I'm sorry to hear that. :(

I completely agree. I could have done a better job with more time or experience, but those were resources I didn't have. In fact, our team was quite inexperienced overall, except for Lonzi. After her RL interfered we had to do our best against several more experienced players. And that was when experience really mattered most.

Oh well, I'll chalk it as a learning experience. So at least I'll be better prepared in the future and I believe GR and Carradice will too.

It's a burden, but I'm willing to bear it.

flubbbbbb!!!

My bad as well...I thought you were trying to sneakily change the NK without a consensus....so sorry for that.....you were a smart cookie and I should've went with it.

Flubba-lubba-dub-dub!
For what it's worth, I very much enjoyed the standoff between us. When you claimed, internally I went "Ah, so it's come to this, old friend?".

half a point deducted for misnaming Lonzi's PR.
(Nice bragging rights guess. Hats off to you)

Well you know me and my penchant for standoffs fated to end in tragedy :)

There is a matter of the game (any game) relying on participants accepting a social contract to exist and function properly. In a social contract there might be hard-coded rules, plus many other unwritten ones, plus mores (as you know, norms that have not the strength of a law but are expected behavior, and their breach will offend most people) and, finally, custom. There has been talk of a cultural clash. Surely in big communities that are like the Tinder of mafia, there is never scarcity of new people to play with (or to ignore). A more closely-knit community necessarily will have different values, or would have not survived. As you know, values are the engine that shapes the set of norms.

Dealing with clash in values and mores (and, depending on the set of rules, the laws) only with in-game tools necessarily distorts the game. In this case: You (for example) vote for X maybe for one or two reasons: to punish anti-game behavior (anti-community behavior, if you like), and/or to punish anti-town behavior. There is the solid logic that, if you are not sure about who is scum, you are better off by voting the guy with anti-town behavior. Then X automatically votes you, as he always seems to be doing. Then someone else who empathizes with X’s line of play sees you as scummy. For a very wrong reason. Or you take the other way, like ZFR did, and firmly decide NOT to punish the anti-game behavior with in-game tools, nor to punish the anti-town behavior because you decide that it is not going to be AI, which means in the end you are buying the meta that is being sold here, and giving a free pass for practically anything. In the end, giving this free pass only encourages said way of handling themselves in the game.

A useful analysis, but I'm not only using in-game tools. By stating my view outside of the game and stating my intentions should someone try this again I am not restricting myself to in-game tools. I would like to think my out of game statement would have a discouraging effect and make use of in-game tools unnecessary. Whether that ends up being the case is in other people's hands in the end.

Indeed. A useful action. The comment above had the intention of going into it further and yes, show support. The word “only” was emboldened just because it would have been easy to miss otherwise.

I make your words mine as well. I don't know when I will be playing again despite wanting it to be soon, but I am stating right now that I'll be voting anyone that plays like Lazak on the principle that this should be a fun game for everyone and this kind of playstyle harms that fun.
Second, someone that makes victory harder for your team is the best example of a bad player I can think of. Despite his claims that he won the game for Town anyone with a brain knows he actually lowered Town's chances by making the cop waste a shot and by causing the cop to basically out herself in time for the scumteam to take her out before the claim. They only didn't do it because of their own troubles and it wasn't something Town did, so it's not like he can claim credit for it.
Third and more important, said playstyle is chosen by entirely egotistical reasons — at least in Lazak's case — so I'm all up for discouraging it.

1. I didn't force Cristi to use her shot on me. Town choosing to be arrogant and not defer to her experience is what forced her to use her shot, which wasn't wasted btw.

2. While Lonzi was correct about the power distribution, her logic wasn't anywhere close to being flawless.

3. My playstyle was certainly selfish, but that doesn't excuse the rest of town's incompetence for continuing to tunnel me and Scene on D2. Meanwhile scum were picking daisies off my wagon...

-----------------

I deserve heat for the way I played, but I was not the worst player in this game by a long shot.

This. Thank you for the nice compact summary!


Flub, I've always enjoyed the games we are in together.
TBH, I haven't finished reading the game. I stopped no later than 950, and was only skimming everything between EOD1 and then (mostly the flavour). IRL has been a real drag. Who won?

All the same, Thanks, Joe, for hosting! I enjoyed the flavour!

I'm sorry, @Lonzi that you don't feel like playing with us again. I do wish you'd change your mind and try again, but that is up to you. In any case, please continue to drop by once in a while to say hi, even if you don't play with us.

In this particular case, I would suggest you to read the game thread until the end of D2. Then jump to the mob thread and read until the end of N-2. At that point you can go back to the game thread and see how D-3 unfolded, then go back to the mob thread. Or you can keep reading in the mob thread to the end.

YMMV, but I think you will get a better appreciation of this game this way. If you cannot bring yourself to read all that, then just go and read N-2 in the mob thread (a.k.a. the scumchat).