Mafia 29 - Looking for Players

boo bek. i vote you.

higgi --> bek

No I just decided to vote for someone who reciprocated the vote for them immediately after they were voted for. So it was between Airline or Chief. I picked Airline.

Bacon, bek gave 3 reasons for voting higgi.

1. he made us wait (bad reason)
2. he voted for himself (I think this is really part of the next reason)
3. now he'll have to vote for himself and be on record voting for someone (very good reason)

I don't know if higgi's guilty, and I'm not chnging my vote, but I don't think avoiding a deciding vote makes him innocent. In the last game when I was mafia, we won at least partially because we avoided casting any deciding votes.

Since he had little reason for his vote i'll return the favor.

Airline>>>Bacon

Dang main! I thought everyone was voting for who voted for them? Methinks I tried to keep my nose to the ground and by happenstance I still arouse suspicion! I am a townie, born and bred, mister bacon.

Higgi's excuse of not knowing the game had started seems plausible since i too was surprised that it had begun after the delay. However, (!) I can never trust higgi even though I like him.
ALLS I know is that I'm so super innocent, and was taken-a-back when bacon put me in the same list as a suspect.

Reciprocal votes in the first round are perfectly normal.
What's unusual here is that we had five reciprocal pairings, leaving Higgi the odd man out.

Procedurally, I don't think the game could advance from the point we were at - five reciprocal pairings plus one self-voter.
An eleven-way runoff at that point would be kind of a waste of time. It eliminates no one from contention, and leaves things right as they were for the first vote. At that point, it's just a redundant hassle for the Ref to say what the existing vote tally already says.
There isn't a way out of that impasse except for someone changing their vote, is there?

Airline and Chief I don't really suspect either of you, but I knew no was going to want to be the first to change their vote and I wanted to get the ball rolling. I just picked a voting pattern that eliminated the majority of the players and flipped a coin between you two.

I'm keeping my vote the same too for now.

Chief-I was surprised the game started too since there hadn't been any new posts about it. I happened to sign in and see my PM early enough to get my vote in.....so I agree it IS plausible but I would never rely on that to rule out Higgi's guilt since ANYTHING can be used as a Mafia excuse

who said anything about you being suspicious?

I always prefer it if there is a run off in the first round. I have a lot of faith in that set up and I am will to go for it even if it means putting myself in the run off. We need this for future reference.

However, if one of you guys are innocent then hopefully one of you will change your vote to someone else who at least looks somewhat suspicious? idk. just sayin'.

Bek,
I haven't forgotten last game... You left me high & dry to send my Townie ass into an early runoff. I'm not gonna Golden Rule you on that this time around, though.
I don't necessarily think you're suspicious for questioning Higgi's self-vote, which - in combination with my vote - is what's sending you into the runoff. I've got some other suspicions already represented in this runoff, and you're not one of them.

I think a four-way run-off might be better for the Townspeople than a three-way with you involved. I haven't so far as ruled you out, but I don't think you're in this runoff for the right reasons.

That being the case, I'm making you an offer.
I am comfortable stacking with you on either of the remaining intact vote pairings - HGH/EAP or Jen/Chief. If you vote for one of them, I'll vote for their corresponding partner.

If you don't want to, let me know and my vote will revert back to you.

I know you can't trust me and I know I can't trust you either. I think if we go with your proposed method, we are guaranteed at least one mafia member in the run off pool... I like it.

I'm just gonna do a random vote by moving my cursor over the list of names:

chief
jen
eap
hgh

and....................



sorry jen.

superbek>>>kdogg>>>higgi>>>jen

Oh wow the two most powerful players that i know of are already making deals?

Maybe it's a good thing.
But.......

Short answer: It's not necessarily suspicion. I wanted to give Bek an out of the situation, while preserving the effect of our votes canceling each other out. These four, paired up, were the only plausible options.

Long answer: Read on.

I just don't think Bek's who we need to be looking at just yet. Bek is in the runoff because of two voters: myself & Higgi.
I voted for Bek because that's our status quo.
Higgi voted for Bek because she got suspicious of his vote for himself - something that I find to be perfectly reasonable.

I think voting for yourself is itself more suspicious than being suspicious of someone who voted for themselves. I think Higgi deserves to be in the runoff more than Bek, to be honest... Higgi's the one that did something unusual, and Bek who questioned it goes to the runoff instead? That doesn't sit right with me.
So I had to make an offer, and by nature of being a two-way compromise would require us both changing our votes.

I had thought about suggesting we both vote for Higgi, but decided against it... I wasn't comfortable voting the same way as Bek, and it wouldn't really be a compromise if I changed my vote while hers stayed the same. So I had to brainstorm different potential offers, ones which had the effect of canceling each other out.

I thought about suggesting votes for NTRT & Jack, since Bacon & Airline have changed their votes. That offer just seemed to head back to that eleven-tie doldrums, so I scrapped that.

Stacking on Bacon & Airline would just narrow the runoff field to two, which I don't think would be the best idea just yet - more on that soon. That only left me with four players:
HGH
EAP
Jen
Chief
They were both voting pairs, which worked perfect for our purposes:
1. Let me give Bek an out
2. They were conveniently paired for Bek & my votes to oppose one another, as is usually the case when we vote each other - which wasn't one of the possible compromises.
3. It expanded the runoff field, which I think is good for the Townspeople in the long run.

At this point, I would like to recall your subsequent question:

I would not go so far as to use Bek's chosen word "guaranteed."
It does increase the statistical likelihood of having a Mafia in the runoff pool. The basic assumption is that anyone has a 1-in-11 chance of being Mafia. Having four of these 1-in-11 chances, when three in eleven players are Mafia, probably gives you your best chance of including a Mafia in the runoff pool.

More players in the runoff means more players have voting records to investigate later on. It increases the likelihood an Inspector's given name will be included for voting. I think both of these might come in handy down the road, when we've learned a few things and want to look back. It is also usually the case that we get a few rounds into the game, and someone who's been quiet will begin to draw increased attention. I think perhaps widening the net earlier on might counter this late-game problem.

Four is about the maximum runoff size I think we'll ever see... Five is not impossible, but it would involve five players receiving two votes apiece so it's highly unlikely. A scope of four players is the most we can consider at once, which is the course of action I'm recommending

And so, to honor my deal and (hopefully) with no hard feelings...

kdogg >>> Chief

I personally would be more interested in seeing either Kdogg or Bek in the run-off than Airline. I am not saying I think either of you are Mafia but considering you two are obviously working together I think it would be smart to include one of you two.

Baconus66>>>Bek