Am trying my best to crack the game dynamics in such a way that might give us a fighting chance.

My exploration starts with the idea of me and Matt being in Scum cahoots - this would also be a bold play by us as not only would we be linked in suspicion but also if one of us flipped Scum the likelihood of the other being droid’d next would be quite high.

So along with a quieter than usual player being a good saboteur suspect, I think players who are minimising interactions may make for good agent suspects.

Like @The Jabbawookie !!!

Matt maybe you can point out the similarities to GNIPS scum game in this one while we wait for BW?

So yeah good idea. I think yesterday when I initially accused him he seemed to react excessively to every point and then diverted to someone else. Not that they were not valid necessarily but they just kept coming [red flag in my book]. Same thing happened last game in our Google doc once we had pretty much pegged him as scum.

I know this could sound silly but it was too passionate of a defense then warented at L-4 and reality L-5 people wise since I was the only vote.

1 hour ago, Matt3412 said:

So I'm gonna

##vote @GhostofNobodyInParticular

For what I said yesterday and my new speculation about BW not throwing shade at you[gnips]

However I realize this really cant be defend by GNIPS so I'm gonna ask @Bertie Wooster why he thinks GNIPS is a good fellow.

When I say shade I mean something I interpret as a willingness to actually vote for said individual. not just a maybe. Clearly opinionated on my end

Sorry, I am still kinda salty about switching my vote to Visovics. So I don't want to respond or vote in anger right now.

Also, I kept changing my mind about people on Day 1, so I want to think a bit more today before I speak.

Does anyone want to join a therapy group for "town who accidentally killed innocent people in Mafia"? LOL

I am not actually depressed by the way. I'll be good in a few hours.

37 minutes ago, Matt3412 said:

So yeah good idea. I think yesterday when I initially accused him he seemed to react excessively to every point and then diverted to someone else. Not that they were not valid necessarily but they just kept coming [red flag in my book]. Same thing happened last game in our Google doc once we had pretty much pegged him as scum.

I know this could sound silly but it was too passionate of a defense then warented at L-4 and reality L-5 people wise since I was the only vote.

As far as last games concerned, I would remind you that 1) I was doing everything I could to save my severely threatened hide, 2) I was both seriously concerned and correct about LTD being the SK, in a town which believed it had only scum left. I was trying to convince you of this fact and have you take out a mutual threat.

That is not the case here. I was not in serious risk of being lynched, and I had a valid read. Since I very rarely have those, I stuck with it (which may seem overly aggressive to you).

Others can attest to the fact that this is how I regularly respond to accusations and go after reads.

11 hours ago, Caldias said:

So two Imperial agents, but they don't know each others' identities. Only the agents know who the saboteur is, but the saboteur doesn't know who the agents are. And of course no night means no night chat.

There is three agents + a Saboteur

1 minute ago, Matt3412 said:

There is three agents + a Saboteur

Ah, I actually read that as the Saboteur being included as one of the three imperial sympathizers. Could be the way you say, though.

There are 11 of us to begin

From LTD opening post

On 10/7/2018 at 6:07 AM, LTD said:

Smuggler

You are one of SEVEN of Talon Karrde’s loyal smugglers – the rendezvous location must be kept secret, and the base location hidden, even if it means the Irrepressible Optimism can never be repaired and you all die in the cold vacuum of space.

7 are town as the post says

1 only is saboteur

3 agents

=11

Cool, thanks! Looks a little tougher than I originally thought, then.

19 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

That   is not the case here. I was not in serious risk of being lynched, and I had a valid read. Since I very rarely have those, I s  tuck with it (which may seem overly aggressive to you).

This feels reasonable to me. Frankly, I’ve been kind of taken aback by the intensity of suspicion on GNIPs by Matt.

GNIPs made, to my mind anyway, the only reasonable case against someone when we were all grasping at straws. Somehow that makes him scummy? I dunno...

I mean really, he was called out for not saying enough, when on the other side we had people literally playing games to the point of Mod frustration. And mine, too, frankly until I really thought through the logic of scum trying to use that to sort out potential alliances. Are LP and Matt “in cahoots”?

If one or both are scum, that’s definitely too strong a word as only one of them knows for sure. But it would be a dam n smart way to start sussing that out.

My test for Matt was if, after returning LPs vote today, he’d show any interest in pursuing LP (as he hinted he would once suspicion turned towards him.) Instead, he’s staunchly stood by him and continued his attack on GNIPs.

So, just to be clear, my current operating theory is that LP is the saboteur and Matt knows it and is helping protect him.

If this is the case, who are the other two allies trying to protect LP — either directly or through obfuscation and distraction?

Gengis i admire the fact that you think me and LP are pulling off a stunt as grand as this.

I'm honestly trying to sift through unknown disaster we have found our selves in and show my work as best as possible.

Sadly I am but a lowly smuggler enticed by gambling and the chance to make some quick credits.

secondarily if i believe that it is very unlikely that LP is the saboteur why would i continue to press him if in order to win we need to figure out the one saboteur i'm going to spend my effort looking elsewhere as long as i feel comfortable with our vote lead we.

To clarify i definitely believe that one of the other 8 people alive are that saboteur over LP right now.

12 minutes ago, Matt3412 said:

secondarily if i believe that it is very unlikely that LP is the saboteur why would i continue to press him if in order to win we need to figure out the one saboteur i'm going to spend my effort looking elsewhere as long as i feel comfortable with our vote lead we.

To clarify i definitely believe that one of the other 8 people alive are that saboteur over LP right now.

But perhaps you say that because you KNOW LP is the Saboteur!

Imperial Scum!

Just now, clontroper5 said:

But perhaps you say that because you KNOW LP is the Saboteur!

Imperial Scum!

oh god guys what do you honestly think is more likely, its great cover for scum to accuse me at this point them probably laughing about LP Not being the saboteur

I don't think its MORE likely, but I also don't think it's less likely, due to the complete lack of information any of us have, except the scum. Therefore anyone that claims to know much of anything gains my suspicion, simply because only the scum actually know anything. The rest of us are in the dark

i agree, i mean i will vote for him if that honestly takes you believing me. though i'm just disappointed if that is where we are looking right now. and who knows he might be agent so that is still a win.

22 hours ago, Bertie Wooster said:

Agents know who the saboteur is. That's about it.

Matt trying so hard to protect LP looks suspicious to me because you don't know who anyone is, unless Matt is an agent and LP is saboteur. If LP is town, I will have a hard time guessing on Day 2. But I think LP is scum, more likely than not.

I agree, it looks like he is working pretty hard to protect him.

22 hours ago, Matt3412 said:

I'm defending LP because all the reason you think hes scum I've done as well that's a slippery slope to me getting mislynched.

Also I do agree with the vis analysis but I don't like that gnips started the first train that's why I'm staying for now.

LP is slippery due to his unique brand of cheekiness that he exudes. Looks like we only need to vote the saboteur off, and with this being the best lead on a busy day, I will

##vote @Lord Preyer

at least until something else turns up. Will review further to see if there's anything else that might stick out this evening.

##unvote

##vote @The Jabbawookie

This LP thing is going to be interesting to see play out.

{Ok, I'm going to be travelling the next 24-36 hours (look for me on MOTF in a few days time! Woot!) so I will only be on my phone and limited at that.}

1 hour ago, Gengis Jon said:

This feels reasonable to me. Frankly, I’ve been kind of taken aback by the intensity of suspicion on GNIPs by Matt.

GNIPs made, to my mind anyway, the only reasonable case against someone when we were all grasping at straws. Somehow that makes him scummy? I dunno...

I mean really, he was called out for not saying enough, when on the other side we had people literally playing games to the point of Mod frustration. And mine, too, frankly until I really thought through the logic of scum trying to use that to sort out potential alliances. Are LP and Matt “in cahoots”?

If one or both are scum, that’s definitely too strong a word as only one of them knows for sure. But it would be a dam n smart way to start sussing that out.

My test for Matt was if, after returning LPs vote today, he’d show any interest in pursuing LP (as he hinted he would once suspicion turned towards him.) Instead, he’s staunchly stood by him and continued his attack on GNIPs.

On the one hand I’m flattered that you think playing Pazaak after midnight was my way of communicating with Scum. Moriarty levels of evil genius there.

On the other hand - arrrrgh! I implore both you and @caldias to think about this please from Occam’s perspective: how likely is it that this is a devilishly fiendish ploy by me/Matt versus how likely is it that it is to the Scum’s advantage to keep bringing this back to me so that they remain unexamined! Am pretty sure in Mafia, the Scum is usually less grand plan, more exploit-Town-trains!

21 minutes ago, Matt3412 said:

i agree, i mean i will vote for him if that honestly takes you believing me.

Matt, I’m confused. Why do say this — that you’ll vote for LP — but then suddenly start a train on Jabba?

I will but I would rather explore other options