-Speculation time-
So, we had four kills yesterday, and since every ability is doubled, probably even mafia kills are doubled. So that would mean 2 killing groups, right?
This is not true at all. If there's two killing groups there's the possibility of cross killing, so CA and ?IS? may as well be scum.?YouYou? wrote:I think so. I also don't think that there's any way scum or SK would have killed one of their accounts day one. CA and ?IS? are probably not scum (do we know either way?). I don't think we should have them come out, but I do think that if they're pushed to claim, that's a good point in their favor.d_rouge wrote:So that would mean 2 killing groups, right?
By "a big claim" you mean that everybody claims a ?? account so that who claims the ?? accounts still alive must be scum? This is what I get from your post.Mr Stoofer wrote: Why unlucky? If we only have 4 ?? accounts, they are probably all scum (3 mafia, 1 SK). We do a big claim and we know all the scum's accounts. That's why an imblanace helps us. (Unless ther scum start killing themselves, in which case we can afford to lynch the innocent ?? accounts to root out the evil ones.)
And we will have lost half of our population! Or even worse, while we're busy lynching the ?? accounts, scum will kill some of the regular ones too. So in the end we'll have no ?? accounts and a lot of scum among the few survived regular accounts.Mr Stoofer wrote:Sorry for the multiple posts but I've just thought of a fifth reason in favour of concentrating on the ?? accounts: once they are all gone the scum will have lost 2 of their night kills.
You're saying that this thought that it would be an advantage for scum to completely kill somebody, is more of a gut feeling?BrianMcQueso wrote:Nevertheless, I think it would benefit the scum to completely eliminate a player from the game, though I'm less sure why.
?Charlie? wrote:BrianMcQueso wrote:vote: ?YouYou?I know my ideas have been a bit confusing, and maybe even voteworthy, but I don't think it's worth lynching me over. Your last post makes it seem like you're eager to start a real early bandwagon over something so little. There's been one vote on me for a real reason and one randomly. If you think I'm worth lynching, maybe you should vote me instead of trying to stir up support.Well, I think it's quite scummy ?YouYou?'s post for giving no reason behind the choice of those two names, but you can't really blame him for not putting his vote where his mouth is: he can't vote twice and his vote is on ?Namelessone?.Flying Dutchman wrote:Vote: ?YouYou?
Trying to get someone lynched without voting yourself is a standard mafia tactic, since not being on the bandwagon will appear innocent if the person is lynched and turns out innocent.