It just means that he can always be like this, and never be accountable for anything he says in game, and when he is mafia, we'd all be 'not voting' him because he's sus, when he really is!

But if he does it all the time it won't help him when he's mafia, and just because one person's mafia play looks like that doesn't mean Kurupt's does. As long as he's trying to win (and the self vote does says no to that) his playstyle is his business, IMHO.

Of course it's his business, but that doesn't mean I have to refrain from voting him because it's his playing style. Just as it's my business that I will vote him every time he acts that way. He's acting suspicious all the time. My point is that if we do as you suggest, and never vote him for acting suspicious, he can act that same way as mafia and never get caught.

I don't get where you say if he plays like that all the time it won't help him as mafia. That only works in my scenario, where I vote him for acting that way. It doesn't go along with your idea, that I can see. Please expand this reasoning?

I don't think it was unfairly balanced in favour of the town.
If the mafia had made a kill night 1 it could easily have gone the other way, likewise if you hadn't investigated h.c.
THe game was always going to be a short one, and I think it could just have easily gone either way.

I might just put on record now that in future games if Kurupt does play, and plays anything like that, I will not hesitate to put a vote on him, regardless of whether I am townie or mafia or think him to be townie of mafia.
I will vote him, it will not have ny bearing on my allignment and I apologise in advance if it is bad for the town, but It has to happen.

ok, my point of view is that limiting the available play styles to "the same as everyone else" is bad for the game. The lynching of whoever stands out on day 1 has historically led to long day 1s with little play. But yeah, it's hard to argue this now cos I end up arguing in favour of Kurupt and he just voted for himself while a townie.

Specific cases aside, I don't believe that a proactive style on day 1 is automatically suspicious, there are many other ways to manipulate the town than just sitting back and subtly dropping hints and it unecessarily limits our game if we react to them by killing them.

This is an interesting discussion - I agree with Lacero that people shouldn't be (and, whether you like it or not, aren't) confined to a cookie-cutter "correct style". That said, "it's just my style" is not a winning argument. It's perfectly acceptable to pressure someone IMO for their posts even if they have a track record of those sorts of posts if the play is still anti-town. Detractors will say "but he has played that was as town, so his style isn't a reflection on his role!" No, but it *is* still helping the mafia if, for example, the play-style sows confusion or fails to help.

Contrived example: Player A is just incredibly abusive with his posts, and doesn't participate in discussion at all. His track record has shown him doing this 5 times as town, 2 as mafia. Next game, he does it again. Should he be pressured and possibly lynched for it Day 1? Damn right he should.

The town punishing proactive play on Day 1 is a separate issue IMO - that's just a self-reinforcing strategy that stems from collective nervousness, and everyone needs to counter-balance it with some lurker hate

As for Kurupt - I believe anyone can learn, and I hope that in this game he simply got frustrated. I'm not ever going to set some benchmark for eligibility to play (though this doesn't discount the possibility of Invitationals at some distant future point), but all I ask is that people do their best to win for themselves and the team, and learn from their mistakes.