Mafia 86 - mafia.gif - Game Over!

[farside22]

Armlx seemed very pro-town to me, and such is this case that I usually turn the other way - so I figured I'd ensure that he was on town's side. I'd intended to investigate BA, but changed my mind at the last minute.

The first statement is horrilbe reasoning. You get a town feel but want to verify. Uhhhh No. Second is you thought BA but decided Tar for what reason exactly? A last minute change should have a better reason then none. Tar was pretty town in my read through so I really don't see a reason to investigate him.

[ShadowGirl]

No, I thought BA first then changed it to armlx. I explained my reasons for Tar - I couldn't read him and I saw a link between him and Sierra in post 396. Alright, I'm typing up a larger post at the moment, which should be up in a few minutes.

[ShadowGirl]

Being lynchable does not make you town. Having not breadcrumbed in a past game does not mean we should let that part of a claim go.

Did I ever say anything of the sort? As far as being 'lynchable', it was 'partially' bad play on my part, in the sense I was more concerned of making it through to the next day. And hopefully in that time as we purged town of scum, I would get some useful results. Do you think I'm happy that my results aren't useful?

Dont pro-town players usually get, you know, nightkilled? Also as I have pointed out before, you had similar thought processes on Stef-Tajo as BA.

What about yourself, LF? I don't believe I've played with a game with you where you were town where you didn't get NKed. (Other then when you were scum.) And I've explained the 'similar thought process' thing in the post above. He wanted to eliminate suspicion.

So you investigated Tar based on interactions with Sierra who as far as I can tell you never got a single read on?

Correct. I inspect people based on my gut, and whom I can't get reads on. (As well as people whom I think are trying to look 'too town'. Not usually a reasoning I want to pull out, but does sometimes lead to something.)

What about how nearly everyone was in agreement that a vig should kill BA? Did that just get ignored?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't our vig claim on today, not yesterday? I don't think you can bring up the plan to exterminate him if it didn't happen at the time.

Investigative roles should ALWAYS get a result. It helps the player with any insanity issues they might have.

As far as 'not getting a result' I was basically just told

to go look at the thread

and see his alignment there, which I consider not getting a result.

I consider that as not technically getting a result, but being told to go look at the front page and seeing him show up as town - I guess you could say I got an innocent on him. That's what I could take out of the PM I recieved.

So you would get a guilty on any Jap mafia, and Greek mafia and the SK? If it is a 4-4-1-1 setup and you got guilties on all mafia, that would make your role so unbelieveably powerful, especially with the watcher and doctor that it just isnt feasable. Maybe, maybe if this was faction specific it would be believeable, but it isnt. So it isnt.

I would think it'd be the opposite. Wouldn't knowing the exact faction be more powerful, say, to perhaps help us out in a case like this where we want to erase one faction completely? But to answer your question, yes, I would get guilty on them.

And if anyone decided they are going to hammer me, I'd like a last word, okay?

[massive]

I'm confused about why you would have changed your Night 1 investigation away from BA, but then came out swinging at him the morning of Day 2.

[ShadowGirl]

I still thought he was scum, so why wouldn't I want him lynched?

[ShadowGirl]

And that is, well, one way of knowing his alignment... That way I wouldn't have to inspect him the following night.

[LlamaFluff]

Being lynchable does not make you town. Having not breadcrumbed in a past game does not mean we should let that part of a claim go.

Did I ever say anything of the sort? As far as being 'lynchable', it was 'partially' bad play on my part, in the sense I was more concerned of making it through to the next day. And hopefully in that time as we purged town of scum, I would get some useful results. Do you think I'm happy that my results aren't useful?

Im a little confused here, it sounds like you are saying that you intentionally played slightly scummy so you would not get NKed and hope results or claim saved you when people finally decided to lynch you.

Dont pro-town players usually get, you know, nightkilled? Also as I have pointed out before, you had similar thought processes on Stef-Tajo as BA.

What about yourself, LF? I don't believe I've played with a game with you where you were town where you didn't get NKed. (Other then when you were scum.) And I've explained the 'similar thought process' thing in the post above. He wanted to eliminate suspicion.

Did you just imply im scum because im alive day four? This also in no way defends against the logic of investigating someone that you find pro-town.

So you investigated Tar based on interactions with Sierra who as far as I can tell you never got a single read on?

Correct. I inspect people based on my gut, and whom I can't get reads on. (As well as people whom I think are trying to look 'too town'. Not usually a reasoning I want to pull out, but does sometimes lead to something.)

Actually why did you not go back to BA here? You found him suspicious given how D2 played, yet you did not investigate him despite that and the suspicion of him on N1. Also why did Tar-town mean Sierra-town? Why Tar over Sierra?

What about how nearly everyone was in agreement that a vig should kill BA? Did that just get ignored?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't our vig claim on today, not yesterday? I don't think you can bring up the plan to exterminate him if it didn't happen at the time.

Most people were saying the vig should kill BA. Investigating someone in a three way tie for deadline lynch is a great way to get your investigation target killed. EA didnt claim untill today but there is no way I would of tried to check a player I saw as vig bait when it was apparent there was one out there.

Investigative roles should ALWAYS get a result. It helps the player with any insanity issues they might have.

As far as 'not getting a result' I was basically just told

to go look at the thread

and see his alignment there, which I consider not getting a result.

I consider that as not technically getting a result, but being told to go look at the front page and seeing him show up as town - I guess you could say I got an innocent on him. That's what I could take out of the PM I recieved.

I still dont like not getting a result either way, or even not requesting one just to be absolutely sure of sanity.

So you would get a guilty on any Jap mafia, and Greek mafia and the SK? If it is a 4-4-1-1 setup and you got guilties on all mafia, that would make your role so unbelieveably powerful, especially with the watcher and doctor that it just isnt feasable. Maybe, maybe if this was faction specific it would be believeable, but it isnt. So it isnt.

I would think it'd be the opposite. Wouldn't knowing the exact faction be more powerful, say, to perhaps help us out in a case like this where we want to erase one faction completely? But to answer your question, yes, I would get guilty on them.

Well lets just do this - Swordsmith (given that most Jap kills seem to use sword). Gets "knife carrier" on Jap, SK, (doctor-scalpel?). Gunsmith gets "has gun" on Greek, vig. Right there is a very crude way of having two investigating roles that pick up different factions and doesnt give it away right off the bat.

Underselling a role that can just keep clearing people is scummy too. Given the doctor + watcher you are impossible to touch without taking those two roles out or getting caught in the act. Also universal cop doesnt fit with what has flipped so far too much. Tracker/Watcher are the main investigative roles and I am the specific investigative one.

If we have to wait untill deadline for this lynch that is pretty depressing.

[ShadowGirl]

Well lets just do this - Swordsmith (given that most Jap kills seem to use sword). Gets "knife carrier" on Jap, SK, (doctor-scalpel?). Gunsmith gets "has gun" on Greek, vig. Right there is a very crude way of having two investigating roles that pick up different factions and doesnt give it away right off the bat.

Underselling a role that can just keep clearing people is scummy too. Given the doctor + watcher you are impossible to touch without taking those two roles out or getting caught in the act. Also universal cop doesnt fit with what has flipped so far too much. Tracker/Watcher are the main investigative roles and I am the specific investigative one.

Well... We don't have either of those. You have me. But it's far easier to 'cripple' town by giving the possibility of being able to murder the 'cop' roles in one go.

How am I underselling a role? As well, I'm not technically 'impossible to touch'. If I claimed and asked to be protected, then, yes, perhaps I would be. But considering our doctor is dead, that isn't the case. Do you think completely taking out the cop would shift the 'advantage' towards scum's side? Also, I'm not so sure about your claim since we haven't seen a SK come out yet, and because all of your crumbing was done, well, today.

Once again, if anyone has the inclination to hammer me, I'd like a last word.

[ShadowGirl]

Arg. I copy and pasted my paragraphs elsewhere. Hold on.

Im a little confused here, it sounds like you are saying that you intentionally played slightly scummy so you would not get NKed and hope results or claim saved you when people finally decided to lynch you.

Yeah. That's what I'm saying. It worked once, at least. Suffice to say, I'm never quite sure how to play PRs.

Did you just imply im scum because im alive day four? This also in no way defends against the logic of investigating someone that you find pro-town.

I said armlx seemed almost 'too town'. And secondly, yes, I did imply that you

could

be scum, not solely because of that, but that point is something that makes me wonder.

Actually why did you not go back to BA here? You found him suspicious given how D2 played, yet you did not investigate him despite that and the suspicion of him on N1. Also why did Tar-town mean Sierra-town? Why Tar over Sierra?

I hadn't really been following the game that much in day two, but BA seemed slightly better - I believe it was day three that most of his oppurtunistic votes happened. And no, it's opposite. I thought perhaps Tar-scum might Sierra-scum. Sierra seemed townier to me.

Most people were saying the vig should kill BA. Investigating someone in a three way tie for deadline lynch is a great way to get your investigation target killed. EA didnt claim untill today but there is no way I would of tried to check a player I saw as vig bait when it was apparent there was one out there.

So? That didn't mean he would be killed. I don't understand your second two points. How would my inspect get them killed? And you just said I should investigate someone who I would see as vig bait...? o_O

I still dont like not getting a result either way, or even not requesting one just to be absolutely sure of sanity.

I considered that as pretty much getting an innocent result on him, but it was technically a no result. Would you like me to ask for clarification?

[Erratus Apathos]

I agree with LF on the claim.

Once again, if anyone has the inclination to hammer me, I'd like a last word.

Alright, I'll see where you're going with this before I hammer.

[LlamaFluff]

Did you just imply im scum because im alive day four? This also in no way defends against the logic of investigating someone that you find pro-town.

I said armlx seemed almost 'too town'. And secondly, yes, I did imply that you

could

be scum, not solely because of that, but that point is something that makes me wonder.

*Pulls up 'Too Townie' notes from ICing for use if needed*. Also I replaced N3... it wasnt even publically announced untill D4.

Actually why did you not go back to BA here? You found him suspicious given how D2 played, yet you did not investigate him despite that and the suspicion of him on N1. Also why did Tar-town mean Sierra-town? Why Tar over Sierra?

I hadn't really been following the game that much in day two, but BA seemed slightly better - I believe it was day three that most of his oppurtunistic votes happened. And no, it's opposite. I thought perhaps Tar-scum might Sierra-scum. Sierra seemed townier to me.

I have a hard time understanding Tar looked scummier then Sierra given that he was NKed, and he was a very believeable watcher gambit claim. Also I dont think BA looked townie D2, he just lurked out of the spotlight.

Most people were saying the vig should kill BA. Investigating someone in a three way tie for deadline lynch is a great way to get your investigation target killed. EA didnt claim untill today but there is no way I would of tried to check a player I saw as vig bait when it was apparent there was one out there.

So? That didn't mean he would be killed. I don't understand your second two points. How would my inspect get them killed? And you just said I should investigate someone who I would see as vig bait...? o_O

I would of bet big money on Rush or BA getting killed by the vig, and im shocked EA didnt kill either of them really. Someone must of though Rush dropped a PR tell or something to that nature. My point is as a cop with a KNOWN vig, you dont want to start investigating the most likely people to be killed.

I still dont like not getting a result either way, or even not requesting one just to be absolutely sure of sanity.

I considered that as pretty much getting an innocent result on him, but it was technically a no result. Would you like me to ask for clarification?

Yes. Are your results "not mafia" or "innocent"?

[ShadowGirl]

*Pulls up 'Too Townie' notes from ICing for use if needed*. Also I replaced N3... it wasnt even publically announced untill D4.

Really? I thought you were around on D3. My timeline/attention to this game didn't really pick up until this day.

I have a hard time understanding Tar looked scummier then Sierra given that he was NKed, and he was a very believeable watcher gambit claim. Also I dont think BA looked townie D2, he just lurked out of the spotlight.

I play by my gut and intuition, so if he looked scummy to me, then I'll investigate him. I consider oppurtunistic voting scummier then lurking.

I would of bet big money on Rush or BA getting killed by the vig, and im shocked EA didnt kill either of them really. Someone must of though Rush dropped a PR tell or something to that nature. My point is as a cop with a KNOWN vig, you dont want to start investigating the most likely people to be killed.

I'll keep it in mind for future reference. But I thought he was acting very scummy, so I decided to investigate him. That's all there is to it.

Yes. Are your results "not mafia" or "innocent"?

Sent Claus a message. It says they are supposed to be 'evil' or 'not evil', so that it's possible to group in the SK, I guess. But I got back innocent on armlx, so I guess he changed to a more standard thing?

[BlakAdder]

Yeah, ShadowGirl needs to be hammered.

[ShadowGirl]

Being lynchable does not make you town. Having not breadcrumbed in a past game does not mean we should let that part of a claim go.

Did I ever say anything of the sort? As far as being 'lynchable', it was 'partially' bad play on my part, in the sense I was more concerned of making it through to the next day. And hopefully in that time as we

purged

town of scum, I would get some useful results. Do you think I'm happy that my results aren't useful?

Dont pro-town players usually get, you know, nightkilled? Also as I have pointed out before, you had similar thought processes on Stef-Tajo as BA.

What about yourself, LF? I don't believe I've played with a game with you where you were town where you didn't get NKed. (Other then when you were scum.) And I've explained the 'similar thought process' thing in the post above. He wanted to

eliminate

suspicion.

So you investigated Tar based on interactions with Sierra who as far as I can tell you never got a single read on?

Correct. I inspect people based on my gut, and whom I can't get reads on. (As well as people whom I think are trying to look 'too town'. Not usually a reasoning I want to

pull out

, but does sometimes lead to something.)

What about how nearly everyone was in agreement that a vig should kill BA? Did that just get ignored?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't our vig claim on today, not yesterday? I don't think you can bring up the plan to

exterminate

him if it didn't happen at the time.

Investigative roles should ALWAYS get a result. It helps the player with any insanity issues they might have.

As far as 'not getting a result' I was basically just told

to go look at the thread

and see his alignment there, which I consider not getting a result.

I consider that as not technically getting a result, but being told to go look at the front page and seeing him show up as town - I guess you could say I got an innocent on him. That's what I could

take out

of the PM I recieved.

So you would get a guilty on any Jap mafia, and Greek mafia and the SK? If it is a 4-4-1-1 setup and you got guilties on all mafia, that would make your role so unbelieveably powerful, especially with the watcher and doctor that it just isnt feasable. Maybe, maybe if this was faction specific it would be believeable, but it isnt. So it isnt.

I would think it'd be the opposite. Wouldn't knowing the exact faction be more powerful, say, to perhaps help us out in a case like this where we want to

erase

one faction completely? But to answer your question, yes, I would get guilty on them.

And if anyone decided they are going to hammer me, I'd like a last word, okay?

Since you people are so big on breadcrumbs, here's mine, I guess. I found as many synonyms of the word '

remove

', if that makes any sense to anyone...

[Jahudo]

I said armlx seemed almost 'too town'. And secondly, yes, I did imply that you

could

be scum, not solely because of that, but that point is something that makes me wonder.

Where? You said this:

Armlx seemed very pro-town to me, and such is this case that I usually turn the other way - so I figured I'd ensure that he was on town's side. I'd intended to investigate BA, but changed my mind at the last minute.

These seem like different excuses to me.

Since you people are so big on breadcrumbs, here's mine, I guess. I found as many synonyms of the word 'remove', if that makes any sense to anyone...

You just made that so why are you referring to it?

[LlamaFluff]

Hammer time yet?

[Jahudo]

Hammer time yet?

I would be fine with a hammer if SG doesn't have anything important to add. Her latest defenses seem to be grasping for excuses and her opinion and treatment of armix sounds contradictory. She's still not my first choice but she's not a bad choice.

I'll wait for a final post from SG though.

[ShadowGirl]

The whole 'remove' thing: It's a reference to the win condition. No one caught on?

[Jahudo]

The whole 'remove' thing: It's a reference to the win condition. No one caught on?

I think I know what you're saying but how do you know or we know that scum don't have that word too?

[LlamaFluff]

Hammer time yet?

[ShadowGirl]

Yeah, ShadowGirl needs to be hammered.

How has your suspicion of me changed (since previously I wasn't at the top of your list, and you just threw your vote on me for the sake of self-preservation.)?

The whole 'remove' thing: It's a reference to the win condition. No one caught on?

I think I know what you're saying but how do you know or we know that scum don't have that word too?

You don't, I guess.

I pondered what my last words should be, as to whether I should change about inspecting armlx (which is true), and say that instead I inspected BA (and got guilty - which would make a whole lot more sense given how I acted), knowing that I am going to turn up cop. But then again, if I'm wrong then that would be setting you all up for a steep fall. I'd intended this to be more spiteful, but then I realize that my wagon is likely primarily scum-based. I believe, at the very least that Llama is scum (99% sure), while BA is still a likely candidate. It seemed some of that 'coaching' Llama keeps saying I was doing to Stef happened between him and Llama and BA.

@Fonz (since all the spite isn't completely out of my body) : <Placeholder 'I told you so'.>

As to about my result on N2, Claus said he can't give to me since when we were all supposed to send in the night actions we already did to him, I was one of the few to so (or only?)

@farside: This kinda of feels like that time I claimed PGO. ;P

[BlakAdder]

Are you kidding me? You expect me to not suspect you, even with this bullcrap claim and you repeatedly contradicting yourself?

[The Fonz]

The idea that the wagon is primarily scum-driven seems bizarre to me. Everything you've done, or claimed to have done, this entire game fits scum perfectly. If you're actually a cop, it's hard to see how you could have looked more scum if you tried. Three investigations, and NOT ONE that is of any use to the town? WOW. Seriously.

Btw, if you're trying to allude to the town win condition, that should be modkillable.

Incidentally, 'I told you so' only works if i'm town. Since you're assuming as such, i can't help but think you're full of crap.

[Jahudo]

as to whether I should change about inspecting armlx (which is true), and say that instead I inspected BA (and got guilty - which would make a whole lot more sense given how I acted), knowing that I am going to turn up cop. But then again, if I'm wrong then that would be setting you all up for a steep fall.

No, you shouldn't do that in games because if we follow your lead and kill town you said was scum, it will look like you have a different cop sanity.

Anywho, since noone looks like they can be convinced off the SG wagon and SG looks pretty scummy, I'll vote her. EA or the second vig or whoever should kill BA though.

Vote: ShadowGirl

[Claus]

Loading, please wait!

(I may take some hours to post the night scene - please be patient)