Mafia V: The Family Strikes Back [Concluded]

[Crazed Rabbit]

Vote: Seamus.

Of course, now that noone suspects me, I'll die next round. Such is my fate, I suppose.

Crazed Rabbit

[Reenk Roink]

Let me phone the Wanax and congratulate him!

[Reenk Roink]

Of course, now that noone suspects me,

No, you're still suspicious that you said that. Plus the fact that you and Xiahou have voted synonymously at least 3 rounds and maybe more... Eh? Wanax...

EDIT: Eureka! I got it. After giving ambiguous and cryptic messages because I felt that I could trust no one, I think I've found our one-two team.

CR and Xiahou have the backgrounds to be the bible killer and the Wanax (who posted a book called "Discourse to an Infidel Mathematician") in their kills.

Look at the other votes guys: Dutch_guy and Craterus are retaliation voting essentially, same with Don and Seamus. But CR and Xiahou are voting together, extremely odd in the dog eat last rounds of the Game. You know what to do villagers!

[Craterus]

I think he's onto something...

Unvote: Dutch_guy
Vote: Xiahou

They've both kept quiet and evaded suspicion for most of the game.

[Dutch_guy]

Plus, come to think of it, those bible messages do fit the profile(s). So yes, I'm unvoting Craterus, and voting Xiahou. Let's see what for reaction we get then.

Vote Xiahou

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Fascinating

[Reenk Roink]

Well fellow villagers, I have closely examined the thread and the evidence is even more damning! CR and Xiahou are like siamese twins. Aside from the three rounds already mentioned, here is the other stuff:

Round 2: CR abstained, while Xiahou didn't vote

Both didn't vote in the tiebreaker.

They were probably wanting to lay low after the first round where I called them out.

Round 3: CR and Xiahou both voted for Zal. In what would be a recurring pattern, their posts were very close together, deliberations being one after another...

Round 4: Xiahou voted for Csar, in his long attempt to get him lynched. CR layed low again, taking an on again off again approach.

Round 5: CR voted disco. Separated by only one post, Xiahou voted for Csar again (in his attempt to get him lynched since last round) but get this, he said: "disco seems like a reasonable choice".

And you know Round 6 and 7.

Coincidence? I think not...

******************************************

Now, if you'll remember villagers, the 4 people I named innocent were killed withing 2 rounds. CR apparently put a lot on this pattern.

He said "Of course, now that noone suspects me, I'll die next round. Such is my fate, I suppose"

Now, this is a pretty good strategy, claiming innocent like that and saying that he would die next round. Good to draw attention away after getting rid of any possibility of losing.

******************************************

Now, I have been in correspondence with Kommo, though I wasn't exactly sure he trusted me, so I also held back from him, and gave him ambiguous and odd statements.

He wanted me to investigate Igno and Seamus in that order, but I was lynched.

He also thought Dutch_guy a suspect.

After he went on Seamus, he told me that Igno had dropped from his list, and Seamus was the prime suspect. I concurred for his reasons, but now I see this turn of events, and I must reevaluate everything.

My suspect list:

Primes: (CR & Xiahou)

Possibles: (Seamus, Igno)

Innocents: (Dg, Craterus)

Enigma: (Don C)

We MUST lynch one or the other of this team NOW!

If I am right, and there is quite a possibility that I am, then leaving both alive this round seals the deal. However, we still have a chance to lynch Seamus (also suspicious) next round.

The call is yours, and you know what is the best choice...

[Csargo]

Hard to believe.

[Xiahou]

I'm not creative enough to be the Wanax and I certainly wouldn't look up bible passages to post with my kills. CR as mafia? Maybe, but he came up looking pretty solid after Sasaki attempted flushing him out.

I'd suggest we stick to Seamus- his normally analytical behavior has been lacking this game. Certainly lynching me would be a wasted round that we can ill afford at this point- I for one, would like to see the town win this game. If you lynch me you'd better hope we previously lynched a mafioso- if not, they're going to walk away with it.

[Reenk Roink]

I'd suggest we stick to Seamus- his normally analytical behavior has been lacking this game. Certainly lynching me would be a wasted round that we can ill afford at this point- I for one, would like to see the town win this game. If you lynch me you'd better hope we previously lynched a mafioso- if not, they're going to walk away with it.

Oh, I never said anything about letting Seamus off the hook. He is definitely with you two in the top 3 suspect list.

This is our scenario:

There is some pretty convincing evidence that you two are a tandem mafia.

There is some pretty convincing evidence that Seamus is a mafia.

Now, both cases are plausible. I would think that the connection between you and CR is stronger than the change in Seamus's behavior, but it really doesn't matter.

The fact is, the villagers have two options:

1) Kill Seamus.

If he is a mafia, he dies, and unless his partner is still alive (and super sneaky) the villagers win!

If you and CR are the mafia, the villagers automatically lose, having 1 lynch to deal with two mafia.

2) Kill Xiahou or CR.

If you are mafia, well, that's one down and one to go for the villagers win!

If you are not mafia, then the villagers have one more round to lynch Seamus or whoever else they find is mafia.

The better option is clear.

I'm not creative enough to be the Wanax and I certainly wouldn't look up bible passages to post with my kills. CR as mafia? Maybe, but he came up looking pretty solid after Sasaki attempted flushing him out.

This is the kind of stuff that goes against ya...

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Oh, I never said anything about letting Seamus off the hook. He is definitely with you two in the top 3 suspect list.

This is our scenario:

There is some pretty convincing evidence that you two are a tandem mafia.

There is some pretty convincing evidence that Seamus is a mafia.

Now, both cases are plausible. I would think that the connection between you and CR is stronger than the change in Seamus's behavior, but it really doesn't matter.

Acting together doesn't seem a plausible mafia strategy to me. I've partnered with Xiahou and we made sure not to partner too much, and Crazed didn't work in tandem with Kage in mini-mafia.

Also if you want tandem, Seamus and Xiahou both went after lurkers in a pretty big way. All three voted for you.

The fact is, the villagers have two options:

1) Kill Seamus.

If he is a mafia, he dies, and unless his partner is still alive (and super sneaky) the villagers win!

If you and CR are the mafia, the villagers automatically lose, having 1 lynch to deal with two mafia.

2) Kill Xiahou or CR.

If you are mafia, well, that's one down and one to go for the villagers win!

If you are not mafia, then the villagers have one more round to lynch Seamus or whoever else they find is mafia.

The better option is clear.

You've got this all wrong

1) Lynch Seamus

a) He was mafia, other mafia already lynched, town wins
b) He isn't mafia, one mafia already lynched, one more try
c) He was mafia, other mafia still alive, one more try
d) He isn't mafia, two mafia alive, town loses

2) Lynch Xiahou or CR

a) They are mafia. One two lynch
b) They aren't mafia, two other mafia alive, town loses
c) They aren't mafia, one other mafia alive, one two lynch town loses

This is the kind of stuff that goes against ya...

You didn't find CR's response genuine?

[Reenk Roink]

Acting together doesn't seem a plausible mafia strategy to me. I've partnered with Xiahou and we made sure not to partner too much, and Crazed didn't work in tandem with Kage in mini-mafia.

Also if you want tandem, Seamus and Xiahou both went after lurkers in a pretty big way. All three voted for you.

Um, exactly why it's popped up only recently, although there has been tacit support between both of them in the middle. It's ingenious, play it low at the start and middle, and then come out together in the end. The fact that Seamus is getting owned by this tandem is what is suspicious.

You've got this all wrong

1) Lynch Seamus

a) He was mafia, other mafia already lynched, town wins
b) He isn't mafia, one mafia already lynched, one more try
c) He was mafia, other mafia still alive, one more try
d) He isn't mafia, two mafia alive, town loses

2) Lynch Xiahou or CR

a) They are mafia. One two lynch
b) They aren't mafia, two other mafia alive, town loses
c) They aren't mafia, one other mafia alive, one two lynch town loses

Yes Sasaki, I didn't put every possible situation up there, only the plausible ones. By the way, you forgot: Seamus is actually the host, never play Mafia again and Crazed Rabbit is the detective...

Fact is, it is much more likely that CR and Xiahou are the mafia than Seamus, and we don't have a partner for Seamus anyway...

Therefore, we lynch one of them now, and decide on the other or Seamus next round...

You didn't find CR's response genuine?

No. The fact that you do says a lot...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

CR/X-man: what up? I wrote off Don's vote as an anomaly with all the dead whispering, but sheesh guys!

Well, I am certain I shouldn't be the target, so though I suspect Xiahou less than I do Don C, I'll

Unvote: Don C
Vote: Xiahou.

I freely acknowledge that this is partly to try to survive a mafia game. I've been killed in every one so far otherwise.

The "case" against me, so far, rests on a lot of subjective interpretation. I have supposedly deviated from my normal posting style. My analysis has been said to lack a "punch line." The Voting Records are supposedly crafted to "prove my innocence."

I have heard this in every game so far!

Sasaki took me to task in GF2 for not posting long posts in the early game. His baseline for comparison, my first game (CN) in which I was a silly townie until being promoted to detective later in the game. As the detective, I dumped a lot of stuff in the water in order to prepare my reveal -- and then more to defend that reveal from the town doctor who preferred me as bait instead of a live detective.

I've been told that all the voting records are crafted to make me look good. Unlike George Will, I don't edit them down to make a point. The votes are a tool to look back and match up with current trends for comparison. Where I fit the bill of "suspect" you'll see my name listed along with the others who fit those criteria.

I've had a few insightful comments, mostly picking up on the musings of others and turning them a bit for a different angle. I lacked insight with all but one or two -- out of many tries, across 4 games now. Usually, their insightfulness is only discernible during the wrap-up anyway.

If you take the time to go back across all of my games, you'll find that it's the same bloke doing the postings and the variations wouldn't get past 1 SD.

Okay Sasaki, you've poked at CR and now you've poked at me. Look for the next one on your hit parade!

I think we've done for one mafioso and that unwrapping an "enigma" will cure the second. Self defense sends me in another direction, alas.

[Reenk Roink]

The "case" against me, so far, rests on a lot of subjective interpretation. I have supposedly deviated from my normal posting style. My analysis has been said to lack a "punch line." The Voting Records are supposedly crafted to "prove my innocence."

The case against you is still there though...

Don't think you've gotten away yet. I'm a keeping my eye on you as well. You're just less of a threat than the duo, and we must act against them now, so we can deliberate at leisure who is the real mafia and be victorious!

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Um, exactly why it's popped up only recently, although there has been tacit support between both of them in the middle. It's ingenious, play it low at the start and middle, and then come out together in the end. The fact that Seamus is getting owned by this tandem is what is suspicious.

Look, there are 7 people left. 2 people voting together is what we call a coincidence. I notice you haven't jumped all over Dutch_guy and Craterus.

Yes Sasaki, I didn't put every possible situation up there, only the plausible ones. By the way, you forgot: Seamus is actually the host, never play Mafia again and Crazed Rabbit is the detective...

Why were yours the most plausible?

Fact is, it is much more likely that CR and Xiahou are the mafia than Seamus, and we don't have a partner for Seamus anyway...

No, there probably innocent. And I do have a partner for Seamus.

No. The fact that you do says a lot...

Apparently you're the only one who doesn't then. Anyone can stick bible references in a kill, assuming the mafia are even writing that kill.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

No, there probably innocent. And I do have a partner for Seamus.

Since I don't have one, that'll be a fun surprise!

[Sasaki Kojiro]

[QUOTE=Seamus Fermanagh]

The "case" against me, so far, rests on a lot of subjective interpretation. I have supposedly deviated from my normal posting style. My analysis has been said to lack a "punch line." The Voting Records are supposedly crafted to "prove my innocence."

Mine always do. This is the same subjective interpretation you've been putting your trust in, remember?
Also, Kommodus's method is Objective. Numerical.

I have heard this in every game so far!

Sasaki took me to task in GF2 for not posting long posts in the early game.

Was for lurking.

I've been told that all the voting records are crafted to make me look good. Unlike George Will, I don't edit them down to make a point. The votes are a tool to look back and match up with current trends for comparison. Where I fit the bill of "suspect" you'll see my name listed along with the others who fit those criteria.

You evoked them in defense of your innocence, it was pointed out that they showed no such thing.

Okay Sasaki, you've poked at CR and now you've poked at me. Look for the next one on your hit parade!

The fact that it took you this long to think of this possibility points to your guilt.

[Reenk Roink]

Look, there are 7 people left. 2 people voting together is what we call a coincidence. I notice you haven't jumped all over Dutch_guy and Craterus.

Voting together consistently the whole game is what we in this part of the country call a "pretty big coincidence". Just like how it was just a pretty big coincidence that OSU's coach decided not to vote in the final BCS vote...

As for Dg and Craterus, considering they were at each other's throats for half the game and it took some PM mediation to patch up their differences and face the common threat, yeah, I'm not too suspicious.

Why were yours the most plausible?

Read the thread...

No, there probably innocent. And I do have a partner for Seamus.

It's amazing how your caprice is...

Who is Seamus' partner though? He is a prime suspect, and we need to know...

Apparently you're the only one who doesn't then. Anyone can stick bible references in a kill, assuming the mafia are even writing that kill.

If your notion of everyone is you and CR and Xiahou and me, then yes...


By the way, you sure assumed I wrote the kills when you went hysterical on me...

[Reenk Roink]

The fact that it took you this long to think of this possibility points to your guilt.

You just ruined an above average (for you on your scale of course) cross with this. How on earth does that follow? What new axioms allow you to proceed with that line of argument?!

[Csargo]

Voting together consistently the whole game is what we in this part of the country call a "pretty big coincidence". Just like how it was just a pretty big coincidence that OSU's coach decided not to vote in the final BCS vote...

As for Dg and Craterus, considering they were at each other's throats for half the game and it took some PM mediation to patch up their differences and face the common threat, yeah, I'm not too suspicious.



Read the thread...





It's amazing how your caprice is...

Who is Seamus' partner though? He is a prime suspect, and we need to know...



If your notion of everyone is you and CR and Xiahou and me, then yes...


By the way, you sure assumed I wrote the kills when you went hysterical on me...

I'm pretty sure he's talking about you.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

You just ruined an above average (for you on your scale of course) cross with this. How on earth does that follow? What new axioms allow you to proceed with that line of argument?!

It certainly would have instantly occured to me had I been in that situation and innocent. Sigurd and I jump on Crazed with no evidence to see his reaction, and then Kommodus and I jump on Seamus with little evidence. You'd think he'd think of it sooner.

It's amazing how your caprice is...

Who is Seamus' partner though? He is a prime suspect, and we need to know...

I'll tell you some other time.

By the way, you sure assumed I wrote the kills when you went hysterical on me...

Aw, man, are you still upset about that? It was far too important to just let you slide by. Of course I went after you full throttle. Sure it's obvious now that you were the detective, but it would have been bade gameplay to leave you alive. At the time I gave you 50/50. I'm sure you've learned your lesson though. For what it's worth I apologize. Learn from Banquo though, he took it with a sense of humor.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

CR/X-man: what up? I wrote off Don's vote as an anomaly with all the dead whispering, but sheesh guys!

Well, I am certain I shouldn't be the target, so though I suspect Xiahou less than I do Don C, I'll

Unvote: Don C
Vote: Xiahou.

BTW, Seamus, if you really thought Don was guilty then his vote wouldn't be an anomaly now would it? It would be trying to start a wagon to get you lynched.

If you were innocent you would be just as interested in finding the mafia as you would in saving your own skin, because lynching one innocent is the same as lynching another. But you don't try to convince us of Don's guilt, you just defend yourself.

Also, did you forget this little thing from that pm a while ago?

Actually, I'm surprised that Don C hasn't got whacked. I never posted about it -- let sleeping dogs lie -- but his absence pretty well confirms he's neither mafia nor a detective. Thought he'd be dead by now.

[GeneralHankerchief]

I'm on briefly, so I'll make this short.

Obviously there is a tie vote. We need that tie to be broken (either by Ignoramus or one of this six).

I don't want to do a dead vote yet. If it's not broken I'll think of something else...

EDIT: Woot, this now has more posts than Mafia III.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Reenk, did you not admit after one game that you were playing a 'bad villager'? It seems you just want to get back at those who voted to lynch you.

As for you 'evidence' of me and Xiahou's conniving - we voted on the same person once. Is that conclusive of anything? And is that every different from comparisons of everyone else's voting records?

Why Seamus - he's come up with no suspects after all this time - very similar to when Kommodus, who shares his analytical approach, was Mafia in mafia III. His defense does not seem to be very townie-esque.

Crazed Rabbit

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I'm on briefly, so I'll make this short.

Obviously there is a tie vote. We need that tie to be broken (either by Ignoramus or one of this six).

I don't want to do a dead vote yet. If it's not broken I'll think of something else...

EDIT: Woot, this now has more posts than Mafia III.

Congrats GH. Would be more but I opted to send a ton of pm's instead.

[Reenk Roink]

It certainly would have instantly occured to me had I been in that situation and innocent. Sigurd and I jump on Crazed with no evidence to see his reaction, and then Kommodus and I jump on Seamus with little evidence. You'd think he'd think of it sooner.

Sasaki, the argument you are making here is stretching the use of a syllogism... This is how I'm seeing it:

1) It took "long" (i.e an undefined period of time) for Seamus to think of possibility X.
2) One would think that a person would think of possibility X sooner than the "long" (undefined period of time) while he did.

C) Seamus is guilty.

Not only is premise 2 extremely weak itself (the person could be stupid, slow, or thought of the possibility and not post it), but even if we accept it (which I don't), the conclusion simply does not follow.

I'll tell you some other time.

PM me and Kommodus. Give good reasons too...

Aw, man, are you still upset about that? It was far too important to just let you slide by. Of course I went after you full throttle. Sure it's obvious now that you were the detective, but it would have been bade gameplay to leave you alive. At the time I gave you 50/50. I'm sure you've learned your lesson though. For what it's worth I apologize. Learn from Banquo though, he took it with a sense of humor.

Sasaki, I am not upset about you pushing to lynch me (I'm more upset with CR, Seamus, and Xiahou for that). That should be clear with my joke "permaexclusalisted" status. What I am upset with is the way you go about interrogating people with terrible reasons. You start bandwagons, cause divisiveness, and all in all, hamper the villagers. Now, I'm not saying that you never get it right, but your getting it right is more due to the fact that you go after so many people and have better chances...

[Reenk Roink]

Reenk, did you not admit after one game that you were playing a 'bad villager'? It seems you just want to get back at those who voted to lynch you.

Um.. yes Mafia III, and I made sure to drop that...

As for you 'evidence' of me and Xiahou's conniving - we voted on the same person once. Is that conclusive of anything? And is that every different from comparisons of everyone else's voting records?

You voted on the same person 4 times. Please look at an earlier post for the "coincidence" of your votes and give me an example of a pair with voting records as similar as yours.

Why Seamus - he's come up with no suspects after all this time - very similar to when Kommodus, who shares his analytical approach, was Mafia in mafia III. His defense does not seem to be very townie-esque.

Crazed Rabbit

This really means nothing. You use labels like "townie-esque" without defining them clearly. This argument is as good as "abstaining courteously is the perfect cover for the Mafia". We simply don't know what you mean...

Now please listen, I certainly have my suspicions on Seamus, but the fact is, that we have one more round to get Seamus, but must act this round to get your tandem.

I tell ya what, Vote: Xiahou, and you will have a bit more credibility in my eyes...

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Sasaki, the argument you are making here is stretching the use of a syllogism... This is how I'm seeing it:

1) It took "long" (i.e an undefined period of time) for Seamus to think of possibility X.
2) One would think that a person would think of possibility X sooner than the "long" (undefined period of time) while he did.

C) Seamus is guilty.

Not only is premise 2 extremely weak itself (the person could be stupid, slow, or thought of the possibility and not post it), but even if we accept it (which I don't), the conclusion simply does not follow.

Of course it doesn't follow, I'm not concluding he's mafia from that. I'm concluding it from lot's of things.

PM me and Kommodus. Give good reasons too...

Kommodus knows all about it :p

Sasaki, I am not upset about you pushing to lynch me (I'm more upset with CR, Seamus, and Xiahou for that). That should be clear with my joke "permaexclusalisted" status. What I am upset with is the way you go about interrogating people with terrible reasons. You start bandwagons, cause divisiveness, and all in all, hamper the villagers. Now, I'm not saying that you never get it right, but your getting it right is more due to the fact that you go after so many people and have better chances...

Ah ok. Well that's my method in a nutshell. Most of my wagons have terrible reasons and I'm not ashamed to admit it ("CR is mafia. Lynch him" anyone? :D ). But it works and I'm a firm believer in it. Consider this: The mafia won all 4 of my games, as well as Mafia I where I was not playing. Now I admit my wildness causes mass confusion, I confuse myself all the time, but from confusion comes knowledge. And yeah, I'm wrong as often as I'm right, but at least I'm right eh?

Glad to here that was a joke I thought I'd actually upset you

[Reenk Roink]

Ah ok. Well that's my method in a nutshell. Most of my wagons have terrible reasons and I'm not ashamed to admit it ("CR is mafia. Lynch him" anyone? :D ). But it works and I'm a firm believer in it. Consider this: The mafia won all 4 of my games, as well as Mafia I where I was not playing. Now I admit my wildness causes mass confusion, I confuse myself all the time, but from confusion comes knowledge. And yeah, I'm wrong as often as I'm right, but at least I'm right eh?

Well, that's certainly an...interesting...strategy. Still, I just want to point out that GH's Mafia games are the toughest for the Mafia to win, because of the setup. No special roles besides the Mafia and the Detective make it much simpler. The only one that the Mafia won was the first one (with the least people and no detectives). The fact that the Mafia actually got this far with 31 people is quite amazing, but I'm resolved to steal their thunder.

Glad to here that was a joke I thought I'd actually upset you

[Crazed Rabbit]

You voted on the same person 4 times. Please look at an earlier post for the "coincidence" of your votes and give me an example of a pair with voting records as similar as yours.

Four times? Are you counting abstaining as voting for the same person?

Well fellow villagers, I have closely examined the thread and the evidence is even more damning! CR and Xiahou are like siamese twins. Aside from the three rounds already mentioned, here is the other stuff:

Round 2: CR abstained, while Xiahou didn't vote

Both didn't vote in the tiebreaker.

They were probably wanting to lay low after the first round where I called them out.

Round 3: CR and Xiahou both voted for Zal. In what would be a recurring pattern, their posts were very close together, deliberations being one after another...

Round 4: Xiahou voted for Csar, in his long attempt to get him lynched. CR layed low again, taking an on again off again approach.

Round 5: CR voted disco. Separated by only one post, Xiahou voted for Csar again (in his attempt to get him lynched since last round) but get this, he said: "disco seems like a reasonable choice".

And you know Round 6 and 7.

You insult my intelligence if you think I would play so foolishly. You cite a few rare instances of us posting near the same time as guilt. Do you think I'm some noob who would post so near to a mafia partner?

Now please listen, I certainly have my suspicions on Seamus, but the fact is, that we have one more round to get Seamus, but must act this round to get your tandem.

If seamus is one of two mafia left and we don't kill him, we lose. We don't really have one more round to get him if we lynch Xiahou - you insist he and I are a team and will urge my lynching if Xiahou gets lynched and I'm still alive. With your plan the town loses. It's pretty clear both Seamus and Xiahou aren't mafia, so lynching both of them gives mafia the win.

I tell ya what, Vote: Xiahou, and you will have a bit more credibility in my eyes...

Maybe he's mafia, but I think Seamus is more likely to be mafia, and I'm sticking with that.

Crazed Rabbit