Mafia 72.5 - Down In The Projects

[House Velaryon]

I am liking Hauk more because of his switch to Carver today. It seems like an impulsive move rather than calculated. Not enough to strike him, because I would like to see him more engaged, but it lowers him.

[House Dondarrion]

He picks up my suggestion quick and votes Avon. A vote which he both defends and tries to cast suspicion on.

I'd word it in another way. After I had to stop my rished reread because time was running out I had to vote someone. I didn't want to vote Greggs, so I had to push an alternative. Either McNulty or Avon. Avon seemed to be the more promising of the two. Tomorrow I'll push McNulty, that's for sure.

I never referenced the Carver reveal. So it's clear now and no one thinks you supported a D lynch on Day 2. Do you feel better now correcting something I never said?

That's why I thought you were implying that I wanted to lynch D'ANgelo all day.

*shrugs*

Maybe I should reread that post of yours, because apparently there is still some misunderstanding going on.

However, my time to post on Monday will be drastically limited. Which sucks.

Moreland takes a lot of people off his list. Daniels most notably, Greggs, Hauk and Carver off the top of my head

Carver is off, Haul is off for now (which means I won't support a lynchmob tomorrow), Greggs is still on my list. On a very low spot though. I still have a hard time to believe that an FM would not have voted for me in her situation. Or hasn't she been as threatened as I think? Has it been that clear that the mob would swing in my direction? Furthermore, who is Greggs' partner? It's not McNulty, not Carver, not you. It's either Hauks or Bubbles (or me, from your PoV). Yesterday's lynchmobs have been very informative, a shame that no one wants to use these informations.

[House Velaryon]

Moreland, Carver

Greggs, McNulty

Hauk, Bubbles

Bell

Moreland is my top choice, but Carver gets a top spot because he confuses the hell out of me. I feel like too much of the case is based on supposed connections to either Moreland or Greggs. Suspicious moves all on his own are mid-level contribution day 1, stubbornness on the D lynch and then jumping to Greggs/Avon. Revealing as finder. This is a special case. It is a desperate move. Either he was so very convinced that he was right against all opposition, or his partner was in trouble. Him un-revealing as soon as night fell was the only thing he could do, innocent or evil. It would have been too hard to keep up the charade. I don't like that his reveal was in tiny, tiny letters easy to miss. It's been brought up that it would have been easy to miss, especially since it seems like everyone was online at that time (except Avon) and it would be likely that orders were going to go through fairly quickly. That was the most suspicious thing about it in my mind.

Bubbles hasn't done anything I find really suspicious so far. I like his re-reads (that he's doing them) and he seems very relaxed.

[House Velaryon]

Yesterday's lynchmobs have been very informative, a shame that no one wants to use these informations.

I have been trying, but it's difficult without hard evidence.

If you're guilty, Carver or McNulty seems like they helped you the most. Greggs is also a possibility

If Greggs is guilty, you are a possibility, Carver is still a possibility. Bubbles and Hauk were pretty firmly on you.

If you are both guilty, then Carver was an inexplicable distraction and we were all your pigeons.

If neither of you is guilty, then I don't know what kinds of conclusions to draw. Moreland seemed the sure lynch (I don't think Greggs was as threatened as you). Then we WIFOM from there. Did the FM want to be on or off the lynch, or split the difference? Did they want to swing it to Avon so that you two would still be top lynch choices? Probably that last one.

[House Dayne]

Just a holding post cos I don't quite know how modkill limits are working with the weekend freeze; won't have time to catch up properly till tomorrow.

[House Velaryon]

And - as if we needed another reason to kill D today - notice how his vote can be manipulated. He was flip-flopping all over the place trying to keep up with the current top vote getter.

[House Corbray]

And - as if we needed another reason to kill D today - notice how his vote can be manipulated. He was flip-flopping all over the place trying to keep up with the current top vote getter.

I could not vote, but that would hurt the innocents, trying to get a majority. If people wouldn't flip flop all over the place themselves, then I wouldn't either.

Really, there is no reason to kill me, certainly not how my vote was manipulated, because it wasn't. I simply followed the most votes.

[House Connington]

Yeah i've checked through, and I can't see how it can help us now, as we almost certainly won't have a situation where a heal wins us an extra day...

Don't go insulting those fine purveyors of wholesome American goods now boy...

Oh seriously guys, that WAS my manly but big breasted cousin. I did not put on a wig, stuff some balloons down my top and try to go door to door selling Avon goods!

Come on, like I have the legs for it!

DOC.

No. This is NOT a healer claim. You see, I'm actually bulletproof. I wish I could have been engaged enough in the game to naturally attract the kill. However, I was trying to look like a healer (bringing up the healer threat constantly, a small fake slip up here and there, that code...) all in the hope that the killers would target me. Hell, I'm convinced Carver saw it, marked me as healer and tried to draw my heal. Hence the un-claim as soon as we went to night, seeing as he knew I wouldn't heal him anyway.

So, why out myself now? If the killers try to kill me tonight, we have an exactly equal chance of winning the game. We just go from odd to even. There's no benefit in me attracting the night kill. However, a PI IS useful.

So, yeah. All my cards are on the table. All game i've been faking the whole "healer" thing, trying to attract the night kill. I was desperate to be hit last night. That's why I was keeping D around. I knew there was someone who could gain us that extra chance at a kill he'd offer in that specific scenario... Me.

It's also how I ended up able to quote the fact that the SK was bullet proof. After all, upon hearing that there was another bullet proof, wouldn't you go re-read the rules? :-p And as soon as I knew the SK could also be BP, it was clear he wasn't an innocent bulletproof.

I nearly, oh so nearly, claimed finder myself early yesterday... Just to force the kill my way. I didn't want to force the real finder, if we have one, to out themselves though.

[House Stokeworth]

Well at that point you had already put your vote on me, which you say you wouldn't without making a proper reread.

What do you think about my partnership analysis? Do you think Rawls and McNulty can be eliminated as possible partners for Greggs? Do you think that a Carver/Moreland partnership can also be excluded because Carver should have voted Greggs instead of D'Angelo?

I think the fact that Rawls tried to shift the day one vote to Greggs points away from a partnership but doesn't rule it out completely since changes of achieving this were slim, there weren't many people around.

I think that a McNulty/Greggs parnership looks like a possibility. She was his main day one focus yet he never placed a vote on her and ended the day without voting. If he knew he wouldn't be around why not leave his vote on her?

He did have his vote on Greggs. But he agreed to move to you with Carver at T30 even though you were on parr. He then took the opportunity to move to Avon even though Greggs was still on four at that point.

Greggs also placed a pretty weak vote on McNulty and McNulty's day one behavior screams distancing.

Don't forget that McNulty voted Carver. It was only after After Carver's reveal that he moved back to Gregg and the reveal wasn't something he could have foreseen. He hadn't left himself a wealth of options Greggs was his only believable choice (except maybe you).

It's definitely something to consider. What do you think?

[House Stokeworth]

Yeah i've checked through, and I can't see how it can help us now, as we almost certainly won't have a situation where a heal wins us an extra day...

DOC.

No. This is NOT a healer claim. You see, I'm actually bulletproof. I wish I could have been engaged enough in the game to naturally attract the kill. However, I was trying to look like a healer (bringing up the healer threat constantly, a small fake slip up here and there, that code...) all in the hope that the killers would target me. Hell, I'm convinced Carver saw it, marked me as healer and tried to draw my heal. Hence the un-claim as soon as we went to night, seeing as he knew I wouldn't heal him anyway.

So, why out myself now? If the killers try to kill me tonight, we have an exactly equal chance of winning the game. We just go from odd to even. There's no benefit in me attracting the night kill. However, a PI IS useful.

So, yeah. All my cards are on the table. All game i've been faking the whole "healer" thing, trying to attract the night kill. I was desperate to be hit last night. That's why I was keeping D around. I knew there was someone who could gain us that extra chance at a kill he'd offer in that specific scenario... Me.

It's also how I ended up able to quote the fact that the SK was bullet proof. After all, upon hearing that there was another bullet proof, wouldn't you go re-read the rules? :-p And as soon as I knew the SK could also be BP, it was clear he wasn't an innocent bulletproof.

I nearly, oh so nearly, claimed finder myself early yesterday... Just to force the kill my way. I didn't want to force the real finder, if we have one, to out themselves though.

Hmmm.

I have a problem with your claim.

At the moment you look to be one of the most trusted if not the most trusted unVPI player. The healer could still live so Stringer is not a safe bet for the FM and you had a good chance of being NK'ed tonight.

If you had been targeted out chances at winning would have improved because your claim would have had some backing when morning showed no NK.

I'll have to have another look at you.

Edit: poor grammar

[House Dondarrion]

Damn Hauk, you shouldn't have revealed today. :bang:

[House Stokeworth]

Here's Hauk:

Just about everything he says speaks of healing, he wasn't kidding. I'm surprised he wasn't targeted yesterday because he's really gone to town with this:

I'm still in favour of keeping D, after all there's every chance we'll win a little breathing space with a good heal or the like. On top of that, if the shit really hits the fan we now know EXACTLY when we have to kill him in order to keep him from winning.

I feel Moreland is trying far too hard to get us to take him out right now.

Carver is following a similar path, but comes across more genuine to me. On top of that, he doesn't have More's rolefishing history dragging him down.

Okay, why we should keep D tonight and hope we get a heal...

day 2:

11 players left (2 FM/1 SK/8 IN)

We lynch an innocent and the FM miss.

day 3:

10 players left (2 FM/1 SK/7 IN)

We lynch an innocent. The FM kill an innocent. The SK kills an innocent.

day 4:

7 players left (2 FM/1 SK/ 4 IN)

If we lynch the SK, the FM will kill an innocent.

day 5:

5 players left (2 FM/3 IN)

We lynch an innocent.

Day 6:

3 players left (2 FM/1 IN)

FM win - we've had 4 shots (3 lynches 1 NK) at the FM and one on the SK

Now lets assume we kill D tonight only to manage a heal...

day 2:

11 players left (2 FM/1 SK/8 IN)

We lynch the SK and the FM miss

day 3:

10 players left (2 FM/8 IN)

We lynch an innocent. The FM kill an innocent.

day 4:

7 players left (2 FM/5 IN)

If we lynch an innocent, the FM will kill an innocent.

day 5:

5 players left (2 FM/3 IN)

We lynch an innocent.

Day 6:

3 players left (2 FM/1 IN)

FM win - we've had 3 shots (3 lynches) at the FM and one on the SK

So...

It costs us NOTHING to let D live until tomorrow.

It potentially wins us an extra shot at the killers in a worst case scenario.

Why would we NOT wait until tomorrow and hope we get lucky with the heal?

Just means the killers have to either play hunt the healer tonight (and anyone looking healer-like is a decent heal choice), or play a game of double bluff with said healer over Stringer.

If we kill D tonight, the killers can afford to gamble a little. Test if we have a healer or not. All killing D does is force the killers to kill Stringer and the Healer to heal him, thus proving his existence. I don't see the benefit in that.

Woah woah woah there...

If I didn't have my coat on, I'd consider a last minute switch to you right now.

edit: If we get the heal tonight and can let D live and try to kill himself tomorrow, then you will be the first person I look at for tomorrow's alternative lynch. I'll also have less than perfect faith in any find result. Just getting that out there in case i die before I get home.

I really didn't anticipate that kill.

I'm not at all surprised that the "finder" was lying. Not sure if it was a failed killer ploy or simply some crazy innocent behaviour though.

If we kill D today, we have 7 players tomorrow, then 5 the day after. Worst case scenario 2 lynches. If we let him live, we have 1 lynch and his 1 kill.

There is absolutely no reason not to lynch D'Angelo today, unless we simply decide that it's better to let a lame duck SK win than the FM.

The annoying thing is that if he killed on odd nights, we'd be able to let him have one kill. When we go down to 4 (1SK 1FM 2 innocents) it's an odd night, so even if we hit the FM, D gets to kill that night to win the game. Barring a heal of course, but then the killers seem to be evading our healers sights.

Firstly, it was only the last minute swing that was... abortion-like. We had a decent suspect with a decent case against them, who was decently heading to a normal lynch. Who may well be a killer still. It was the last minute swing that was just... wrong. Hardly a symptom of keeping D

Secondly, now we have to kill him. However if we had hit an FM yesterday or healed successfully last night, it WOULD have brought about a scenario where his powers could be useful for us.

Thirdly, it was clear that you wasn't being particularly... believed... before you withdrew your claim. I doubt it would have been withdrawn if you had recieved a warmer reaction. Plus there's the risk that the healer wouldn't have been around to see and change it. If you are innocent, and we did have a one shot healer, you may well have diced with our chances there.

I am leaning towards believing him because the ridiculous number of healing references support what he's saying, in fact it's just about the only explanation that makes sense unless he's an FM who had this move planned from day one.

Also speaking in his favour is the fact that the role of BP is a good balance for the role of vig, which can just as easily result in the loss of an innocent.

He's not VPI but I can accept this for the moment as there are people who look a lot worse to me.

[House Dondarrion]

Moreland, Carver

Greggs, McNulty

Hauk, Bubbles

Bell

And another 180 degee change of mind?

Tell me, why is a player who is trying the hardest to analyze the thread, a player who is constantly giving innocentts a free pass, how is that kind of player more suspicious than a parroting, non-confrontational player like McNulty? Reall, I don't get it. I should be at least PI for everyone if this was a normal game.

Please explain why this is so by making a goddamn case.

[House Stokeworth]

And another 180 degee change of mind?

Tell me, why is a player who is trying the hardest to analyze the thread, a player who is constantly giving innocentts a free pass, how is that kind of player more suspicious than a parroting, non-confrontational player like McNulty? Reall, I don't get it. I should be at least PI for everyone if this was a normal game.

Please explain why this is so by making a goddamn case.

What did you think about the likelihood of a Greggs/McNulty partnership now?

[House Dondarrion]

What did you think about the likelihood of a Greggs/McNulty partnership now?

More likely. It really depends of the danger that Greggs has been in. I thought she was the more likely lynch because almost everyone suspected her and she hadn't contributed that much. However, if everyone tells me that my lynch was a foregone conclusion, a potential Greggs-partner could have risked to vote her to draw a line. It's still unlikely, especially combined with the fact that she wasn't voting me herself, but it's possible.

Have to go now.

[House Velaryon]

Hauk, I have problems with your claim, but I won't discuss it now.

And another 180 degee change of mind?

Tell me, why is a player who is trying the hardest to analyze the thread, a player who is constantly giving innocentts a free pass, how is that kind of player more suspicious than a parroting, non-confrontational player like McNulty? Reall, I don't get it. I should be at least PI for everyone if this was a normal game.

Please explain why this is so by making a goddamn case.

180 degree flip? Hardly. In the moment I felt like your reactions were good and that you re-reading was good, but I've had a chance to look at that again. The suspicion on you came very early Day 2 and seriously - almost everyone was jumping on you except Carver. You had plenty of time to react and start your re-reads.

You pulled quite a few points against Greggs before making your 180 on him for his (non)voting. You giving 'innocents' a free pass is one of the things I don't like about you. For instance, Daniels. He was going after you hard and you cleared him. Him flipping innocent makes you look 'better' because your judgment is so good. You kissed up to Bubbles too - another one going after you hard. You giving so many people a pass only helps you to focus on a few players and you'll never have to look at anyone else because they are not high on a lot of people's radar. I don't think it looks as innocent as you seem to think it is Mr. PI.

If you want a case, why don't you look at the one Bubbles made, or the one I made after Bubbles, or perhaps my post here earlier this page? Don't get your panties in a twist because no one has bothered to make a cohesive case or points against you - many people have.

[House Clegane]

Bubbles:

Three RP posts, joking vote on Moreland. Absent all the serious part of day 1. Starts participating soon after Stringer's reveal.

#193: suggests leaving SK alive. Suspects Moreland, Greggs and Avon.

#200: case on Moreland and vote.

#209: reread of Avon: "what's here is not really enough to get a good handle on him either way. "

#210, 212, 214, 218: defends his case against several players.

#219: has to go, promiced to reread Greggs and some others later.

#292, #296: questions Avon about her non-voting.

#297: supports non-lynching SK again.

#301: reread of Greggs: "She doesn't look great but I'd still prefer Morewell to go atm. This was a fairly rushed so sorry if I missed anything." Leaves again.

#328, #330, #331, #332: discusses Moreland's posts.

#333: asks for Greggs' opinion on Moreland.

#339: objects Moreland's theory on FM behavior.

#349, #354, #360: discusses finder claim and possibility of Carver being a symp.

#356: discusses role distribution.

#392: mini-reread of Carver, concluded with suggestion to lynch Moreland. Carthage should be ruined!

#462: after lynch: "What a bloody mess. It should have been Moreland or Greggs"

#512: critisizes Carver's play.

#541: posts opinions about all players and tiers: "D'Angelo

Carver

Morewell, Greggs

Rawls, McNulty

Hauk

Bell"

#544, 547: attacks Carver.

#551: explains his position on Greggs to Moreland.

#565: discusses Carver and his potential partnerships.

#566, 568: answers Moreland's questions.

#570: reread of Rawls: "He doesn't look super bad, and he doesn't look squeaky clean either. "

#571: reread of McNulty: "I think he looks worse on a reread"

#589, #594: suggests McNulty/Greggs partnership.

#590: uneasy about Hauk's reveal.

#591: reread of Hauk: "He's not VPI but I can accept this for the moment as there are people who look a lot worse to me."

He is extremely eager doing (and posting) rereads but his conclusions are almost always extremely wishy-washy, with exeption of his main suspect only. Evidently has troubles with having more than one ssupect at once. On day 1 absent, on day 2 completely tunnel-visioned on Moreland, on day 3 mostly tunnel-visioned on Carver but started to look at me recently.

Conclusion: until very last hours, looks like FM who chose being tunnel-visioned as a cover. Still very suspicious.

[House Clegane]

I think that a McNulty/Greggs parnership looks like a possibility. She was his main day one focus yet he never placed a vote on her and ended the day without voting. If he knew he wouldn't be around why not leave his vote on her?

You evidently confuse me with somebody else (which is very strange considering your love to rereads). I made only one post at the beginning of day 1, before serious part started, and then was gone for the rest of the day. Like you, I started participating on day 2 only.

[House Clegane]

Hauk's reveal is quite confusing. It's senseless for innocent (almost as bad as Carver's) but also senseless for a guilty.

Hauk, you perfectly know today's lynch is decided, we are just spending weekend time. Why not to wait with your claim until tomorrow, giving killers another chance to target you?

[House Stokeworth]

Bubbles:

He is extremely eager doing (and posting) rereads but his conclusions are almost always extremely wishy-washy, with exeption of his main suspect only. Evidently has troubles with having more than one ssupect at once. On day 1 absent, on day 2 completely tunnel-visioned on Moreland, on day 3 mostly tunnel-visioned on Carver but started to look at me recently.

Conclusion: until very last hours, looks like FM who chose being tunnel-visioned as a cover. Still very suspicious.

I think your reread speaks for itself, however:

There are nine players remaining, one is the SK one is VPI and one is me leaving six possible FM. I have looked at pretty much everybody over the last few days so I don't see agree with being called tunnel visioned.

Of the six possible FM remaining only two are guilty. Some of my rereads warrant stronger opinions because they are the ones where I found things that seemed off.