Sheikah

I'll answer it but then I'll ask again that you explain why you think I'm always going for you (ridiculous), when the only two instances where I have been town I should have been going for you as you were Mafia. It's weird that you'd accuse me of having a vendetta ahead of actually being good at the game, then tell people to immediately assume any death of yours in any Mafia from now is because of me? Seems a bit childish, and silly as the rest of the scumteam are hardly likely to go with my decision to lynch you all the time. Anyway, Paul had his own Mafia going and had already announced ahead of time that he was helping out at the Olympics. So it was at least more believable than you saying you were relatively inactive for reasons X, Y and Z (all of which I have myself) after I challenged you on what I considered to be relative (to your other games) inactivity. Then you appeared to me more active, at least active enough to throw back my comments. Not saying you were lying, but Animal has more than demonstrated that idling can be a tactic so it's not wrong in the slightest to pick up on people's inactivity. EEVIL I have seen nothing in the way of strong activity in any game thus far that I have played so didn't seem as suspicious, plus with Peeps being on my suspicion list that made EEVIL appear innocent. Either way it's a silly thing to pick up on. If you go inactive, expect to be questioned. Saying 'oh but you didn't challenge that other inactive guy' is not a defence, because you still appeared inactive to me. It's like saying (albeit on a much less severe scale) you shouldn't ban heroin because cigarettes aren't banned. That's not a reason for not banning heroin.

Also in sorry, should have said.

No way all members of town would switch. No point anyway since you were Mafia so voting you was a good choice. Its up to the guy who's not with the majority to switch, everyone knows that. Getting one guy to change his mind is much easier than all the rest of town. I think you fail to understand the advantage thing by still saying town could have had an advantage. That's not what it means. It means scum had an overwhelmingly large advantage before the game even begun, I'm not talking about advantageous situations that may or may not have been if certain certain choices were made in the game.

20℅ is clearly not due to good persuasion/acting either way. Cube also admitted his reason to vote for me had nothing to do with you so there's nothing to suggest you did a good job convincing anyone! EEVIL only didn't get on side because he had such strong suspicion of Peeps and wouldn't budge. Ifs, buts. The fact is the Mafia had an overwhelming vote advantage that in most played out scenarios would have resulted in their swift victory. I don't consider Mafia to have played all too well in a game in which two thirds of the Mafia were strongly suspected in the first 2 days and in which they would have been lynched had the game been balanced. That's the only reason you think you did well; because you won. You haven't considered that if the game was balanced and played out the same way you wouldn't have. Anyway this conversation is just going around in circles, most have agreed it wasn't balanced so I'm not sure what else we can add.

I dont know if you noticed but Nintendohnut isn't really being helpful. That entire post of his was essentially telling people if he was killed off in future Mafia's then it is probably my fault. Which was incredibly silly and nonsensical to say the least. Stopped reading after seeing this. So very wrong, wrong, wrong. The fact you guys aren't seeing that the Mafia had an incredible voting advantage is slightly unnerving. Can't tell if you're being serious or troll. Yes Animal. Brilliant acting that got you 4 votes, only bested by the 5th vote for me from your double voter who really shouldn't have even been one if the game was balanced. In fact, how does what you just said make any sense? From when you actually started joining in you were hot favourite to be lynched, and the reason I was lynched and not you was down to your overpowered scum team (who made up 80% of the votes on me). Alas, I have also tried to give you advice by suggesting that the way you posted was (to me) extremely obvious. Yet you appear to be throwing it back in my face. Also interestingly you have confessed that being inactive was part of your Mafia plan. So I guess going for inactive people isn't such a wrong/stupid idea, no @Nintendohnut? Rest assured this conversation shall be cited in the future in the event you suddenly go quiet in Mafia games, @Animal

Previously when I was a roleblocker I have been told via PM that I was successful in roleblocking. He would not have been successful thus either received no confirmatory PM or he would have received nothing (ie. no confirmation of it working), I think. Maybe other hosts do it differently to Cube. In terms of Tales then working out why he wouldn't have been able to target me, he probably wouldn't have thought he was redirected because If you're redirected he would probably have been told he was sent to someone else (in my short Mafia experience, that has been what's happened to me). He probably wouldn't have thought I was roleblocked either (I remember when I roleblocked Rummy in Lego, Rummy stated that he received a PM saying he was smashed to pieces for the night, thus from what I know if you're roleblocked you can receive a PM about it too). He may well have received the information that their target couldn't be found / was protected. Or just come to that conclusion after he ruled out all other possibilities. Wrong. The suspicion might have been fluke. What followed was bad acting/hole-digging by Animal (I called him out on it, go through the topic if you don't believe me). It was painfully obvious. I would have changed my vote from Animal if he hadn't pretty much confirmed it for me. The risk didn't pay off. He could have totally made up another role and no one would have suspected him. As I said, the game ended far too soon because of imbalance, if the game was properly balanced he would have been killed because of that action. Don't feel like this was a pat on the back, the game was cripplingly unfair on town. Again I find this quite patronising: "I think your biggest issue going forward" "Don't let it cloud your judgement" "You need to be careful about how you play" Couple of things that I find sensationally ridiculous with your accusation that I always go for you @Nintendohnut: 1. I didn't gun for you here, merely questioned you. I never voted to lynch you. I'm gauging from this post that you're trying to portray me as someone with a vendetta, but if this was the case I would have pushed hard to lynch you. Note I never voted you. 2, And this is the big one - In every game I have played where I have been town, you have been Mafia. Thus, the 2 games you base your judgement on (which is bad to do in itself) that I am gunning for you, I have been spot on to suspect you. And ironically, you've just done what you told me not to. In making that post you are essentially trying to influence people in every Mafia game from now into thinking that any of your deaths is caused by me. Which makes no sense and is exactly the kind of personal vendetta thing that you just tried to accuse me of. Don't worry about my judgement being clouded either, worry more about your own.

Like I said Animal, I don't think anyone played that well (myself included) other than Tales. Although this is in part because the game was over so quickly due to imbalance. So I don't see why you're stating I wasn't that good when I never suggested that. Evidence, evidence, evidence. The game isn't all about evidence, and you can never KNOW someone is Mafioso even if you have 'evidence'. It can be false. You can claim to 'know' someone is Mafia based on clearly Maf posts just as you can if someone claims they investigated them. No one really knows until the mod confirms it. There was no luck to identifying you as Mafia btw - your posts screamed Mafia and this was not me comparing your behaviour to previous games (unlike I did with Dohnut). Look back to where I said your posts sounded Cabaret for proof of that. It was clear to me purely from this game that from both your inactivity and then the way you posted that you were Mafia. Dohnut used the very same logic to find me out in one of my very first posts in the Lego mafia. It works dude. Generally I have noticed people rely far too heavily on evidence, character judgement should really go hand in hand with it.

So we PM you any character and you create a role for it?

lol no worries. With regards to going on information, as well as evidence pointing to him I felt Animal's posts were strongly overpowering any information and sometimes you have to just analyse people themselves rather than the information they tell you.

Hey thanks @mr\-paul Cube I remember you saying that you redirected me on the night before I died yet I announced I wasn't. Once I died and was confirmed town I thought people might have realised I was telling the truth and you were lying. Shame no one picked up on that. Animal nooooo. Can't believe you didn't come to my defence even though you admitted lie detecting me that day and finding out I was telling the truth! You said you didn't want to confirm your role to avoid being killed but once I said it, obviously the Mafia knowing I was town would have no reason to disbelieve what I said. The real reason the Mafia probably didn't kill you straight away when I outed you was because you were seemingly inactive.

And that's why. You didn't see it, and if you had then then we could have started to lynch the Mafia. Character judgement is a big part of the game, a lot of people twigged Animal (his posts were quite obvious) so rather than this being 'town was retarded' as you said, it was more 'you didn't get it'. No, you weren't the entire reason town failed but the turning point that basically hammered the nail in the coffin was you not getting onside, hence me lynched instead of Animal. .Clearly not. Still find it quite funny that you are feeling pleased with yourself despite me and several others pointing out how cripplingly unbalanced this game was and still seemingly failing to acknowledge it. Taking my advice on getting it in early I see. :p Don't worry, I will interrogate anyone I deem quite inactive, as any good player should. Inactive people slip under the radar easily and you don't get much information from them, so it's important to keep on top of them. Also you completely ignored my response to you saying the Mafia steered the vote of others to lynch me! No one except Cube lynched me, the rest was all you Mafia! Shows what masters of persuasion you were.

Well done guys! Glad to see Rummy made it to the end, I had full trust in you. Player of the match.

Unfortunately you saying your target was protected (I thought to be me) as well as Peeps claiming he role blocked you said to me there was a reasonable chance that you couldn't perform your role (and coinciding with no night kill, you seemed the most likely). For me it was kinda 'lynch one of them to at least clear things up' so that even if you were town we knew at least who to gun for next. I felt like whichever one of you was town probably wouldn't be night killed that night since you were drawing potential hostility from the Mafia, so we had to get our hands dirty to get the answers. Another messed up bit of game here. I targeted myself for protection that night but Jimbob didn't see my PM so randomly (I assume) sent me to Dohnut. I PM'd Jimbob saying I actually targeted myself and he apologised and conceded that yes, I targeted myself. But it seems he didn't PM you to inform you I actually didn't target Dohnut...

It was pretty much his manner. Dohnut should know as he pretty much singled me out in my first proper game (Lego Maf) based on a single post. Once you see that post (Or posts, in Animal's case) it becomes so obvious. Tales had the belief because he role blocked Animal. I had the belief from it not being Jonnas who was scum after he was lynched and also Animal's posting style (although Tales saw this too). Paul checked me out and knew I wasn't scum. The writing was on the wall for him.

@EEVILMURRAY You were the death blow dude, Animal was Mafia and you didn't get with us. You can't argue we should have all removed our votes from a Mafioso, surely? We believed Peeps and Animal were Mafia, but Animal was obviously considered most suspicious so we went with him first. I don't see how this is in any way retarded play in any way because we were right. Also you can't have expected every person to log on and change their vote to Peeps say, 30 mins before day end, so when you saw your first choice wasn't holding most votes you could have switched to Animal if you had realised he was Mafia. Its unfortunate but that was basically the nail in the coffin. If you had gone with Animal he'd be dead, next day would have been Peeps. And I can tell you I would have voted Dohnut long before you, Tales or mr-paul.

That's not the case from most of the topics I've looked at. And obviously I was pointing out your inactivity because I was suspicious of you. Should be obvious even if I didn't say it. Also inactivity is a general thing to watch out for, the fact you were inactive is enough to suspect you might be Mafia. Please, cut the patronising act. From where I'm standing you were uncharacteristically inactive. And lo and behold, Mafia you were. You can claim real life circumstance til the cows come home, to me your behaviour was odd because you didn't say you would be inactive in advance and also when I called you out you were mysteriously able to be active. Fairly happy I picked up on this if nothing else. Wrong. I was a protector and he would have known that if he targeted me. Either way Animals posts were very Mafia, and Peeps revealed being a role blocker thus making either him or Tales Mafia. And you were quite inactive (not a good thing to be if you want to appear town). Hence why I don't think any of the Mafia played that well (along with a lot of town. As I say I think there was only one 'good' player in this short game and that was Tales. Hahaha. Look At the people who got me lynched -ALL of you guys! (and Cube who I think it's fair to say was off track). So how on Earth can you continue pretending that you skillfully steered the vote (when only one townie voted me) and not that the game was horribly unbalanced? Dohnut, from my short time here I can see you love to gloat about things. I remember you doing something like this with @Rummy before and I got the same impression. Maybe instead of trying to take credit on this one you should try gain some perspective: Picture what should have been the likely event. You guys kill on N1. You now have 4 votes out of 9 players. D2 - unlikely the tracker or cop spotted the killer (2 in 10 chance). You guys could have just made stuff up about your roles. Doesn't even matter if a town lynch happened here. N2 - kill someone. D3 - Mafia = 4 votes out of 8 players. Game pretty much won. I'm quite surprised you've made no comment on how ridiculous the setup was and how you seem to be taking the outcome as purely a measure of your 'great' play (it really wasn't). @EEVILMURRAY as I and others have previously said, you didn't get on side and were effectively the deathblow for town. Slightly surprised that you're still not seeing this. I don't think you realised we all suspected Peeps too but were also sure of Animal? We had to vote one first, obviously, and you not voting Animal to me suggests you had probably only identified 1 Mafioso while others had identified 2.

I read through quite a few Mafia topics and gauged the way you play from that. Ugh, ca'man. For the last time, I am not accusing you of lying about your RL activities. I am just saying I will never know if you are genuinely inactive for a reason or not. Therefore I will judge you by the way I expect you to act. If you don't like that then it's your responsibility to not come across as different. In fact that's part of the bloody game as a Mafioso - appear as you would normally. Don't look suspicious. Inactivity = suspicious, I don't care for the reason. There's no point trying to justify it with reasons outside of the game. It's not cruel, it's just realistic. Put it this way, suppose some player who isn't being genuine comes along and plays in a Mafia game. They get told they're a Mafioso and then tell people they'll be barely active for the next few weeks. Now their inactivity won't register on quite a few people's charts as they have given a reason. I personally don't agree with this. Again - above. I've read quite a few Mafias so I have a reasonable understanding of how you play. Which as I rightly pointed out was foolish - people don't have any concept of my style yet (maybe they do now), I've only just dipped my toes into Mafia. Well then this clearly sums up the lack of attention you paid to the game. None of the Mafiosos played well, in my opinion (Peeps and Animal outed almost instantly, only not lynched due to lack of cohesion in town - but then Town being overall ineffective doesn't necessarily make the other side good!) The game almost certainly wasn't going be won by town based on mr-paul's succinct analysis: Put short, there's no way we would have had the time (or people left alive) to analyse you all thoroughly and collate our views to put out meaningful lynches in what was always going to be a short and one-sided game. So we were always going to look like headless chickens here.

What the ginger man said.

If you want to do a Mafia I say go for it, mine likely won't be ready for 1 month+

It was based on us believing Tales and Peeps were roleblockers from what they said. You were one of the targeted, as was Jonnas, thus people believed one of you two to be the killer who was stopped. It's not hard evidence but in a short game we all kinda knew we had to act quick. Later you were posting in a way that seemed kind of cabaret villain to me so I was certain. :p Yeah. Town double voter is relatively weak compared to a Mafia one - Mafia have the power of unity and can effectively end the game a day earlier than usual, and lynch quicker than town can. For instance, if EEVIL had changed his mind and voted Animal with the rest of us the Mafia would still have reached majority on me sooner so I'd be dead.

Ayup. Probably for a small player game double voters could be left out. Still, I had fun. Still making my own Mafia at the moment, I'm creating videos for each character. This is going to take a while, I've only done a fifth of them. :p I'm expecting at least a month until I'm ready to start my game.

All of this reasoning is fine and well, but I will suspect you regardless if there is a change to the way you play. As I say, I'll never know if you really are busy or not, nor do I really care; I am a player of the game and will examine the way you behave against what I consider is 'normal' for you. For me it wasn't "Who is the most inactive" but "Who is behaving the least like you might expect them to". In terms of inactivity I have all the reasons you have too, in fact possibly more (I'm doing a very intensive PhD), yet I still manage to check the forum a few times a day. It's more or less extended periods of nothingness from a player that should trigger everybody's attention. Inactivity is a fairly consistent hallmark of a Mafioso. lol, you barely had a presence. I think such a short game is hard to win for town (especially when our double voter didn't get on side), so the result doesn't surprise me. I wouldn't say many people played well here except Tales who had it right nearly all the time. If that's the case, taking this early night end into account and everything else (mixed up roles, ability descriptions) I think it's fair to say this game was kinda weird in the way it was run and the information people were told, so I'm not sure how much we can take from this. I'm pretty sure Mafia will always opt to make a kill on night 1 (you only didn't due to Jimbob's technical error) so I wouldn't have expected anyone to entertain this possibility. Well done for Tales picking up on this being an odd thing for Dohnut to come out with though, shame we didn't pursue it. Our logic wasn't actually that bad because it DID lead us to address 2 of the people invovled in this 'roleblock and roleblockee' network - Animal and Peeps. It's just unfortunate I pushed Jonnas based on what seemed most logical. It could have quite easily gone the other way, I feel. Lastly, I'll say it's all to easy to judge if you're a Mafioso with all the information at hand.

Yeah, the thought of you using a Pokedex on women isn't going to go away now. :p

Yeah I would like to know how you were redirected. Your contradicting info there was one of the reasons I thought you might be lying scum. :p

Well you have no one to blame but yourself. Sure Peeps was Mafia, but if you paid attention you'd have noticed Animal was clearly Mafia too. Both in behaviour and for similar reasoning - he was apparently roleblocked on N1 and there was no kill. Instead of voting Animal with the rest of us you split the vote to Peeps, someone I had every intention of voting the next day anyway. Your vote was essentially wasted, and that hurts more because you had a double vote. If you voted Animal N3 with the rest of us he would have been lynched and I wouldn't. You have to pick your battles, there's no point splitting the vote if no one else is going to join in.