15 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:

Ok so cop is your fake claim. Let's get real claims, visovics, cninj, ovino, let's top beating around the bush and get your information out. Any hidden information at this point is helping scum only, so town needs to start talking truth so we can lynch the liar. My truth is out there, and I have my expected vote for it, because scum wants a lynch without having to say much that could expose them.

My real claim is vanilla town. You can check it from my behaviour. It was pointed several times during this game.

It was the first time I didn't have any info at all, but my role. I tried to experiment a bit.

2 minutes ago, Visovics said:

I am no cop, where did you get that from Ovi? I'm a vanilla

When you pointed that role-cop was an interesting interaction with jailkeeper when Caldias claimed. When you asked Broba for "something" before voting Caldias. Like you had some info about him and wanted to check it. And when you step out a bit when Caldias pointed my claim saying I never claimed cop.

Not something I knew. It was just a thought that made me think that, at the end, we really had a cop. It seems I was wrong.

Boop.

Interpretation:

I'm vanilla as well.

So we're in an all vanilla situation?

4 minutes ago, Visovics said:

So we're in an all vanilla situation?

We are in a one is a ******* liar situation more probably. But impossible to check without winning/loosing the game.

I might have missed, but where did Broba claim?

19 hours ago, BrobaFett said:

Definitely just honest statements about the game state, and to be honest, as the non vote, I knew that scum would come at me to push the dayvote today.

I didn't try to save him, or buy cred.

I am a vanilla town , my vote is my weapon, and this game I have been right once, wrong once, and the other two times (one time lynching a friendly and one time lynching a scum) the rest of the town lynched while I was trying to get more information meaning I have a voting batting record of .500 (for any non americans, that is pretty good).

All I said yesterday was that I wanted to to hold off hammer to continue conversation so the SECOND agent might say something incriminating once we figured out whether Caldias was scum or not. I have nothing to hide. I figured Caldias for scum, and said as much emphatically, but I know I am not the only one for whom the scumtell was so obvious that the best place for him to hide became plain sight. If I wasn't the only town that had second thoughts, he wouldn't have lived as long as he did.

When I asked what people thought, I was trying to create discussion about whether we thought that Caldias was playing scum poorly or smurf was playing scum super duper well because I wanted to see who would defend who and suggest what, because once hammer dropped it would be useful. Because I am town, and I have a vested interest in finding the scum. To that end, I have something that is an important consideration for todays vote:

The #1 most interesting thing I find right now is that our last scum was a part of the hammer yesterday. That means I KNOW that Caldias got bussed. That is important to know, because it means that they are so confident in the trust they gain from that move they are willing to sacrifice their duelist for the win today, which means that our living scum thinks that they have enough cred to swing the day lynch. So I am starting by looking at the votes from yesterday, and if we find who is our busser we find our last scum:

@ovinomanc3r votes first. Ovino buries everything he is saying in inane rambling, but that is how he plays town, so it makes it tough to get a read. However, in this case, it is almost impossible to believe that scum would vote themselves with victory on the line. I think Ovino is verified town.

Smurf voted second, RIP. obvious town vote position, and verified town.

@Visovics voted third. He bought "100% town" cred with the hammer or buss on Gink. Would be a smart play for scum, but what is SUPER interesting is that let's say Visovics hammered gink to gain trust, and then puts caldias to 3 votes, putting him on the edge of hammer. It could be a scum feeling the temperature of the water around them and realizing that his buddy was a goner, and it would be better to get in as early as possible on the vote. He said he was waiting for me before casting his vote. My suspicion is he was hoping I would defend Caldia so he could agree with whatever logic i had and follow my vote on smurf so he could tie it up, hoping ninja sent hammer that way. Even if he didn't when smurf turned up town he would have an easy "but I just followed broba, lynch him" excuse for protecting caldias. Our agent IS either him or Cninj in my mind. That said visovics, I need your side of the story, and I hope it's super convincing.

Last is @CaribbeanNinja who brought the hammer down. This is buss territory as well. Probably the most questionable position to be in, as at this point the writing is on the wall and you aren't going to avoid the kill, so might as well end the conversation and gain a little cred to hopefully lynch the non voter rather than drag it out and risk more. Which is a solid plan, except that it gives me the most dangerous tool in Mafia, verified knowledge. Which means I am almost positive that I have it 50/50 because vote 1 is so unlikely. That said, running through everything else these last few turns, visovics has just read so much more scum than Cninj so until we get Cninj and Visovics with their cards on the table hopefully we get something that pushes clarity one way or the other.

So that is it, in my mind we are down to Visovics and Caribbean Ninja. One of you is scum and bussed your mate last night. Despite Cnjinj dropping the hammer, I think Visovics is the one that thinks he has the cred to push the dayvote in his favor. And again, I expected as a non-voter for scum to move on me early since that is pretty much their only play for todays day vote.

As of right now, my vote is on visovics. However, I still need to hear from Cninj and visovics through before I actually cast that vote because I don't want to vote without all the information and let the scum put a townie at 2 votes for free.

Definitely overlooked it, thanks

Maybe I repeat myself a bit but I want to star putting things out.

CNinja is the less suspicious for me. I cannot find anything that makes him definitely townie but I cannot find anything that makes him definitely scum either.

He voted Biggs at day1 but at this point this is even more townie. We know Caldias didn't vote his mate. It would have been weird that every scummy tried to help his mate. The survivors know how our mate is lost.

He didn't vote Truthiness what would be really good but we know scum had already a vote there. A second one still being useful but not needed.

He voted Caldias what doesn't make him townie. Caldias was dead man. I am curious how he didn't see that the role claims made almost impossible Caldias to not being scum. But it seems Broba didn't get it either.

He is not pushing anyone right now. It could be scum waiting but honest townie too.

As I said anything definitive.

Things that make Broba suspicious to me.

- He voted Gink at the same time he was defending him.

- He was on Biggs since the beginning of the day. Nothing made him change his vote, not even Caldias's claim. However it doesn't mean too much, the claim helped Caldias, not Biggs so why change the vote?

- He didn't vote Caldias. It is suspicious not cause he was trying to save his mate. I thought that CNinja and Broba had a problem cause one was going to hammer what could be so suspicious as keeping away from the wagon. This tactic followed by pointing to the hammer guy could work for a scum. But I didn't see he played this card.

- Gink has him for changing his vote. But Gink was scum. And he pointed that he declared his scummate in game. I thought a lot about that and he only could be Broba. However it would be hilarious that someone who pretend to be smarter than anyone else here made that kind of mistake!! So or he was incriminating him (probably) or he was playing a double reading game here (possible).

And now Visovics.

Actually I was writing I long post and I realized something at the same time I was writing it.

Smurf knew he lost his protection. He knew that Caldias didn't protect him.

I thought that scum could protect his victim just to proof Caldias being town. That was one of the permutations of my plan.

But if Smurf lost his protection he was not protected so they really tried to kill him and they found they didn't. But the night ends as soon as all actions are submitted so they found it at the same time we did. No contention plan.

This is the oddest piece about Visovics. When the day arrives he put said he realized what actually happened and what was that:

Or Caldias was lying, what he didn't. Actually Caldias didn't talk until Visovics asked him directly.

Or smurf was SCUM bulletproof and played an epic game.

Here my question: why scum bulletproof?

I mean, as I said, I thought that a scum jailkeeper protected smurf while his mate killed him but this didn't happen. I could think that smurf could be a townie bulletproof and Caldias lied too but a scum bulletproof?

What I think? They tried to kill smurf and failed. Again, no day chat so Caldias's mate could make the bulletproof claim weaker or... wait until Caldias screwed himself claiming protect someone he did not protect.

So that is the story:

Visovics sold Gink putting himself in the goodies zone. D1

Visovics voted Truthiness. D2

Visovics changed the wagon to Biggs after my plan. He knew that the chance of Caldias saving someone was 0%. D3

The night kill failed. His first thought was to try to take advance and clean Caldias but he realized that it was stupid inmediately. If Smurf didn't die he was bulletproof and he eventually would claim so pointed to a scum bulletproof just after I said he was 100% town because he was attacked. He gave Caldias a chance. He must say who he protected, probably me again but Caldias didn't play a single good day. He saw a chance of saving himself claiming protect Smurf what actually lynched him. Also, Visovics didn't vote hin until he asked Broba for what? I already said that this had no sense, no matter what Broba could answer, he would be incriminated by his answer. D4

And here we are, with Visovics voting Broba cause he took distance from Caldias when a townie couldn't do anything else.

I would like to look to Broba more carefully cause I don't want to loose this game but things don't matched so well in his case under a first look.

1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:

He is not pushing anyone right now. It could be scum waiting but honest townie too.

This is it right here.

But the more emphatically I state that, however, the more I see the scum may have indeed bought the cred to swing the dayvote. I'm not trying to be smart, I am trying to be productive and catch the agent. Ovino seems like he is waffling on me. Cninj says I am suspicious but doesn't cast a vote either. If either Ovino or Cninj were scum they would have instantly added their vote to put me at 2 and on the block, because that would probably be game over in scum favor, so that vindicates them in my book. That is enough evidence for me.

Visovics is our scum, and he is riding the fact he has bussed both his other mates for cred which makes his voting record look good against my voting record saying that it is untrustworthy when it has simply been conservative. My mistake was believing a verified town (soon-to-be-deceased truthi) when he believed that the Bigg's-led daykill of him was scum killing our chat. Also, I didn't vote for truthi when Biggs went after him BECAUSE I DIDN'T BUY THAT HE WAS GUILTY! The rest of the town (and scum, happily) went on to lynch him without me, but I stand behind my Gink vote, truthi no vote, taking truthi's word about Biggs (which in hindsight was my mistake) and waiting yesterday, knowing my own town status, to see if scum would buss Caldias (which they did). So far everything I have done has been for a good pro town reason, not haphazard or suspicious.

Hopefully I convinced you and we can end this in the towns favor. Visovics, if you are town, look closely at the other players and help me find something suspicious about them. If you lynch me after doing that seriously, then I won't fault you if you are town and follow through on me. But on the odd chance you are a townie and just tunnelvisioning on me (thus the quick vote yesterday) and havent revisited looking as critically at the others, do it and see if anything turns up. I really really don't want to send the vote after a well meaning but suspiciously aggressive-for-no-reason townie on the last day.

##vote Visovics

Beep. BOOP.

Interpretation:

Well @ovinomanc3r , any other thoughts? It looks like its up to us.

Well, after re-reading, noticed something in D1. In Ginks long post where he does 2 votes, he votes against both Ovi and Cninja... more to come as I read further, and I am also looking at Ovi and Cninja in this analysis Broba, not only you.

12 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Beep. BOOP.

Interpretation:

Well @ovinomanc3r , any other thoughts? It looks like its up to us.

Not too many.

Broba didn't want to join the wagon on me at day 1 cause he didn't share the reason. I cannot read a scum behaviour here. While Visovics suspected about me but didn't join it either but there were actually two scum votes. If got lynched town would have 50% of hunting a scum as soon as I flipped town. A third scum joining in would be bad but he didn't want remove credit from third the reason people raised against me.

Broba voted Gink. What could be scum but he just follow Biggs. You and me just follow Gink. Visovics started following Biggs but unvote when Gink tried to counterattack as waiting for a plausible escape way, the came back as a miracle when Gink definitely stepped out asking for a tie.

Broba didn't follow Biggs whit his witch hunting. I said at least one scum was there but it doesn't me that not more than one. Visovics vote Truthiness was what a bad vote at the end.

Broba started the wagon against Biggs what could be suspicious but he just follow Truthiness when he flipped town. Biggs was a bit suspicious. Visovics voted Caldias what was not bad but he changed based on my plan. A possible scum behaviour cause they knew Caldias was not going to save anyone.

And finally Broba didn't vote Caldias. Why? Do you think a scum could let the chance of lynching a mate pass? I would suspect more if he would have been the only one that was not sure but you weren't. It just happened that you made the conection between the roles more quickly and voted. Visovics on the other hand brought weird ideas about scum bulletproof.

I see suspicious things about Broba but there is a post from Visovics that looks so weird.

Okay, so the more I read,the stranger the interactions between Broba and Gink are. On a counterpart, Ovi's vote into Biggs day 1 came very suddenly, no explanation, additionally, he mainly confused everyone with his 5 men accusation and missing words to clear it up. Cninja looks more townie to me.

12 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Not too many.

Broba didn't want to join the wagon on me at day 1 cause he didn't share the reason. I cannot read a scum behaviour here. While Visovics suspected about me but didn't join it either but there were actually two scum votes. If got lynched town would have 50% of hunting a scum as soon as I flipped town. A third scum joining in would be bad but he didn't want remove credit from third the reason people raised against me.

Broba voted Gink. What could be scum but he just follow Biggs. You and me just follow Gink. Visovics started following Biggs but unvote when Gink tried to counterattack as waiting for a plausible escape way, the came back as a miracle when Gink definitely stepped out asking for a tie.

Broba didn't follow Biggs whit his witch hunting. I said at least one scum was there but it doesn't me that not more than one. Visovics vote Truthiness was what a bad vote at the end.

Broba started the wagon against Biggs what could be suspicious but he just follow Truthiness when he flipped town. Biggs was a bit suspicious. Visovics voted Caldias what was not bad but he changed based on my plan. A possible scum behaviour cause they knew Caldias was not going to save anyone.

And finally Broba didn't vote Caldias. Why? Do you think a scum could let the chance of lynching a mate pass? I would suspect more if he would have been the only one that was not sure but you weren't. It just happened that you made the conection between the roles more quickly and voted. Visovics on the other hand brought weird ideas about scum bulletproof.

I see suspicious things about Broba but there is a post from Visovics that looks so weird.

Also if I was scum, why would I publically announce that I knew what had happened with him being bulletproof? At that point, Cninja was also suspicious of Caldias and you were the one that tried to turn it into only using the "known" roles, the duelist, which not only was a claim that we couldn't totally trust, from a L-1 in D3, with no explanations about past actions, also when you proposed a plan on how the Biggs vote would be benefitial (and I fell for it)

Ovi is seeming more and more suspicious to me

On 13/7/2017 at 6:30 PM, Visovics said:

Oh, that makes sense now

So if there is a scum in your suspects, than

EITHER

Caldias is scum

Smurf is bulletproof scum and they made an ingenious play there, there are 2 more, and that would have been EPIC as a scum play (not so likely)

Or your suspicion on the Truth vote is wrong and N-O O-N-E there was scum, which is also a good play letting town fully lynch

Here is.

He post it just after I said who were my main suspects the day after and why I knew that there were just two lefts: he and Caldias. Biggs was dead and Smurf was attacked.

He agreed but then said that Smurf could be a scum bulletproof suicidal. He didn't point to Caldias protecting his victim. I had to point that out. Why the options at the beginning were:

Or Caldias saved the day or there is a bulletproof. Why not the scum jailkeeper trick? Easy, that never came to his mind. If it would have happened, then they would have tried it at night but we know scum didn't try it cause Smurf died last night (his protection worked the night before. He knew there was a bulletproof cause his kill failed when it shouldn't. And then pointed to a scum bulletproof what makes Smurf claim weaker.

He also pointed to no scum voting Truthiness when it could be actually even scum voting him.

2 minutes ago, Visovics said:

Okay, so the more I read,the stranger the interactions between Broba and Gink are. On a counterpart, Ovi's vote into Biggs day 1 came very suddenly, no explanation, additionally, he mainly confused everyone with his 5 men accusation and missing words to clear it up. Cninja looks more townie to me.

Also if I was scum, why would I publically announce that I knew what had happened with him being bulletproof? At that point, Cninja was also suspicious of Caldias and you were the one that tried to turn it into only using the "known" roles, the duelist, which not only was a claim that we couldn't totally trust, from a L-1 in D3, with no explanations about past actions, also when you proposed a plan on how the Biggs vote would be benefitial (and I fell for it)

Ovi is seeming more and more suspicious to me

Actually I explained that both had a point but Biggs reasoning went further than I would have gone.

And my 5 suspects ended being right about one and it seems that were two.

And the duelist seemed a real claim. It matched perfectly with Biggs being alive every night as you, what I pointed already. The only thing with that claim is that matched perfectly townie or scum.

You, on the other side added a role that didn't appear until you pointed out. Even Smurf, the bulletproof shut up his mouth until you started to point the case of the scummy bulletproof.

Sorry guy.

All have quite sense for me.

## vote Visovics.

3 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Here is.

He post it just after I said who were my main suspects the day after and why I knew that there were just two lefts: he and Caldias. Biggs was dead and Smurf was attacked.

He agreed but then said that Smurf could be a scum bulletproof suicidal. He didn't point to Caldias protecting his victim. I had to point that out. Why the options at the beginning were:

Or Caldias saved the day or there is a bulletproof. Why not the scum jailkeeper trick? Easy, that never came to his mind. If it would have happened, then they would have tried it at night but we know scum didn't try it cause Smurf died last night (his protection worked the night before. He knew there was a bulletproof cause his kill failed when it shouldn't. And then pointed to a scum bulletproof what makes Smurf claim weaker.

He also pointed to no scum voting Truthiness when it could be actually even scum voting him.

Well, from me, Caldias, Biggs and Smurf, I posted my thoughts on the possibilities, I know I am town, Biggs was dead town. So it would be either Caldias or Smurf. But I thought that due to the text of the night, Smurf just striked me more as bulletproof than protected. Also, the fact that any role could be any faction, it's legimately possible bulletproof scum as a trick from Oni

Unless one of you two are scum, I am dead meat.

BOOP.

Interpretation :

Sorry Vis...all roads lead to you...

##Vote Visovics

3 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

It matched perfectly with Biggs being alive every night as you,

But the night kills still hapenned if you didn't notice, which mean we weren't the targets for the night kills.

@Onidsen hammer

1 minute ago, Truthiness said:

Oh! I had a feeling of over thinking a bit.