I'm totally cool with y'all trading and getting your individual win conditions, but how do we with the survivor condition help?
[MAFIA] Death on the Independent Station - Day 5
2 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:I'm totally cool with y'all trading and getting your individual win conditions, but how do we with the survivor condition help?
Erm. . . end the game? Tell Biggs it's over?
With the town win, all scum dead
12 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:I am severely torn between voting Pod, and just randomly voting 1 of the 5 unclaimed
12 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:So, 5 still unclaimed. Should we bother asking for a mass claim?
6 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:Are you a cop? What night action did you have?
5 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:Is nobody else gonna claim town? Really?
11 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:but you should recall that I wasn't outright asking for them.
Yeah, everything but.
1 minute ago, Visovics said:With the town win, all scum dead
I was about to type that!
Just now, Bike Stunts said:Yeah, everything but.
Indeed, everything but. Those I was suspicious of, I asked directly. I also mentioned voting the unclaimed, not asking them to claim. . . I repeatedly stated that that was up for debate.
Anyways, it's all moot now.
9 players capable of voting = 5 to hammer:
- @GhostofNobodyInParticular - (1) - Bike Stunts
-
@Madaghmire - (1) -
Onidsen,JJs Juggernaut, Onidsen,Bike Stunts,GhostofNobodyInParticular, -
@Ginkapo -
CaribbeanNinja - @Visovics -
- @CaribbeanNinja -
- @Caldias - (2) - GhostofNobodyInParticular, Visovics,
- @Onidsen -
- @Bike Stunts -
- @JJs Juggernaut - (1) - Madaghmire,
- No Lynch -
@Onidsen I'll trade with you
So, I am pretty sure there are a number of fake claims going on. I don't think its possible for you to all be what you say you are, because it just doesn't add up.
We started with 14 people. We are down 5 and not a single one flipped scum. I'm not scum, but even if you were disinclined to believe that, and even should Ginkapo turn out to be scum, then we are still looking at 2, shall we say, "malignant" roles out of 14! And again, I'm not.
So I've been trying to figure out who could be false claiming.
I've ruled out @Bike Stunts. Bike wouldnt have bothered to protect pod if he were a scum doc, and I think its pretty clear he is a doc. Three operations though? That seems like a lot, unless there are a metric ****-ton of people out there who can kill people.
I feel good about @Onidsen, because as I believe I understand his role it should be relatively easy to verify.
As for Slippy Nippy, his role should be easily verifiable as well. Although, perhaps, not his alignment. But until he uses it, we wont know.
There is no way to verify the claim of @JJs Juggernaut. It would be a great false claim for that reason, and because it makes it appear as though his interests coincide with anyone else who would be interested in scum hunting.
@Visovics is also a difficult claim to verfiy, tho through no fault of his own. He can just keep missing if its a fake claim, as I understand it. Plus, it would explain any visitations. However, harkening back to the fact that bike is a self aligned medic who needs three saves, it lends creedence to his claim, since Bike can also save the scum players he would otherwise kill.
@Caldias has a totally believable claim. He's also admitted to visiting the player who was murdered last night. This could just be him trying to get out in front and control the spin, in case someone had a watcher power. Certainly I can see why he would have inspected Ovi if his claim is real. I wonder if he has his spice after all.
@Ginkapo I've been giving a pass to, because of the holiday. I havent yet reached the inevitable conclusion that hes scum yet, which is odd because I'm normally there by now. Interested in where this trade goes.
@CaribbeanNinja is definetely the role he says he is. I do wonder at his alignment though, since it would appear he can only be daykilled. Either way, not a road worth walking down, imo, until later in the game if it proves necessary.
So, short story, the three players im most concerned with, atm, are JJ, Cal and Gink. Thats in no particular order, and is based purely on my evaluation of how easy/existant their claims would be to fake.
Btw, I'm sure you would all love me to claim now also, but I still feel its not in my best interests. If I were scum though, I would simply drop a fake here.
Just now, Madaghmire said:since Bike can also save the scum players he would otherwise kill.
I bypass protection
Just now, Visovics said:I bypass protection
Oh right. Huh.
Jesus bike has a rough ******* assignment.
2 hours ago, CaribbeanNinja said:I'm totally cool with y'all trading and getting your individual win conditions, but how do we with the survivor condition help?
You win when either town or scum wins. This is what I've been driving at.
Although it appears that GNips might just be one player but his role is threatening enough that I'll go back to trying to help town again. Until then I really couldnt see why I should bother.
26 minutes ago, Visovics said:I bypass protection
But not Jail?
Vis. Why did you have a protection shield if you are basically an improved Vig?
4 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:Vis. Why did you have a protection shield if you are basically an improved Vig?
no idea, it was one shot shield
5 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:But not Jail?
*The target's personal protection, in this case I was blocked, sorry for the unspecification
So I take it Mad and Gink have no abilities to kill folks at night? Or do you?
You both implied as much, and Mad posted why he thinks somebody is lying, but we haven't got your roles to properly consider why you got that opinion. . .
35 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:So I take it Mad and Gink have no abilities to kill folks at night? Or do you?
You both implied as much, and Mad posted why he thinks somebody is lying, but we haven't got your roles to properly consider why you got that opinion. . .
I really dont want to claim, as doing so is going to make it significantly more difficult to fulfill my win condition.
As to why I think there are people lying, I summed up my argument, and it doesn't require my claim for it to be evaluated on its own merits.
31 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:I really dont want to claim, as doing so is going to make it significantly more difficult to fulfill my win condition.
As to why I think there are people lying, I summed up my argument, and it doesn't require my claim for it to be evaluated on its own merits.
I agree, and I see the value of your arguments. I can see their merit on their own, never fear.
Still, I do find it interesting that your win condition becomes difficult to be realized if it becomes public knowledge.
2 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:I agree, and I see the value of your arguments. I can see their merit on their own, never fear.
Still, I do find it interesting that your win condition becomes difficult to be realized if it becomes public knowledge.
Yeah I would if I were in your position as well.
51 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:I really dont want to claim, as doing so is going to make it significantly more difficult to fulfill my win condition.
As to why I think there are people lying, I summed up my argument, and it doesn't require my claim for it to be evaluated on its own merits.
I hate to say it, but this sounds like your win condition might be at odds with the rest of the players, as @Onidsen has already suggested that all us self-aligneds should work together to fulfill our win conditions. I am guessing you are self-aligned, but is your win condition at odds with any of ours?
2 minutes ago, Caldias said:I hate to say it, but this sounds like your win condition might be at odds with the rest of the players, as @Onidsen has already suggested that all us self-aligneds should work together to fulfill our win conditions. I am guessing you are self-aligned, but is your win condition at odds with any of ours?
Not directly.
22 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:Not directly.
What about with mine?
Sorry, misread the above statement.
What do you mean by 'not directly'? It only partially conflicts? Certain things can happen, but not all?
3 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:Sorry, misread the above statement.
What do you mean by 'not directly'? It only partially conflicts? Certain things can happen, but not all?
It means that my pursuit of my objective doesn't put me in direct competition with anyone else's objective as stated thus far. My completion will mean someone else by definition will have failed to complete theirs, but not as a result of my action.