Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

House Targaryen

Mafia 63.5

Recommended Posts

I am not a finder.
I still mistrust Handy, but I admit it would be foolish to lynch him today.
For now, I trust Hefty, Lazy and, up to some degree, Jokey (the way how he forgets things is very like my own when making very late read)
This leaves Grouchy, Smurfette and Vanity as my top lynch choices.
I think [b]Grouchy[/b] was too much under radars for most of day 1, after Hefty's case was dismissed. He needs his portion of attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Greedy' post='1745924' date='Apr 5 2009, 18.11']You might not die tonight, it depends on the healer. And as the heal works until the end of the game, you could be very useful.

Completely up to how much the healer believes you, of course.[/quote]

Hence the choice of nightkill?

So yeah, I think we'll bark up the wrong tree if we look at the normal ideas of "what tier is he in, active, mid or quiet" or "who did he seem to trust and suspect" but instead should chalk it up as an attempt to kill the healer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, it could be either healer hunt or just getting rid of unlynchable player. Still, it won't harm to look onto Greendy's suspects. If he had any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm off out for a bit.

We should avoid going to night at ALL costs.

All it does is lets the killers check if they have eliminated the healer threat.

Us having 8 or 7 players makes no difference as to when end-game arrives. All going to night will do is give the finder one extra shot, but the killers a free chance to kill him with no risk to themselves, thus testing if Greedy was the healer. If we lynch and they mess up, we gain a lynch before end game. If we go to night, we're either the same place we were today, or further behind as the finder's dead.

So, anyone suggesting night will be lynched immediately. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After quick reread (thanks for idea, Smurfette!): Greedy made early mini-case on Vanity, voted and stayed there for most of the day, but never pushed this lynch actively. His second and last suspect was Harmony. He was friendly to Hefty and Handy.
I doubt he was big enough threat for Vanity to justify a nightkill.
I suppose he was killed mostly for being reasonable and trustable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Smurfette' post='1746486' date='Apr 6 2009, 12.00']We should avoid going to night at ALL costs.[/quote]Of course. But why do you think it worth dsicussing? Nobody suggested going to night yesterday and I see no reason to expect that anybody will try to suggest this today.
Sorry, but you just made two useless post in a row. Was it a try to imitate contribution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok I'm back. Shame about poor Greedy, but a fairly logical kill I suppose. I agree that we shouldn't read too much into that choice; i guess it was probably just because Greedy wasn't really suspected by anyone and could well be roled.

And I too would like to go back to [b]Grouchy[/b] to start the day. A summary of the case against him may follow in a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Lazy Smurf' post='1746519' date='Apr 6 2009, 07.07']Ok I'm back. Shame about poor Greedy, but a fairly logical kill I suppose. I agree that we shouldn't read too much into that choice; i guess it was probably just because Greedy wasn't really suspected by anyone and could well be roled.

And I too would like to go back to [b]Grouchy[/b] to start the day. A summary of the case against him may follow in a bit.[/quote]

That would be awfully nice, thank you. :P


I agree that Greedy seems a logical choice since he wasn't really suspicious and likely not lynch able.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is day 2.

8 players remain: Brainy, Grouchy, Handy, Hefty, Jokey, Lazy Smurf, Smurfette, Vanity.

5 votes are needed for a conviction or 4 to go to night.

2 votes for Grouchy (Brainy, Lazy Smurf)

6 players have not voted: Grouchy, Handy, Hefty, Jokey, Smurfette, Vanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good morning everybody.
FWIW, I had a look at Lazy last night, and he spent the night sleeping in his bed.

Looks like Brainy's going strong again with his "I suspect you but I won't tell you why" thing. You may be labouring under the mistaken assumption that you are actually contributing usefull stuff.

Had a look over Smurfette's posts too, who has the tendeny to state the obvious, as in, we shouldn't go to night (which nobody, as far as I know, had been talking about, and which I think we haven't done for ages), as well as the strange attitude towards replacement killers. This might be an attempt to appear contributive by posting stuff when not bothered or unable to find anything else, or too busy hiding devious purposes.

As Grouchy seems to be flavour du jour so far, I'll have a look at his posts next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Brainy' post='1746489' date='Apr 6 2009, 06.12']Of course. But why do you think it worth dsicussing? Nobody suggested going to night yesterday and I see no reason to expect that anybody will try to suggest this today.
Sorry, but you just made two useless post in a row. Was it a try to imitate contribution?[/quote]

In the current slow game, they went to night allowing the killers a free test of if there was a healer.

I'd really rather not do the same thing here.

So, not so useless Mr. Smartypants...


As for the other post, it's also not useless. It points out a healer clue people may have missed that seems to explain the kill.

So sorry, you are either evil, in which case they are useless to you, or completely missed the point of my posts. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Handy' post='1746530' date='Apr 6 2009, 07.45']Good morning everybody.
FWIW, I had a look at Lazy last night, and he spent the night sleeping in his bed.

Looks like Brainy's going strong again with his "I suspect you but I won't tell you why" thing. You may be labouring under the mistaken assumption that you are actually contributing usefull stuff.

Had a look over Smurfette's posts too, who has the tendeny to state the obvious, as in, we shouldn't go to night (which nobody, as far as I know, had been talking about, and which I think we haven't done for ages), as well as the strange attitude towards replacement killers. This might be an attempt to appear contributive by posting stuff when not bothered or unable to find anything else, or too busy hiding devious purposes.

As Grouchy seems to be flavour du jour so far, I'll have a look at his posts next.[/quote]

If you have to parrot brainy's case on me, at least have the dignity to ask for a cracker.
:pirate: :pirate: :pirate: :pirate:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Handy, why did you chose Lazy to watch?

I have a question - want to make sure I'm reading the guard role right.
[quote name='Papa Smurf' post='1731315' date='Mar 24 2009, 06.25'][i]You may guard the player that you did vote for, but only if [u]at most[/u] one other smurf did vote for him. In case that there are only four or less smurfs remaining you cannot use your power anymore, since you refuse to share your wisdom when there's not enough audience that listens to you.[/i][/quote]
So in order for a guard to be able to use his power, it has to be someone he voted for. If more than 1 other player votes for that person, he can't use it, right?

I think perhaps we should be careful with our votes if this is the case. How can we give the guard (if he exists) the widest possible range of targets without making it obvious who the guard is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As much as I hate it, I might actually from time to time make statements not totally opposite Brainy's. I'll try to actually support them though. And I don't like crackers :P

You do have the tendency to state the obvious though, so I'll just keep watching ;)

In the meantime, I had a look at Grouchy. I found that I had a very diffferent impression of him before than now. I kinda thought there had been more behind that laconic attitude of his, but in hindsight it's just a bunch of one-liners.
His activity yesterday in a nutshell:

some RP, then proposes to get serious, followed up immediately by an RP vote and the admission that there's nothing to base anything serious on.
The only thing that count count as taking a position is his statement that he doesn't get bad vibes from Hefty.

Grouch then fairly fast jumped on the bandwagon on me, stated that he thought there had been more votes already, then apologised and retracted when I revealed (not that I mind :P ), and jumped on the next bandwagon, i.e. Harmony, which pretty much completes his contribution so far.

So Grouchy, start talking...I won't vote on you now, as I don't want a speedlynch, but I might later on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would also like to know why you finded me Handy.

As to the case on Grouchy, what I don't like is that I found his behaviour early in the day suspect (cue comment from me and the Hefty-Grouchy interaction) and that has not really gone away, but since then he has offered nothing substantive at all, yet made sure to stay contributive like he is trying to avoid accusations of under the radarness. His strongest statement seems to be that he finds Handy suspicious for OMGUS vote on brainy - but only adds a vote to this comment when it seemed the lynch was going that way. He said that he was around, and yet doesn't add anything of particular value. Very middleof-the-road and suspicious, imo, Grouchy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Handy' post='1746530' date='Apr 6 2009, 13.45']FWIW, I had a look at Lazy last night, and he spent the night sleeping in his bed.[/quote]Odd choice. Why haven't you looked at somebody more suspicious than Lazy? Like, you know, myself?
[quote]Looks like Brainy's going strong again with his "I suspect you but I won't tell you why" thing.[/quote]I didn't intend to go strong again. I think we shouldn't waste bandwith on discussing a person whom we won't lynch anyway. It's almost like discussing the king in a kingmaker game. Still, if you want it...
[quote]You may be labouring under the mistaken assumption that you are actually contributing usefull stuff.[/quote]This stuff should be useful enough if you cared to repeat it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hefty, I had about 4 or 5 candidates last night, and decided to go for Lazy because of the vibes I'd been getting from him all day. Then when I revealed and he flat-out refused to remove his vote (at first), I decided to leave the nightaction on him.

The guard role is pretty screwed, as it keeps the guard from blocking the most suspected players, as they'll naturally accumulate votes. I don't really see how one could limit that without disturbing the flow of the game. So the guard would have to vote one person, that they suspect, then start defending them to keep more than one other person from voting them? This gets more screwed the more I think about it. It's virtually unplayable. Or I'm getting something wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Smurfette' post='1746532' date='Apr 6 2009, 13.56']In the current slow game, they went to night allowing the killers a free test of if there was a healer.[/quote]Ok. I don't read the slow game. Now I see you really had a reason.
[quote]As for the other post, it's also not useless. It points out a healer clue people may have missed that seems to explain the kill.[/quote]But I don't think explaining the kill was useful action.
Do you still suspect Hefty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did Handy role claim earlier? If he's the finder, then he's innocent, yes?

The choice for Lazy is very weird, Lazy was at the bottom of my suspicion list, one of the few I'm getting no bad vibes off at all. An investigation of Hefty, Grouchy, Vanity or Brainy would be better served.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brainy, I don't suspect you. You just seem to be playing a different game from the rest of us, and that smurfs me.
As I said, I have a bunch of candidates, and with a bit of luck, I'll get through all of them ;)

Why should my repeating your stuff make it more useful?

The I suspect you but I won't tell you why thing refers to Grouchy, btw, not to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×