4 minutes ago, BiggsIRL said:Dang it Truthiness let me get you to -2 and then you can freak out.
Not gonna freak out. I will be a martyr for the cause to the very end. I will even unvote myself at -1 just so I can hammer myself . I'm that stubborn.
{Mafia} Killagain's Planet
8 minutes ago, Truthiness said:Not gonna freak out. I will be a martyr for the cause to the very end. I will even unvote myself at -1 just so I can hammer myself . I'm that stubborn.
this can also be a very effective way for a traitor to avoid suspicion...
2 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:this can also be a very effective way for a traitor to avoid suspicion...
Fair enough. This is gonna be a fun game.
****...I'm not sure what is more suspicious. Biggs's percentage number, or Truthi's over-the-top willingness to die. Maybe they are both in on it....you never know.
1 hour ago, Truthiness said:And look how suspicious that made JJ look. It got me to the point that I investigated him that first night because he was flailing about pointing the finger at everyone. Just as last time, I'll keep an open mind, but you're gonna need a compelling case to convince me.
And what's with this again! I only pointed the finger at like 3 people. Also, there were whispers going around making people suspicious...
14 minutes ago, JJs Juggernaut said:And what's with this again! I only pointed the finger at like 3 people. Also, there were whispers going around making people suspicious...
3 people in one round. It made it pretty easy for Scum to paint you in a suspicious light.
As for my madness, do whatever you think is best. No skin off my back. I love making a point.
Man, I try to make things interesting and it goes dead quiet. Well, off to bed I go.
##role confirm
One of these days I'll sit down and run the numbers to show...
Wait! That day is today!
Assume 9 players, 2 scum. Assume successful scum kill every night, and assume village miskill every day
With no hanging d1:
D1 - nothing
D2 - 2/8 = 25% chance
D3 - 2/6 = 33% chance
Village loses overnight
With a D1 hanging:
D1 - 2/9 = 22% chance
D2 - 2/7 = 29% chance
D3 - 2/5 = 40% chance
Village loses overnight
As you can clearly see, a D1 hanging gives the village better odds on later nights, in addition to giving the village an extra chance to kill a scum. Mix a few power roles in, and things change a little, but not a lot. D1 hanging narrows the pool from which a cop can investigate, the doc can protect, and so on. There's the chance of miskilling our own power role, of course, but they can always claim to get out of it. And even if we do kill one, it's not the end of the world. The biggest and most important strength of the village is discussion and their daykill, not power roles.
And here is the other thing, you can look at voting records to pinpoint likely scum. Often the second or third voter on a target (or sometimes even the hammer if scum is bold) can be suspicious. Hence why I keep trying to bait scum into voting for Truthiness in a delightful honeypot scheme.
Doubt it'll work now, but something that we can try in future games.
Still not 100% sure Truthiness is town, given that he sprung the trap I set with him as bait, but yeah voting yourself is a townish thing to do if you don't have a power role. Gonna put you in the "Friendly" camp for now.
##unvote
9 alive, 5 to hammer.
42 hours until night falls.
Votes
@Onidsen -
@Truthiness - Truthiness
@Norell -
Last post before bed, in case someone has a Day Vig or something silly:
Biggs’ Big Scum List
Totally Town:
Onidsen - Posts some excellent numbers, showing Day 1 Vote is a pro-Town move. Feels the most "town" of everyone so far. Probably should go into FF range, but hey, you're number 1 buddy!
Fortutiously Friendly:
Visovics - Didn’t fall for the honeypot, but defended day 1 investigations.
Truthiness - Specifically opposed to my Day 1 honeypot scheme, but it was pointed at him in particular. So, a net neutral. Lines up with his actions in previous games. Sprung his own honeypot. Voted for himself, but pre-danger. Feels townish?
Nauseatingly Neutral:
JJs Juggernaut - Surprisingly quiet?
CaribbeanNinja - Not much from him yet.
Ovinomanc3r - Went to bed.
GhostofNobodyInParticular - Went to bed.
Norell - Not much from him.
Oddly Odd:
Simply Scummy:
## vote confirmed.
Again, Europena timezone....
According to my backstory I'm a girl so from now on I'm gonna try to act like one
Anyway, let's not forget that there are roles that have victory conditiond like being killed by the mob. Truthines may have such role, although this would be a rather direct approach on his part....
1 hour ago, Norell said:## vote confirmed.
Who's "confirmed"? And why do you think he is a traitor without he having said anything?
Biggs and Onidsen talking about 22%
Truthiness doesn't trust himself so why we should?
Norell is back hunting roles
and even voted!!
Not sure what we should do but as I said I agree with, at least, the threat so...
## vote confirmed
@confirmed has you something to say?
On a thought, Truthiness is either a crazy loyal bounty hunter or a very intelligent traitor. By drawing himself the target on himself and showing he has no fear of being lynched, he is making us hesitate, which as a loyal person, he would want to prove his point to us, or as a traitor, making us back off from him would make us include him in a "loyal" list as Biggs did, the perfect cover he could get.
1 minute ago, Visovics said:On a thought, Truthiness is either a stupid loyal bounty hunter or a very intelligent traitor. By drawing himself the target on himself and showing he has no fear of being lynched, he is making us hesitate, which as a loyal person, he would want to prove his point to us, or as a traitor, making us back off from him would make us include him in a "loyal" list as Biggs did, the perfect cover he could get.
Fixed.
I wouldn't lynch him. If he is stupid , traitors will do our job, no matter what we said or not. Right?
Dang Truthiness, I thought I was the dude who was supposed to be high. Sheesh.
So, Biggs really wants to lynch someone, and backed off when his target agreed on principle to vote in order to prove his innocence, Vis defended the target. . .
Who else should we shake up?
13 hours ago, BiggsIRL said:Well, I'd feel bad too, except he beat me at a 2016 [So last year] regional. That kind of vengeance is just the kind of smuggler I am .
He should have known that would one day come back to bite h [er] in the butt. He should have been more vigilant.
Even if he did die the first night.
Hmmm. . . . so your character is a smuggler who bides his time for vengeance (long memory short fuse eh?). . . 'Bite in the butt', so from behind. . . . Died first night. . . what did the captain do to you that you shot her in the back after a year of planning?
3 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:Biggs and Onidsen talking about 22%
Truthiness doesn't trust himself so why we should?
Norell is back hunting roles
Not sure what we should do but as I said I agree with, at least, the threat so...
## vote confirmed
@confirmed has you something to say?
Truthiness' point was that he DOES trust himself, so voted to prove it.
Just now, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:Hmmm. . . . so your character is a smuggler who bides his time for vengeance (long memory short fuse eh?). . . 'Bite in the butt', so from behind. . . . Died first night. . . what did the captain do to you that you shot her in the back after a year of planning?
Truthiness' point was that he DOES trust himself, so voted to prove it.
Freakin' heck, that keeps on happening!
Anybody else know why random unintended strike-throughs occur in posts?
13 hours ago, BiggsIRL said:Well, I'd feel bad too, except he beat me at a 2016 [So last year] regional. That kind of vengeance is just the kind of smuggler I am.
[She] should have known that would one day come back to bite h [er] in the butt. [She] should have been more vigilant.
Even if [she] did die the first night.
Because some edits of mine didn't make it, I'm redoing the quote.
Testing:
if this is struck-through, then the '['+'S'+']' is the short-cut for that ability. . . useful to know.
Boom! It is! Fascinating, and REALLY annoying. . .
Ghosts I didn't understand anything. Not sure if you are arguing, taking back or just testing how to cross out text.
23 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:Ghosts I didn't understand anything. Not sure if you are arguing, taking back or just testing how to cross out text.
Yeah, there was an issue with text. My post two above yours is a fixed version of my original. . . just read the original and try to ignore the strike outs. I'm really annoyed about those.
Anyways, to sum it up:
Biggs implied that his character is vindictive, and that he was attacking Truthiness because Truthiness beat him a year ago in a regionals. He also implied that that defeat would return to hit Truthiness in the back.
Most likely it's a joke, but I decided to read stuff into it, maybe he was subtly implying something, so I ended up with this:
'A year ago I was wronged. The perpetrator should have been beware , my revenge will strike said wronger from behind. The perpetrator died the first night .'
The captain was shot in the back. Biggs suggested his character is vindictive and seeks revenge, his reference for his attack on Truthiness suggests a year long wait has occurred. So what I got from it is: Biggs is a smuggler who was wronged by the captain a year ago, and has sought revenge ever since. Finally he saw his chance and shot her in the back.
That's what you can read into his post.
Also, note the past tense in his original post (I quote it and highlight important bits 4 posts above this one, counting this one as 1). He's referring to Truthiness (so he claims) who is still alive, yet uses a tense that implies that his target was already struck, and should have been beware, ALTHOUGH no one else had then died . Nobody else died, so any target of his would have been at ease. Truth is still alive, so why use past tense?
3 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:Yeah, there was an issue with text. My post two above yours is a fixed version of my original. . . just read the original and try to ignore the strike outs. I'm really annoyed about those.
Anyways, to sum it up:
Biggs implied that his character is vindictive, and that he was attacking Truthiness because Truthiness beat him a year ago in a regionals. He also implied that that defeat would return to hit Truthiness in the back.
Most likely it's a joke, but I decided to read stuff into it, maybe he was subtly implying something, so I ended up with this:
'A year ago I was wronged. The perpetrator should have been beware , my revenge will strike said wronger from behind. The perpetrator died the first night .'
The captain was shot in the back. Biggs suggested his character is vindictive and seeks revenge, his reference for his attack on Truthiness suggests a year long wait has occurred. So what I got from it is: Biggs is a smuggler who was wronged by the captain a year ago, and has sought revenge ever since. Finally he saw his chance and shot her in the back.
That's what you can read into his post.
Hmm I like the idea of playing this through the roles and the background. I won't be able of avoiding rational argumentation based on meta-game facts as likely roles, chances of traitors but I will try.
Let me read my PM again to figure out who I am.