Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Hello, also confirmed.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







mfcrocker posted:

No avatar no trust

You could fix that you know. If only you had a generous heart.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







tithin posted:

Ask not for whom the bone bones, it bones for thee

Are you... are you coming on to me?

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Normally I would advocate against a no-lynch but with so many powerful town roles it would really suck to accidentally cap someone really useful (Sheriff, Investigator, etc.)

On the other hand town literally being 100% power roles/there being third parties being detrimental to the town that are not Mafia I'm not opposed to getting a lynch done.

Magnus asking TT to create a case seems kind of unreasonable though because it's day 1 - all there is to go off of is meta-judgments (which frankly I can't make with this being my second SA game). I am currently ill at ease voting for anyone currently voted for and I'm not finding a lot to base any kind of case off of except Magnus's fervor for lynching TT who evidently votes no-lynch D1 fairly frequently based on what I'm seeing/hearing? I dunno if that's enough to build off of.

(tearshed has barely loving posted though what's up with that)

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







I'm not personally for the idea, but I will admit that there's no clear choice(s) to lynch.

##vote No Lynch

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Somberbrero posted:

I don't like Epsilon hedging his vote here.

I just wanted the day to end. With how everyone was voting/the lack of any good leads a no-lynch was obvious.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Excellent life choices.

So, who did you target and what was your reasoning?

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Magnus Gallant posted:

Nope it was smart. If only the way the roles worked wasn't stated in the OP

C'mon. Obviously this was a poor choice; roles have literally been in the OP since day one. Reading them was the first thing you did. Try just admitting it was dumb! We'll forgive you.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







An excellent question!

Magnus would be a pretty obvious choice but I'm undecided on him - he could have just made a poor choice with his roleclaim, but now that we're cooling a bit on him he may be getting away scot-free. The only way to know 100% is if someone comes forward as a sheriff or investigator, which I would not recommend. I'm not a super great mafia player so making a call is difficult. I also want to know why he's not pushing TT again as he was So Sure on the previous day.

Mostly I'm suspicious of anyone who didn't vote D1 - mfcrocker, Opopanax, Pinterest Mom and Poison Mushroom didn't vote. Pintrest Mom is dead, Opopanax is talking a bit, PM is quiet but could be at work or something? Not sure how I feel about that.

If you forced me to guess I'd pick Magnus Gallant, Opopanax, Poison Mushroom and Somberbrero (maybe not all mafia - one could be an arsonist or something I dunno). Ask me again D3?

Also since we're engaged in a dialog:

mfcrocker posted:

So you don't think any other good could come out of D1 that you wanted it over that quickly?

Pretty much! I'm here to play, not dither around while inevitable votes slowly trickle in. I was on the fence for lynch/no-lynch to begin with. The only person I would have wanted to vote was Magnus but it was obvious that wasn't going to happen.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Why do I need to die?

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Somberbrero posted:

Your opinions are inconsistent and wishy-washy. Your posting seems forced and fake.

It's how this player plays the game I like to take a wait and see approach on all things in my life. We've got 48 hours to work with, so I might as well mull things over.

Somberbrero posted:

Even if you're town you are a massive liability. I don't want you around in lynch-lose.

This is some reasoning I can get behind, however - if Magnus starts poisoning people along with lynches and nightkills, we're gonna bleed dry pretty quick. Even if only on odd nights, it's a risk.

##vote Magnus Gallant

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Somberbrero posted:

Epsilon it is weird that you hemmed and hawwed over whether or not to vote Magnus and hovered around to see what the popular opinion would be, especially when you make a very good point in regards to Magnus & TT.

Honestly, you made a better point than I did. I didn't think about a lynch-lose situation. If you don't want people following you, try being stupid like me.


Somberbrero posted:

It's weird that you assume one of your scumlist would be a third party, unprompted. What about anyone there indicates third-party behavior? It's weird that you think I'm scum when I don't match your previously established criterion, which is not having voted day one.

Statistics? I'm assuming there's 4 scum, 2 third parties and 7 town (or maybe 3/2/8 I dunno). I know neutral roles are in the game so I "budgeted" for it. More important, I was asked who I think is suspicious - not who I think is scum. Third parties can harm the town and we should be on the lookout for them!

I think you're potential scum given your posting, plus a bit of gut feeling. I'm not pointing a finger; I think it's too early to do that.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Day 1 was dead and done before I even voted. I like to think things through but when the only real option is to vote no-lynch I'll take it. The only person I wanted to pull for was Magnus but that obviously wasn't happening.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







How did someone not protect the investigator

What the gently caress happened there

God drat it guys. If you're a sheriff, for gently caress's sake don't come forward. Unless you're Tearshed. Tearshed, what have you been up to? What are your thoughts, your feelings? Grace us with your presence, fucker.

CapitalistPig posted:

I think I believe her.

I believe her, too, at least with regards to the busdriver/getting blocked part. My rear end is lucky to be alive.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







It's less outrage and more of an incredulous giggle but whatever arms your crusade I guess

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Somberbrero posted:

'Crusade' is silly hyperbole. Who is scum, Epsilon?

Enemies of the Communist Party.

If you want me to actually analyze people and make a case to present to you, it'll need to wait; I work until about midnight EST assuming no weirdness at my job. Please do not brutally lynch me beforehand!

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Who I Think Should Die, Or At The Very Least Who Should Apologize Profusely, a book by Epsilon Plus

Tearshed:

tearshed posted:

Man, short day yesterday. Only 12 hours.

I don't agree with the Mags lynch. If you claim poisoner, it's no different to claiming town vig. But everyone was all "HE MIGHT HIT TOWN". Well no poo poo. The investigation implied there was a 50% chance he could be the arsonist, and even then I didn't agree with voting him. But then I checked OP and it was actually a 1/3 chance and that's even more bullshit. Bad town.

I really really don't like sombers approach to everything he said about magnus and pushing the magnus lynch ##vote somber. Ras is also gut pick for maybe badguy.

Cpig is goodguy.

Tearshed is barely posting and the one post of serious importance is disagreeing with Somberbrero, who made a lot of very good points and who was probably the main reason Magnus was lynched so effectively. I feel like they are just dodging scrutiny via inactivity (but! to be fair, they could just be busy - god knows I'd rather do things on my break than try to re-read pages of this game whilst on the crapper at work).

Capitalist Pig:

Posting, but not much content. Being vouched for by Tearshed with no real context.

Bonus Content!

I don't have a third pick for scum because frankly I'm not picking up on a whole lot to work with because, surprise, Somberbrero has been up my rear end since Magnus died and frankly I feel like I'm the only "scum" being hunted.

Somberbrero:

Somberbrero posted:

Epsilon is also scum, by the by.

Somberbrero posted:

Even though Epsilon is scum, we need to lynch Magnus anyway. I don't really care what order we do that in, either is kind of unfortunate since both those players are active.

These two gems where you attempt to discredit me without any attempt at explanation, followed up with

Somberbrero posted:

Epsilon it is weird that you hemmed and hawwed over whether or not to vote Magnus and hovered around to see what the popular opinion would be, especially when you make a very good point in regards to Magnus & TT. It's weird that you assume one of your scumlist would be a third party, unprompted. What about anyone there indicates third-party behavior? It's weird that you think I'm scum when I don't match your previously established criterion, which is not having voted day one.

where you believe I'm scum for... agreeing with you? You legitimately made a good point that I, in my inexperience, overlooked - that a reckless poisoner is a liability. Similarly, what I had posted earlier didn't have any particularly strict criteria; only that I was vaguely considering a group of people. Forgive me for not adhering to strict scientific rigor when replying to what I thought was a basic question!

Following that up you confuse two spots of humor (sorry!) for some kind of horrid scum tell. I am very sorry I used the word "crusade" when disregarding your complete lack of an actual case presented.

I think Somberbrero just picked up on one bad statement I made and is honing in on it, or possibly an Executioner with lynching me as his goal. Magnus was much more critical, but even when attempting to discredit Magnus he was working me over.

Also if anyone gives a poo poo I'm the escort. Night one I roleblocked Magnus Gallant because he was hellbent on TT and I was concerned that TT might not make it through the night (statistically, TT is/was more likely to be town than scum). Night two I roleblocked mfcrocker because both Somberbrero and mfcrocker were gunning for me, but Somberbrero's actions made me feel that he was more than likely either a town role just trying to be helpful or an Executioner who needed me dead to claim personal victory while mfcrocker was more interested in just having me dead. If mfcrocker was going to protect tithin, well... poo poo! Sorry dudes. With what appears to be two roleblockers, a jailor and who else knows what's going on I probably didn't think that through and I do apologize. I would also be concerned if mfcrocker immediately came back saying "yes I was going to protect him, ergo Epsilon is scum", though, so...

I'd really like to hear what people other than Somber and mfcrocker have to say, however. If I'm to be lynched, I'd at least like to see everyone's opinion so that you know who to trust after my corpse is hoisted.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







I also had less people actively looking to lynch me then, and now I have a (claimed) PR to justify and pick targets for. It's not just based on a binary town/scum state.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Poison Mushroom posted:

Do you actually think these people are scum, or are you just mad at them for voting you?

I think Somber is town or at least a benign third party. mfcrocker I have no solid grasp on. Tearshed and to a lesser extent CPig are who I actively suspect.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







If you can't see why having a poisoner running around killing people at random is a bad thing I am not sure how to explain it more effectively than previous players have. We technically lynched a townie, but someone killing without direction is a liability regardless of alignment. If he had kept silent until later to try and coordinate a potential scum kill, that would have been reasonable.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







##vote tearshed

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Why PM? She is making reasonable points.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Stupid newbie question: how the hell does TT being a survivor end the game the next day?

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Yeah, I'm the roleblocker. I blocked Opopanax last night because his posting all game has been straddle-the-fence poo poo - the most he's ever really done is explain someone else's actions without contributing much else beyond that except votes. I feel like he's being too quiet, especially for Day 3 and 4 with no scum dead. I really want to know what you've been up to.

Also ##vote Poison Mushroom

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







If I was scum, and I'm as bad a player as you seem to think I am, don't you think one of my scumbuddies would have told me to shut up and sit down?

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







CapitalistPig posted:

Then you're an idiot

Well with evidence like that

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Poison Mushroom posted:

I have no idea who to believe anymore. This game is absurd and it's entirely our own fault.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







CapitalistPig posted:

Please lynch the liar epsilon.

Okay.

Lampsacus posted:

OK so unless PMush is lying and the real driver turns up - my result on Opop was accurate.

Everybody! You either believe I'm lying or you vote Opop. There is no middle ground and don't let scum try murk the waters.

##unvote

##vote Lampsacus

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Really though, I was making a joke based off of those two statements. Even if I'm scum and my scumbuddies all vote for Lamp the dude is in no danger of being lynched.

Let me go over the day when I get home and I'll get back to you. ##unvote

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Currently I think that TT is some kind of neutral role we honestly don't need to worry about - his posting style has made it pretty clear that he's disconnected from the game. CPig has counter-claimed me, which I of course find inherently suspicious having claimed the same role previously. So far I've got these players, in order of most-lynchable to least-lynchable:

1. CPig
2. TT

CPig claims night 2 that he was "completely ineffectual", shortly after PMush says she was roleblocked. I've already stated I roleblocked mfcrocker that night (although it was afterwards). His posting has been pretty lackluster all game but I assume he's doing it from his phone (look at those periods) or busy or some poo poo, so that's a non-issue. The only time he's really dug into somebody was with Magnus, though - but we appeared to be pretty much all in agreement at that point. I was suspicious of CPig the previous night but didn't have much to back it up at the time.

PMush, I think you're either telling the truth and you're the bus driver, or it's (less) likely you're the Witch. However, you've not done a whole lot with your day phase - you mostly appear to be fighting with TT instead of doing anything particularly useful. Having you around as a bus driver is useful though; as we've not gotten any scum yet, even if you're just randomly swapping people you're getting more likely to nail scum (assuming scum don't do something ridiculous like target one of themselves on the off-chance you randomly select a scum). So:

1. CPig
2. PMush
3. TT

Lampsacus seems to be coasting by on having claimed sheriff despite a wide variety of interesting posts!

Lampsacus posted:

##vote no lynch

Because it sounds reasonable. But I am careful of just following the pack. With role madness I am excited to see the clusterfuck of results. :p

This is the exact same poo poo I've been slammed for previously. Similarly:

Lampsacus posted:

I don't understand agreeing that Mag is a town role AND voting to lynch them.

Town should be vying for not_town lynches.

This was after the reasons for lynching Magnus Gallant were pretty clearly stated. This is the same thing Teashed got lynched for (at least partially, in my opinion). Ras stated it more clearly than me with:

Rascyc posted:

I don't want these posts to vanish into the ether. There is something really wrong with this sequence. It goes from an over-explanation of strategies to "Is lynch all liars a thing on SA Mafia?" to "I misread Magnus" to "Lynch all liars".

Also TT brought up the interesting gambit possibility, which I'm not sure if I buy but I'm definitely thinking about it.

So now we stand at:

1. CPig
2. PMush / Lampsacus
3. TT

I've already stated how I feel about Opop:

1. CPig
2. Opop
3. PMush / Lampsacus
4. TT

mfcrocker's actions appear to contradict TT's, and I don't think TT has any real reason to lie about his role/his posting is a pretty clear tell for his role. He also claims to have used his night action on TT twice under belief that he was the jailor. Moreover, he states that TT interacted with Magnus that night, which doesn't mesh with the roles TT could feasibly be. So:

1. CPig
2. Opop
3. mfcrocker
4. PMush / Lampsacus
5. TT

Finally Ras's posting doesn't have anything particular pointing out, other than disagreeing with me on CPig, which isn't really anything to build a case on. But still more likely to be scum than TT.

So basically my list, after rereading the entire thread several times and confusing myself more than once is:

1. CPig
2. Opop
3. mfcrocker
4. PMush / Lampsacus
5. Ras
5. TT

##vote Capitalist Pig and I won't be changing that unless something compelling comes up. This is about all I can wring out with my limited experience. Feel free to ask me questions or call me a huge scumlord, whichever

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Poison Mushroom posted:

That is an admirable effort at a fake effort port.

Bonus points for including four lumpen lists in one post.

I sure wish I knew what that meant.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Yeah but here's the thing, there could be framers and all kinds of fuckery.

Cpig is claiming my role so he is 100% undoubtedly scum.

Opop could still not be due to actions.

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







yeah I roleblocked cpig and was roleblocked in return. what a twist!

also ##vote cpig

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







If you were so sure on Opop yesterday, why weren't you voting him instead of me?

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







I would like to thank my skumfriends for putting up with my atrocious posting and everyone else for not killing me

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Somberbrero posted:

Well done Epsilon. I can't believe you got away with that, but you did! Cap, shoulda claimed earlier on that one. I should have pushed it harder too.

Yeah at least twice I offered for my team to kill me, I was seriously worried about sinking the game. TT is my new best friend.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Epsilon Plus
Dec 30, 2006







Poison Mushroom posted:

GODDAMMIT I KNEW YOU WERE SCUM EP. WHY DID NONE OF YOU LISTEN TO ME.

Good game, though.

Yeeeah with every single non-scum player suspecting me for a few nights I'm not sure how I survived.

  • Locked thread