[KH-21] JOAT^2 Mafia
This game mimics Mafia Championship Season 7 as found at
https://www.mafiauniverse.com/forums/forums/69-Mafia-Championship-Season-7
The setup:
3x Mafia Goon
2x Town Jack Of All Trades (9x Doctor, 9x Motion Detector, 9x Tracker)
10x Vanilla Townie

The Jacks Of All Trades must use all three actions before repeating an action, i.e. they are rotating. This does not mean they must use the actions in the same order every time.

Players:
Lilweirdward, Vanilla Townie, killed Night 1
Torres951, Vanilla Townie, killed Night 2
Tony Maurice Vanilla Townie, lynched Day 3
Wolfpacks Vanilla Townie, lynched Day 4

ghaws, Vanilla Townie, killed Night 4

Lord MK, Mafia Goon, lynched Day 5

Ali bin Turban, Town Jack Of All Trades, killed Night 5
Velocity, Mafia Goon, lynched Day 6

Ferastical, Town Jack Of All Trades, killed Night 6

Rafay Vanilla Townie, lynched Day 7

The Warrior, Vanilla Townie, killed Night 7

Finster Baby, Mafia Goon, lynched Day 8

brewersalliance, Vanilla Townie
Lyner, Vanilla Townie
Robert2424, Vanilla Townie




Rules:
• During the Day phase, each player may speak and vote in-thread.
• If a player receives the majority of the available votes during the Day, they are lynched.
• At deadline, a player with half-majority will be lynched; tied votes will result in a player being lynched at random from among the tied players
• You may vote No Lynch.
• After the Day, the game goes to Night.
• The game thread is closed during the Night.
• All Active Roles may submit actions via PM at Night.
• The Mafia can, as a faction, kill one player at Night.
• Mafia factional kills are assigned; they display as an action to the Tracker and the Motion Detector actions.
• The mafia faction kill is mandatory.
• Mafia may communicate at any time.
• After the Night, the game goes to Day.
• All dead players (lynched or killed) can no longer participate in the game.
• Basic rules for maintaining the integrity of the game thread are in effect (i.e. players may not quote their Role PMs, nor may they discuss the game outside the game thread unless otherwise permitted, etc.)
• The game is won when only one faction remains in the game, or nothing can prevent the same.
• Mass role-claiming is allowed.

Game Days will last half as many real-life days as there are players alive.
Game Nights will last 48 hours.

Sample Role PM:

Hello, xxxxx
You are a Vanilla Townie
You win when all threats to the town are eliminated.

 

 

Rafay was lynched, as he deserved. I'm happy. Lol

he was not even scum lol

Your point?

I was just serving my own personal agenda, lol

To be fair “personal agenda” equaling “townie dying” isn’t a great look. I know you just wanted to lynch him because that’s you, but it’s not great.

 

 

Your point?

 

and also i won the game because u helped him lynch lmao

 

 

 

Rafay was lynched, as he deserved. I'm happy. Lol

he was not even scum lol

Your point?

I was just serving my own personal agenda, lol

To be fair “personal agenda” equaling “townie dying” isn’t a great look. I know you just wanted to lynch him because that’s you, but it’s not great.

But i was right about all the Scum, except ghaws.

I didn't even know someone with that name existed, lol.

 

 

 

Rafay was lynched, as he deserved. I'm happy. Lol

he was not even scum lol

Your point?

I was just serving my own personal agenda, lol

To be fair “personal agenda” equaling “townie dying” isn’t a great look. I know you just wanted to lynch him because that’s you, but it’s not great.

Wait wait, how is that not a great look on me?

I'm dead in that game and that game is over.

Yes, I did my initial vote in this game to help push the lynch along.

But that had nothing to do with this game.

So it's not a good look or a bad look, there's no "look", in fact.

 

 

 

 

Rafay was lynched, as he deserved. I'm happy. Lol

he was not even scum lol

Your point?

I was just serving my own personal agenda, lol

To be fair “personal agenda” equaling “townie dying” isn’t a great look. I know you just wanted to lynch him because that’s you, but it’s not great.

But i was right about all the Scum, except ghaws.

I didn't even know someone with that name existed, lol.

I knew ghaws was one of the scum, I just didn’t press hard enough.

 

No more nice Velocity lmao

If I know something imma use it

Sorry again about my relative inactivity. There is all sorts of stuff going on irl for me right now.

 

To address a few things that have been said today so far:

 

First off, I don’t think anyone needs to actually justify why they voted for Tony. His actions warranted the votes against him. I’m not surprised he ended up being town but he also deserved the votes he got based off of in game actions. Having said that, there probably was at least one scum in there somewhere but this would also be an easy place for the majority of scum to stay away from while town kills town.

 

Secondly, Rafay calling out the 7 people who voted for Tony and asking for justification from us all is again, ridiculous. He earned his votes.

 

Thirdly, There is very little reason why scum wouldn’t have killed on given night with the low odds of a town JOAT catching someone in the process so it’s likely that at least one of our JOAT’s uses a protective action last night. So if that was you, you probably know who at least one more townie is today. I advise sitting on that knowledge unless absolutely necessary to save that person in line for a lynch or until we’re in a LYLO situation or something.

But there's another possibility you didn't consider.

Say, 1st Joat saves a VT.

On the same night, the 2nd Joat could have used doc action on a mafia goon.

So yes, they are probably townie.

But that doesn't mean we should exonerate them completely.

 

Also there's something else that i have just confirmed with Kevin.

 

The motion detection action result message in case of a positive hit.

"Actions were performed either by or on that player"

What that means is,

1st Joat uses motion detection on player A.

 

2nd Joat uses any action on player A

Or Player A commits a kill. Or both.

Or player A is the other Joat.

 

The same message would be sent to the 1st Joat, in all these cases.

But there's another possibility you didn't consider.

Say, 1st Joat saves a VT.

On the same night, the 2nd Joat could have used doc action on a mafia goon.

So yes, they are probably townie.

But that doesn't mean we should exonerate them completely.

 

Also there's something else that i have just confirmed with Kevin.

 

The motion detection action result message in case of a positive hit.

"Actions were performed either by or on that player"

What that means is,

1st Joat uses motion detection on player A.

 

2nd Joat uses any action on player A

Or Player A commits a kill. Or both.

Or player A is the other Joat.

 

The same message would be sent to the 1st Joat, in all these cases.

Sounds interesting

It is possible that a JOAT protected a Scum but that wouldn’t block a kill anyway. Scum aren’t going to kill scum.

It is possible that a JOAT protected a Scum but that wouldn’t block a kill anyway. Scum aren’t going to kill scum.

 

I believe what MK means is that if both JOATs used a Doctor ability the same night, there’s a chance one of the JOATs used it on a person who didn’t get attacked, so without a way to check who actually saved the attempted target for kill we couldn’t exonerate either of them.

 

It would help their case, but not exonerate.

Still. Unless a JOAT comes out all that is a moot points. I lingering feeling is that JOATs won't claim unless they think they have scum. Any other information that they have that they have could eventually be lost if they find nothing concrete. So it's a waiting game with VT's stuck in the middle hoping that the JOAT's are competent.

 

 

First off, I don’t think anyone needs to actually justify why they voted for Tony. His actions warranted the votes against him. I’m not surprised he ended up being town but he also deserved the votes he got based off of in game actions. Having said that, there probably was at least one scum in there somewhere but this would also be an easy place for the majority of scum to stay away from while town kills town.

 

 

Nope. Every action has to be accounted for. We got only 4 lynch chances in this game and cant let it slide. Because of your "justification" attitude (and previously Velocity's) I'm more convinced that scum were instigators of this lynch. They got perfect excuse presented and all they needed to do was to make sure that Tony gets enough attention and his wagon starts rolling. 

About JOATs, no surprise they didn't come out. As I've mentioned before for those 3 nights they had like 20-something% cumulative chance to uncover scum. Now they have only around 35% for the next 3. We can't really depend on them.

 

 

I wasnt inactive I just choose not to vote, looked like my choice was right, so before you choose to lynch a so called inactive I suggest you look closely at the 7 who did vote first

If you're town, then you can't sit and wait for the results. You're part of investigation team. So what do you see, when you look closely at those 7?

 

So, Wolfpacks, you're not interested in sharing your insight on those 7? 

 

I wasnt inactive I just choose not to vote, looked like my choice was right, so before you choose to lynch a so called inactive I suggest you look closely at the 7 who did vote first

If you're town, then you can't sit and wait for the results. You're part of investigation team. So what do you see, when you look closely at those 7?

 

So, Wolfpacks, you're not interested in sharing your insight on those 7? 

Yeah I will just need to grammarise it lol

Yeah. ABT has a point. Considering JOAT's will only wait till its 100 % certainty to get scum, that they likely any information they'll probably never reveal till its too little to late. so we have to go off the information we do have. We have 2 of nothing much and early ending the day for no lynches and the lynch of yesterday. That is it because people are too afraid to come out of there shell. I'm one of the few willing to make some conversation and not just go for the easiest vote there ever was. The kills have to be considered clues along with the no kill last night. Its a bit naive to not look at either the wagon that formed yesterday and who wasn't one it, or the kills, or lack of kill yesterday. 

 

Everybody should have a feeling on somebody. Even if its a guess and make a scum list. In fact I would like everybody to submit one. I really don't care if you pick a name out of a hat, just give town something. You dying without you opinion being heard could hurt the town, so its in the town interest everybody dose it. 

 

 

Lyner, weren't you the one who accused brewers, Finster, me and tw of being scum? That's 4 people, btw.

 

 

 

 

Never mentioned TW directly, stop lying MK

 

 

 

Why is exactly you behave every time you are scum Which is how you behaved in the infamous greening game of tw, and we caught you even then. And you have acted like Rafay every time you are scum.

 

 

 

lol this is literally the same reaction when I voted brewers on the first day: basically OMGUS for voting you and bringing past games

 

which means you don't have actual reasons to vote me

 

 

 

 

First off, I don’t think anyone needs to actually justify why they voted for Tony.

 

 

It's not only about who voted on Tony, but also how they voted.

 

Brewers started the wagon on Tony by saying that he voted him on principle, then proceed to do nothing for the rest of the day

 

MK did the same a few posts later, later defending FB when his vote tied with Tony

 

FB also did the same

 

They voted within 24 hours of day 3 and didn't even unvote/change vote for the rest of the day. This doesn't look normal to me.

 

If I were a clueless townie I'd hate vote Tony sure, but I will only do so after I'm certain that there's no better target.

 

 

Not claiming that all 3 of them are 100% scums, but pretty sure at least one of them is scum.

Oh wow.

That's new.

Lyner telling me to stop lying.

 

Also regarding your comment that i got no actual reasons.

No one has any concrete evidence that anyone is scum, except the Joats who are pretty much unlikely to catch scum.

So all votes are more about vibes than solid evidence in this game.

 

I feel you are scummy, cause of your attempts to murk the waters, by throwing accusations left and right.

You tried to lynch brewers, that backfired.

Yesterday, you tried lynching finster that backfired.

Today, it's me.

 

If you really think the 3 of us are scum, you should be consistent.

That is, if you think brewers is scum, you should have kept on pressuring him until he either cracks or he convinces you.

Neither of that happened, yet you are not voting for him anymore.

You were convinced that finster is scum yesterday, but you stopped chasing him yesterday itself.

 

Basically, you are trying hard to lynch people, but you are afraid of pushing too hard, as you are afraid as soon as we flip town, you are going under the hammer the very next day.

Being afraid of pursuing your targets is a scum feeling,

Townies are obligated to push and not let go off their targets till they either RC or gets lynched.

 

So if you really were convinced that we 3 are scum, you should have stuck with your first target, brewers.

Not give up immediately after he pushed back.

.

 

 

But there's another possibility you didn't consider.

Say, 1st Joat saves a VT.

On the same night, the 2nd Joat could have used doc action on a mafia goon.

So yes, they are probably townie.

But that doesn't mean we should exonerate them completely.

 

Also there's something else that i have just confirmed with Kevin.

 

The motion detection action result message in case of a positive hit.

"Actions were performed either by or on that player"

What that means is,

1st Joat uses motion detection on player A.

 

2nd Joat uses any action on player A

Or Player A commits a kill. Or both.

Or player A is the other Joat.

 

The same message would be sent to the 1st Joat, in all these cases.

Sounds interesting

So Joats need to be even more careful about piecing together their leads.

I have said several times that if there were evidence of a better target than Tony I would have changed my vote.

 

Right now Lyner, you're the one acting scummiest to me.  Rafay is second, basically because he didn't vote and his reasoning is rather weak.

 

I lean towards AbT, Robert, MK, and TW as being town.  I don't have a great read on anyone else yet.

 

Kevin:  First page needs an update as to who died etc.

 

 

Rafay is second, basically because he didn't vote and his reasoning is rather weak.

 

I have no words. 

 

 

You tried to lynch brewers, that backfired. Yesterday, you tried lynching finster that backfired. Today, it's me.

 

 

How exactly did Lyners voting backfire? Did I miss something happening?

 

 

 

So if you really were convinced that we 3 are scum, you should have stuck with your first target, brewers. Not give up immediately after he pushed back.

 

 

How do you know he's really convinced, when as you say yourself "all votes are more about vibes than solid evidence in this game"? Why would someone be forced to stick with one target when each day may bring new vibes and readings of participants?

Deadline is closing and we can't end day with no lynch, so we need to start voting. Even though most probably there are scum on Tony's wagon, I think they may also hide among non-voters.

Out of them Wolfpacks look the most suspicious to me. He didn't share his reasons and all he said in his defence, was to look at the Tony's wagon instead. I asked him twice about his view on the mentioned wagon, but he's avoiding answer.

 

vote Wolfpacks 

 

Rafay is second, basically because he didn't vote and his reasoning is rather weak.

 

I have no words. 

 

Which is exactly why you're on my list.

Vote Count:

Lord MK (1): Lyner,
Lyner (1): Lord MK, 
Wolfpacks (1): Ali bin Turban,
Rafay (0):  
Finster Baby (0):
brewersalliance (0): 
The Warrior (0):
Robert2424 (0):  
ghaws (0):
Ferastical (0):
Ali bin Turban (0):
Velocity (0):

No Lynch (0):

 

Not Voting: Velocity, Rafay, Wolfpacks, brewersalliance, Finster Baby, Ferastical, ghaws, The Warrior, Robert2424,

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch or 4 at deadline.
Deadline is Tuesday, September 15 at 16:00 EDT.

 

You tried to lynch brewers, that backfired. Yesterday, you tried lynching finster that backfired. Today, it's me.

 

How exactly did Lyners voting backfire? Did I miss something happening?

So if you really were convinced that we 3 are scum, you should have stuck with your first target, brewers. Not give up immediately after he pushed back.

 

How do you know he's really convinced, when as you say yourself "all votes are more about vibes than solid evidence in this game"? Why would someone be forced to stick with one target when each day may bring new vibes and readings of participants?

Backfired in the sense, after brewers retaliated against him, people started voting for lyner.

 

He says that he's convinced we are scum.

You are saying each day we get new reads, that's true

But lyner hasn't changed his reads.

He still suspect the sane 3 people he did when the game opened.

So he still suspect all 3 of us are scum.

But he is too afraid to go after brewers and he has been unlucky with Finster.

So he comes after me.

Especially now that brewers is not active.

So the only one calling him out on his bs is just me. So he's just trying to make as much use of the opportunity he got from brewer's absence to lynch me.

 

 

And he has been convinced that we 3 are Scum right from the off.

Basically he's not convinced that we are scum

But he wants us to be.

Cause only then can he justify his hard-on for Lynching us.

Finster for his actions in brewer's game.

Brewers for tw's game.

Me for well, every single game we have played together.

 

So this is a case of personal grudges than any scumhunting.

.

Deadline is closing and we can't end day with no lynch, so we need to start voting. Even though most probably there are scum on Tony's wagon, I think they may also hide among non-voters.

Out of them Wolfpacks look the most suspicious to me. He didn't share his reasons and all he said in his defence, was to look at the Tony's wagon instead. I asked him twice about his view on the mentioned wagon, but he's avoiding answer.

 

vote Wolfpacks

This kinda makes sense.

Then again, WP always does this.

But he can use that reasoning that he always does to hide when he finally becomes scum.

Not changing my mind is simply another lie. Remember I accused ghaws for defending Brewers?

 

Also how about you actually replying to the accusation MK? Any thoughts on Brewers & FB, or more generally the Tony wagon yesterday?

 

 

First off, I don’t think anyone needs to actually justify why they voted for Tony.

 

 

It's not only about who voted on Tony, but also how they voted.

 

Brewers started the wagon on Tony by saying that he voted him on principle, then proceed to do nothing for the rest of the day

 

MK did the same a few posts later, later defending FB when his vote tied with Tony

 

FB also did the same

 

They voted within 24 hours of day 3 and didn't even unvote/change vote for the rest of the day. This doesn't look normal to me.

 

If I were a clueless townie I'd hate vote Tony sure, but I will only do so after I'm certain that there's no better target.

 

Not claiming that all 3 of them are 100% scums, but pretty sure at least one of them is scum.

FR i have 2 questions rn

 @abt what happened to the wagon against rafay?

 

@lyner any reasoning for backing down from the finister wagon?