Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 56

Author Topic: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Game Over!  (Read 169445 times)

ToonyMan

  • Bay Watcher
  • Danger Magnet
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 3 solves metaproblems
« Reply #600 on: November 18, 2013, 06:49:44 pm »

Toony: ...I'm really unsure if you're too busy to answer my query or..that you're posting to the seemingly more relevant matter at hand.
Note. :S
Let me make this clear.  I am done with that case.  I am through trying to explain to you.  I will just assume you're town and not trying to annoy me.

@Imp:
You are crazy.  I don't know what to respond to but speculating that there may even be another scum team is nonsense (some third-party sure, but another scum team?).  I don't have the time to waste the rest of the night responding to your inquires.  The day will be over before I could even hit post.



I'd really like Max White to survive into the night at least, but that looks like it may not happen.  If Max flips town I can only hope Persus is actually malevolent.

Also I enjoyed your poetry Max, and comparing resurrecting somebody as blowing their load on somebody is humorous.
Logged

Imp

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 3 solves metaproblems
« Reply #601 on: November 18, 2013, 07:13:35 pm »

Gosh, Toony!  The rest of the night, heck, all day just to try and answer all of my questions?

You're right!  That's horrible!

Umm... I gotta ask just one more though.  What's your typing speed?

Cause in my -last- post to you, I really just ask you one question.

It's a pair of questions, but both are clearly asking the same thing - one answer can answer both, be that answer short or long.

If Max survives we can use his Seer ability

Full stop.  Toonyman, how much do you believe what you just typed?  In order to believe that statement you have to believe that Max truly is a Seer, that Max did not lie.  Is that what you intend to say?

It would make you "waste the rest of the night" to "respond to [my] inquiries"?

@Imp:
You are crazy.  I don't know what to respond to but speculating that there may even be another scum team is nonsense (some third-party sure, but another scum team?).  I don't have the time to waste the rest of the night responding to your inquires.  The day will be over before I could even hit post.

Wow.  Well, soon I lay me down to sleep, N coming and all.  Should I not be here come D4, and especially if my role flip doesn't make my suspicion of Toony from D1 onwards (Hey, I just remembered D2 NQT rated Toony as 'much improved from D1 involvement - an opinion I very much don't share and didn't then either), please remember my top Scum picks, though I could be wrong about my suspicions just like anyone else:


1 is Max, for my inspection result that does not match his Claim.
2 is NQT for a great many reasons, both summarized, then explained in depth here, though many of his subsequent posts have strengthened my suspicion of him.
3 is Toony, for mostly low involvement, and increased further by his actions at end of day today.  Otherwise he didn't seem -too- suspicious too me, but wow, this end of D3 stuff is getting weirder and weirder.
Logged
For every trouble under the sun, there is an answer, or there is none.
If there is one, then seek until you find it.
If there is none, then never ever mind it.

Mephansteras

  • Bay Watcher
  • Forger of Civilizations
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 3 solves metaproblems
« Reply #602 on: November 18, 2013, 08:06:42 pm »

The Scribe's Tally Sheet
Max White: Imp, Jim Groovester, Toaster, Persus13, Tiruin
Persus13: Max White, notquitethere, ToonyMan


  Your discussions over, you all feel the compulsion come over you again. Each in turn steps forward, and calls out their vote.

  Max White's name hangs in the air.

  He strides in the the center of the room, head held high. "Fools, all of you. You think we are your enemies? No! We simply want to restore our people to their former glory. Now have become fat and lazy, our soldiers renowned not for their prowess in combat, nor their bravery, but for the polish of their uniforms! Well, this is one Knight who has the will to do something about it! No matter your struggles, the Old God shall rise again! My death is nothing! You cannot win!"

  And like the others he collapses to the ground, all life gone from his body.

  Another
Cultist dead. But how many more are there? Is he right? Are your struggles in vain?
 
  With nothing more to do or be said, you head back to your houses to await the night. And the horrors within it.




Night has fallen. Send in your actions! 
Logged
Civilization Forge Mod v2.80: Adding in new races, equipment, animals, plants, metals, etc. Now with Alchemy and Libraries! Variety to spice up DF! (For DF 0.34.10)
Come play Mafia with us!
"Let us maintain our chill composure." - Toady One

Mephansteras

  • Bay Watcher
  • Forger of Civilizations
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Night 3
« Reply #603 on: November 20, 2013, 12:33:57 am »


  Your eyes open to the light of day, and the walls of the great hall. Five of you now remain. A small circle indeed.
 
  ToonyMan and Jim Groovester are absent this day.
 
  In glowing red letters on the floor you see this:
 
    ToonyMan, loyal Warlock of this town. He has joined the spirits he once spoke with.
   
    Jim Groovester, loyal Exorcist of this town. His power over evil could not help him this time.
   
  The Captain of the Guard steps forward. "We investigated their houses. ToonyMan's body was found a few streets down, stuck down by a sword thrust to the heart. Jim's house was broken into, but there is no sign of him."

   



Day has begun. It will go until ~5pm Pacific Friday.
Logged
Civilization Forge Mod v2.80: Adding in new races, equipment, animals, plants, metals, etc. Now with Alchemy and Libraries! Variety to spice up DF! (For DF 0.34.10)
Come play Mafia with us!
"Let us maintain our chill composure." - Toady One

Max White

  • Bay Watcher
  • Still not hollowed!
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Night 3
« Reply #604 on: November 20, 2013, 12:37:25 am »

My ancestors are smiling at me Imperials! Can you say the same?

Jim Groovester

  • Bay Watcher
  • 1P
    • View Profile
Logged
I understood nothing, contributed nothing, but still got to win, so good game everybody else.

Imp

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #606 on: November 20, 2013, 01:20:34 am »

NQT is my top Scum pick among those who live.  My case against NQT is unchanged. 

I have a migraine and I'm in a very foul mood.

At the moment I have no questions and nothing else to say.

I'm listening though and watching and I'm sure my mood will change.
Logged
For every trouble under the sun, there is an answer, or there is none.
If there is one, then seek until you find it.
If there is none, then never ever mind it.

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #607 on: November 20, 2013, 01:26:45 am »

:( Get well soon Imp.

Also I'm on the line and will post later due to this being my break. Checking back on the survivors.
Logged

notquitethere

  • Bay Watcher
  • PIRATE
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #608 on: November 20, 2013, 03:38:43 am »

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

NQT narrowed his eyes. Just as he'd long believed. Words are wind. Only logical appraisal of the vote record can show us the light.

Once again my analysis was vindicated but my vote choice wasn't: the players who I though were scum from their actions were (Caz and Max, my top picks!) But both Days I chose to follow what people said and play games of psychology. I though Jim was guilty for lying, but he wasn't. And I thought Max was innocent because otherwise he'd be an idiot, but he was an idiot. I feel like a tragic hero that ignored the prophecies to his peril. No longer! I will put faith in my scumetrics. Be right back: there's analysis to be done.
Logged

Imp

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #609 on: November 20, 2013, 05:53:24 am »

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

NQT narrowed his eyes. Just as he'd long believed. Words are wind. Only logical appraisal of the vote record can show us the light.

Once again my analysis was vindicated but my vote choice wasn't: the players who I though were scum from their actions were (Caz and Max, my top picks!) But both Days I chose to follow what people said and play games of psychology. I though Jim was guilty for lying, but he wasn't. And I thought Max was innocent because otherwise he'd be an idiot, but he was an idiot. I feel like a tragic hero that ignored the prophecies to his peril. No longer! I will put faith in my scumetrics. Be right back: there's analysis to be done.

Picture time, huh?  My headache wants to roleplay too.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So, NQT.

I've totally changed this post from how it had been.  It had been filled with mockery and meanness.  I had a headache, I had stress, you were lying and I caught you yet again - I was venting.

I vented for a good hour of typing, until I reached near the end.  The topic looped back around for me to how Max had been a gentleman towards me, how I believe Max dropped his defense instead of taking what I believe (what I expected to come when I counterclaimed him) was reasonable action to try and save himself and further his Wincon.  I really expected to play through a really hostile series of interactions that never came.  And by the time in this post that I was ready to type that I was smiling at him too, that it wasn't just his ancestors smiling at him but me too - well.  I found I didn't want to yell at you either anymore.

I'm still going to reveal your lies.  I'm just going to do it much more nicely and without the sarcasm.  Thanks, Max.  But for your kind choices, this would -still- be playing out a lot more viciously even if the votes had still fallen where they did.

So, back to Scumhunting business.  With a final toss of 'thank you' again to Max.


Quote
Once again my analysis was vindicated but my vote choice wasn't: the players who I though were scum from their actions were (Caz and Max, my top picks!)

You've 'analyzed' a lot more than Caz and Max to be your top Scum picks.  If what you said were true, you'd have listed Caz and Max consistently as your top picks, and really only them as those picks.  But you didn't.

Caz and max were NOT your top picks, unless you call your top picks approximately a third to half of the total list of players.  Jim, Persus13, and Imp also have topped your stated lists.

There's another possible, and actually more likely reason why you were able to 'accurately' notice that Max and Caz were Scum - because you shared a Scumchat with them.  Somehow, despite your claim of those two being your top Scum picks, you managed repeatedly to shift your attention off of them.  You claim that's because:

But both Days I chose to follow what people said and play games of psychology.

'Games of psychology', considering you didn't define those games at the time, that's hard to prove or disprove.  But you didn't actually follow anyone with any of your votes, except for your very last vote change late D3.  You picked a pretty bad reason to claim, because that one's verifiable and false.

With your first D2 vote, upon Jim, the only person you could have been following was yourself - yours was the first vote on Jim and your challenge was "OK Jim, please explain to me how night-killing town players is more productive."

Later you switch your vote to Caz, reason "Caz's day end lynch vote on Nerjin was an RVS vote!".  Your vote is Caz's 2nd, following Toaster's single statement of Caz opening D2 with rolefishing.  We could count this as your vote following someone else - except you cite that as why you didn't vote for your top Scumpicks, not why you did vote for them.  Once Caz gets 4 votes, you soon switch back to Jim, "On a lynch-all-liars basis, my vote is going back to you: Jim."  Again, your vote is the only one on Jim.  And that's where you -leave- your vote for the end of D2.  If you were prone to following others in voting, I rather suspect you wouldn't have switched off of Caz, given how you claim him today and before as someone you thought was Scum - one of your top picks.  Yet you preferred to be the only vote on Jim at day end instead of participating in the lynch of someone you claim was one of your top Scum picks.

You open D3 with a vote on Max and the challenge "Max— You sheeped Jim's vote and left it there with this as your argument:"  You unvote after he roleclaims.  This behavior highlights that you are lying about him being a top Scum pick for you - when your top Scum pick roleclaims is it reasonable to drop your vote on him?

Then I counterclaim him - and you switch your vote to -me-.  Again I ask, because it highlights that you are lying - when your top Scum pick roleclaims and then is counterclaimed - is it reasonable to vote for your Top Scum pick's counterclaimer?

It's hard to say that you are 'following anyone' in your vote on me - unless you're following me/yourself - Immediately before your vote I had posted my detailed case on you.  But you, as an innocent townie (which you are not) with a top Scum pick who has claimed and been counterclaimed, with nothing proven yet - again I ask this to highlight that you are lying - is it reasonable to vote for your Top Scum pick's counterclaimer when she also states and offers reasons for high concern that you are Scum as well?  As an innocent Townie - your primary focus should be on your Top Scum pick, yes?  Sure, notice me, react to me, consider the validity of my Scumhunting.  But you do something weird again.

"By this logic we should lynch Imp and win the game."  We who, NQT?  One good reason for Scum to risk a Claim D3 was for the game to be so close to over that a mislynch would likely seal the game for Scum.  Any mislynch is acceptable, I guess?  All works the same for the numbers to your perspective perhaps?

But then you go further - you switch your vote from me to -Persus-.  You claim that Max was a top Scum pick for you (as of D3 he's your only surviving top Scum pick) - but here you are, with your top Scum pick claimed and counterclaimed, and you go from voting your top Scum pick's counterclaimer to voting for your top Scum pick's lynch target.

And were you following anyone?  Why, yes you were.  You were following your top Scum pick.  And you kept following him, despite his prolonged quietness, despite challenges, despite your claimed Top Scum Pick having the votes of nearly every other player in the game.

I assume you did this because you were already pretty strongly identified as Scum - that you didn't think actual innocent-looking behavior would fool anyone - that the only hope there was for your Wincon was to get votes somehow off of Max and onto -anyone- (ideally Persus) else.

Quote
I feel like a tragic hero that ignored the prophecies to his peril.

*sighs and looks up at the post above this point*.  So I spent an hour writing words of scorn intermixed with the truths above.  Thank goodness, NQT, you included this line, and I interpreted it as I did.

Though it took me a good half hour to rewrite my post without the snark, it's a better post for it, and that wouldn't have happened but for my reaction to your words - and that they made me think so much of Max's attitude, intentions, and decisions.  That's why I cleaned up -my- act too, and erased the ire from my posting.  Thanks again, Max.  The rest of the post didn't need changing - I conclude with it below.


This.  Now this I believe.

Scum is a team.  Scum is a group.  And I bet not all of these plans were yours, NQT.  I bet there were prophecies of peril, and I bet you made several of them, but they were ignored.  And maybe -you- had to ignore your own prophecies too, because you're part of a team that charged headlong into a dangerous strategy.

Or maybe the plan was yours.  Either way, Yeah.  I feel sorry for you.  Not as sorry as I feel for Max, who was so much a gentleman in his play that I believe he -refused- to really try and save himself because it required taking actions he felt inappropriate to take against a newbie whose comments and questions had rekindled his interest in S Mafia games.  I think he saw the ugliness of play required, maybe saw the ugliness I'd faced elsewhere so recently, and decided 'no, I won't go there'.  Thanks, Max.  I'm sorry I'm not a gentlewoman, and that I would rather chase my win than preserve your playtime.  You are the very best of Scum, possibly the very best that Scum could be.
Logged
For every trouble under the sun, there is an answer, or there is none.
If there is one, then seek until you find it.
If there is none, then never ever mind it.

Imp

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #610 on: November 20, 2013, 06:21:19 am »

Tiruin, Persus13, Toaster:

So, there's at least 3 Scum to find, with 2 already caught.  Does anyone think there probably are 4 total to find?

My thoughts on that are 'probably not'.

There are 5 players alive.  Of the 6 dead, 4 are Town, 2 are Scum.

No 3rd parties have roleflipped this game as yet.  We -might- not have any, which would be the first time a S game hasn't had at least one 3rd party (though sometimes the 3rd has been a vanilla survivor).

We know we have two night killers.  One is almost certainly Scum, and their role to me may or may not look like a Killer's.  The other is almost certainly not-Scum, but their role will almost certainly look like a Killer's to me.

If we do face a 3rd party killer, it is a rather well behaved one.

We've never seen a 3rd party killer that was not a Serial killer, but we've seen both Serial killers and Town monster hunters.

I feel certain that NQT is Scum.  If we kill the last Scum, the Scum night kills will stop.  That wins the game - or we have to find whatever other threat(s) still exist(s).

But it's vital that we stop at least one of the night kills.  If NQT is not Scum, or *shiver* if he's not the final Scum - we've pretty much lost, right?  Especially if our non-Scum killer is a Serial Killer.

We lynch someone today, 4 players in the night, if that someone wasn't the final Scum even if the target is Scum - two night kills and we're left with 2 players D5.  Unless something neat like one team wiping out the other happens so there's only one night kill.

That's my conclusions so far about 'what has happened/is happening/will happen'.



What do people think about the wisdom of massclaiming at this point?

Anything missing from my appraisal of our situation and our concerns?  I've never been in a situation much like this ever in play or real life - I haven't got much to compare this to.

One thing I'm not talking about yet is my inspection results from last night.  I did inspect someone, I did get results.  I see reason not to reveal my results yet - I'm going to tentatively assume most of us would prefer to see me verify another's claim rather than have someone verify my claim at this point.  But maybe it's best for everyone to not claim (I believe I think it is time for a mass claim, but I'm not sure and I've never been present for one - I'm not sure how to tell when it's time), and if not it might be best for me to not reveal my results either.
Logged
For every trouble under the sun, there is an answer, or there is none.
If there is one, then seek until you find it.
If there is none, then never ever mind it.

notquitethere

  • Bay Watcher
  • PIRATE
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #611 on: November 20, 2013, 06:27:19 am »

Imp
I'm still going to reveal your lies.  I'm just going to do it much more nicely and without the sarcasm.
I appreciate the goodwill and I am confident that you will find no lies.

You've 'analyzed' a lot more than Caz and Max to be your top Scum picks.  If what you said were true, you'd have listed Caz and Max consistently as your top picks, and really only them as those picks.  But you didn't.

Caz and max were NOT your top picks, unless you call your top picks approximately a third to half of the total list of players.  Jim, Persus13, and Imp also have topped your stated lists.
Spoiler: And this (click to show/hide)

[speculation]

I assume you did this because you were already pretty strongly identified as Scum - that you didn't think actual innocent-looking behavior would fool anyone - that the only hope there was for your Wincon was to get votes somehow off of Max and onto -anyone- (ideally Persus) else.
You've given a very good explanation of why a scum-NQT would have behaved like I did. All I can say is that these were not my motivations. My vote-analysis showed that Caz and Max were the scummiest but I second-guessed myself and switched my votes to other targets each time. I thought I had good reasons at the time but I was focusing on the wrong things. This makes me look bad, but I'm not sure it's an especially good scum-tactic.

Quote
I feel like a tragic hero that ignored the prophecies to his peril.
This.  Now this I believe.

Scum is a team.  Scum is a group.  And I bet not all of these plans were yours, NQT.  I bet there were prophecies of peril, and I bet you made several of them, but they were ignored.  And maybe -you- had to ignore your own prophecies too, because you're part of a team that charged headlong into a dangerous strategy.
That's very imaginative. If you are town then you're in for a shock when I flip!

Or maybe the plan was yours.  Either way, Yeah.  I feel sorry for you.  Not as sorry as I feel for Max, who was so much a gentleman in his play that I believe he -refused- to really try and save himself because it required taking actions he felt inappropriate to take against a newbie whose comments and questions had rekindled his interest in S Mafia games.  I think he saw the ugliness of play required, maybe saw the ugliness I'd faced elsewhere so recently, and decided 'no, I won't go there'.  Thanks, Max.  I'm sorry I'm not a gentlewoman, and that I would rather chase my win than preserve your playtime.  You are the very best of Scum, possibly the very best that Scum could be.
Max made an ill-judged gambit. I think he's a nice guy and all, but I don't think he should be praised as a good scum-player.

Analysis ongoing...
Logged

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #612 on: November 20, 2013, 07:01:22 am »

But both Days I chose to follow what people said and play games of psychology.

'Games of psychology', considering you didn't define those games at the time, that's hard to prove or disprove.
Adding my own matter into this, NQT. You sounded more like a debater than a psychologist/tester. A debater wherein you defend your stand despite anything, existing otherwise or not.

Me? I've played my own game of psychology and its called the response mechanism. How would one respond if I angle the tone a bit. Use some words which would superficially lead to a point. Trail off into the subconscious that, in certain circumstances, the target will more focus on given certain accusations--ie what I said to Caz as him being a liar (though I didn't notice it at the time, I guess this was my driving force..my consciousness works weirdly with my subconscious OR my ability to explain it afterwards).

Anyhow, let me poke at certain...illnesses with your post, NQT.
Quote
I though Jim was guilty for lying, but he wasn't
Where and what, exactly? As far as I recall, it pertains to one post where you caught him, and proceedingly blew up the case with the add-on of a silencer. It was subtle at the time due to our focus being on other things, but subtleties are seen once people look back.

Noted here. Second paragraph to the response to Jim [wherein the link can follow via the quoteboxes]. Now checking it..it seems that in that same post [unless there is suitable context to where Jim lied == Jim scum], the allegation of lying = lynch (in that context) is watered down. Diluted. Then added a bit on the top proceeding it.

So what's up there with Jim = lie?

PPE: Imp. I will detail my post on that, next, because I want good formatting and for it to (most probably not cause you a headache) be more organized. I thank you muchly for this post.

...And this. I skimmed over it to only register the lowermost paragraph in my mind that 'Imp wants NQT dead'.

Blargh I'm doing the whole post here! Hold up.

Quote
But it's vital that we stop at least one of the night kills.  If NQT is not Scum, or *shiver* if he's not the final Scum - we've pretty much lost, right?  Especially if our non-Scum killer is a Serial Killer.
I believe it is best for the hunter to claim now given this scenario. Persus, for me, is 99% confirmed town [unless he was DARN WELL BUSSED], which, given the context of Max flippin' scum, at least gives me some solace in my many-tailed theory back there [IE: Max claiming Seer on Knight. Flashback; Knight gets attacked by SWORD-WIELDING HUMAN. It is logical to believe, though up for debate as always, that Persus is a Knight AND unNKillable.]

I'm checking back on you and the rest. It is believable, on your case at NQT, but it is also a factor which I didn't check enough that you may be bussing Max. Given your claim as a Fortune Teller, what did you find yesterday?

...Also I do like your pictures. Sadly I cannot give my own since I lack theatrics and/or any in-character related drama..despite my RP-ing self nudging me hard to do that.

Quote
What do people think about the wisdom of massclaiming at this point?
I favor such. However, there is..well, nothing to gain from my role. I will detail such in my next post.

Toaster: Are you the Monster Hunter? Details of kills//description of how those happened? Did you target Persus N1? Why? Same 'why' applies to everything else.

Persus: Reads//Suspicions. Did you learn anything in the night?

PPEII: NQT
...Focus on that question I asked above as I'm busy checking back, ty.

Logged

Persus13

  • Bay Watcher
  • 6th King of the Mafia
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #613 on: November 20, 2013, 07:33:31 am »

Persus: Reads//Suspicions. Did you learn anything in the night?
No. Well my plan for today was to decide on whether or not NQT or Toonyman was our scumpick for the day. And Toony's dead. NQT seemed to be trying to stop Max being lynched and get me lynched instead.

Who's left? It's me, Imp, Toaster, Tiruin, and NQT. I'd like to hear more from Toaster, but all of you read as town to me, except NQT, and possibly Imp.

Imp: You didn't inspect NQT?
Logged
Congratulations Persus, now you are forced to have the same personal text for an entire year!
Longbowmen horsearcher doomstacks that suffer no attrition and can navigate all major rivers without ships.
Sigtext

notquitethere

  • Bay Watcher
  • PIRATE
    • View Profile
Re: Supernatural Mafia 6 - Day 4 brings dark news
« Reply #614 on: November 20, 2013, 08:10:08 am »

Analysis 4
In my previous two analytical posts, I successfully predicted the scum-status of Max and Caz. Let's repeat the same procedures and see what we get.

Spoiler: # People Voted Day 3 (click to show/hide)

Day 3's vote-count results aren't that interesting on their own: Max claimed early and all votes were either for him or the counter-claimants, Persus and Imp. I know that one of the scum must have bussed Max so I'll be looking over at the timings and reasons for each of the votes on him. But first, let's look at the global results for all four days so far (-1 for Persus if you just want Days 1-3):

# people voted not counting RVS & FOS:
1. Caz
2. Cmega Max
3. Nerjin Tiruin
4. Jim Toaster
5. Persus, Imp, Toony
7. NQT

So we know that Cmega and Nerjin gave up playing on day 2 and both died that night, which explains their low-suspicion count. Nerjin in his first life was actually a strong town player by the vote-suspicions metric.

In virtue of having the lowest number of suspicions, Tiruin is the top candidate. She was the last on the Max lynch but the first on the Caz lynch. In my next analytical post (coming very soon!) I will look at the cases and interactions-with known-scum of each player.

As we have either have a serial killer or a monster hunter with terrible judgement (I have a theory as to who it is but I might well be wrong), this is probably LYLO right now. As such we should be even more cautious than normal about who we lynch. Not right now, but before the end of the day we should all share our top scum picks in ranked order: this often works out quite well.

As this is probably the last day, I very much think a mass claim would be in our favour. Any town players that may have lied to misdirect scum in the past should be honest now. If we get this right we won't have to risk N4.

Imp— if you inspected me then you know I'm whatever Priest comes up as, right?

Persus
No. Well my plan for today was to decide on whether or not NQT or Toonyman was our scumpick for the day. And Toony's dead. NQT seemed to be trying to stop Max being lynched and get me lynched instead.
Okay, if you're town I can understand why you'd be sore about this but I honestly didn't think Max would fakeclaim such an obviously testable role. A hasty mislynch today will cost us the game. You said I OMGUSed today and yet your tentative scumpicks are merely the people that suspected you. Bear in mind that town suspect town.

Tiruin
Adding my own matter into this, NQT. You sounded more like a debater than a psychologist/tester. A debater wherein you defend your stand despite anything, existing otherwise or not.
What I meant was, I was focusing on player's potential motivations for why they made assertions (like Jim saying I wouldn't have backed off unless he voted me, and Max claiming he was a seer) rather than their overall game-behaviour. It's very easy to make a mistake or to come up with a last-minute gambit, but it's difficult for scum to play a whole game as-if-they-were-town.

Me? I've played my own game of psychology and its called the response mechanism. How would one respond if I angle the tone a bit. Use some words which would superficially lead to a point. Trail off into the subconscious that, in certain circumstances, the target will more focus on given certain accusations--ie what I said to Caz as him being a liar (though I didn't notice it at the time, I guess this was my driving force..my consciousness works weirdly with my subconscious OR my ability to explain it afterwards).
Well, I look forward to seeing whether your method bears fruit today if you do turn out to be town.

Anyhow, let me poke at certain...illnesses with your post, NQT.
Quote
I thought Jim was guilty for lying, but he wasn't
Where and what, exactly? As far as I recall, it pertains to one post where you caught him, and proceedingly blew up the case with the add-on of a silencer. It was subtle at the time due to our focus being on other things, but subtleties are seen once people look back.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'with the add-on of a silencer', but on Day 2 I made very clear my case on Jim and my own misgivings with it:

SCUM
Jim - was previously very townish but now pursuing a case that he has twice undermined with his own lies and hypocrisy

Noted here. Second paragraph to the response to Jim [wherein the link can follow via the quoteboxes]. Now checking it..it seems that in that same post [unless there is suitable context to where Jim lied == Jim scum], the allegation of lying = lynch (in that context) is watered down. Diluted. Then added a bit on the top proceeding it.

So what's up there with Jim = lie?
By Day 3, I came to realise that Jim mischaracterisation of our interaction was probably an honest mistake rather than a deliberate deception. You might have noticed by now that I'm not afraid to change my mind.

Toaster Your thoughts on the game, please.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 56