[Mafia] Contact in Cudlaty

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > The Game Room > [Mafia] Contact in Cudlaty

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

What the hey, I'll do this. Nickname: Angles.

# ¿ Oct 19, 2017 04:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 26, 2024 18:07

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

All these sirens make me flashback to the 90's. Just need a 'must credit drudge report' in there, maybe an oasis soundtrack...

Sirens=scum mating call? Huge if true.

# ¿ Oct 19, 2017 20:50

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Tobbs Gnawed posted:

Why is your mom so long

Quoted to save this sick burn from being lost at the end of the page.

# ¿ Oct 19, 2017 22:56

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

gif Probst posted:

why are we not voting thranguy

he must die

No one taking your scumbait cause probably the scum are already on a ~~joke~~ totally sincere early day one vote or else lurking.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2017 05:43

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

TMMadman posted:

Hello, I am confirming that I am in this game.

But the Cubs just lost and are now out of the playoffs, so I'm taking the rest of the night off.

##vote TMMadman

Not for the weak excuse, but for being a Cubs fan.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2017 20:13

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Thranguy posted:

##vote TMMadman

Not for the weak excuse, but for being a Cubs fan.

That is to say
##vote TMMadman

# ¿ Oct 20, 2017 20:14

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Think I'll stay on my joke vote because 'guy whose one post is making excuse for lurking' looks as bad as anyone else right now.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2017 02:42

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

##unvote

Not quite buying any of the cases out there enough to pick a side yet though.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2017 04:58

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Grandicap posted:

Have you played d1 before? If you are looking for a well reasoned case with backing D1, I don't know what to tell you.

Fair enough. But I don't have strong gut feelings either yet, and there's a lot of day left.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2017 06:07

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

I find that read pretty convincing. Not ready to risk an early hammer, but a lot stronger than any other case I've seen so far.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2017 09:27

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Tobbs Gnawed posted:

Hal's claim is supremely easy to test and he'd need to give out his results at this point, so dunking him seems dumb. Also, stacking hatred is the worst power for scum, though it could be something else that gives hatred (jugg kills etc).

I'm not sure how easy to test it really is. If their faking they can either claim they investigated the person the scum killed or that they were blocked, depending on if they become hated. Either of which could very well actually happen.

Still, also not going to vote for a day one cop claim.

##vote Retro Futurist

Right now that looks like the strongest case to me.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2017 16:37

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

flerp posted:

thoughts

was reading hal as town before the cop claim. it felt like p much every other bif slapfight where she's engaging w/ another townie and with the cop claim there's no way in hell im voting for hal (wouldnt vote for him anyways w/o the cop claim tbh). also, prob wont vote for bif i think she leans more town side for me. its kinda weird bif is buddying up w/ gif kind of, but im not sure thats indictative of either of bif's or gif's alignments.

i agree that the bif/hal slapfight doesnt help anybody. creates a lot of posts, but of only two people, and its hard for anybody (scum or town) to post since the thread becomes so focused on them. makes it easy for scum to just sit on back and sip on their lemonade as they watch the thread implode.

yeah gif is feeling odd to me a bit, but for some reason its leading me towards the town side. im not sure why he keeps going onto thrangles tho it seems like he started it out as a joke vote but i cant tell if hes serious voting thrangles or not.

actually when looking at thrangles himself there's a lot "yeah i agree w/ this" but not a lot of their own independent thought. could be newbie uncertainity, or d1 uncertainity, or scum trying to find the "safest" case (which i feel like thrangles has always chosen, when it becomes oppurtune. such as going onto hal after multiple people have read him and then switching onto opop who is voting for claimed cop). i feel like it might be the last one.

hosed up but im feeling a thrangles vote myself. me 2-ing a lot but in a way that feels like its attempting to be w/ the "safest" case and not trying to actually find scum.

It's uncertainty of both types, be sure. There are a lot of claims based on playstyle history or proclivity to sub out as scum vs town that I don't have any way to evaluate getting thrown around. I've been trying to find the best case in a day full of weak cases, with the only one that felt remotely strong to be getting a cop claim, and now that we're actually getting close to deadline I'm looking for the vote that doesn't help a day one no-lynch happen, which I guess could read the same as 'safest'.

I don't quite understand your case for opop tbh. Can't they be both dumb and scum?

Anyhow, for independent thought, if opop does have a solid explanation to give, maybe we should look at grandicap next? Of all of our most lurkier people right now his posts feel the most sit-back-and-sip-lemonade-y.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2017 21:39

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

##vote STONE COLD 64

Just looking at votes yesterday infi's the one who's been on the most town lynch trains, but his reasoning looks town to me. Wrong about me, but town. Apostate' a bit suspicious to me too, both with the scum-level of upsetness being targetted earlier and, as they mentioned themself, doing a lot of third-voteing. But gif/stone's day one play, sitting on and returning to a jokephase vote without ever giving a case and waiting for actual suspicion to follow it (either naturally or with the help of other scum), leaving briefly only to try and ride the Hal train that would have lead to a lynch if he had been vanilla town, that's what looks scummiest to me this morning.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2017 01:35

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Yes, I'm counting myself and the two dead ones. Could count myself twice, once for each day.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2017 01:49

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Asiina posted:

This always made no sense to me either when you said it there too, since none of us revealed a power role in there because obviously we're suspicious there's scum in the masonry, so I would assume that the scum in our group would want to keep the others alive so that they can more easily talk to them and try to manipulate them to go where they want them to in private.

Like why would a scum want to kill a member of their own masonry any more than they would any other town player?

One of you could have died from a lynch or vig or 3rd party etc.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2017 17:59

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:

like I said, I'm cool with this vote in general, but why are YOU pushing for him so hard (and you have been since the beginning of the game)

I have no idea why he's (=Stone Cold 64) getting so little scrutiny for this kind of play. Does he always do this and have a rep for being a town psychic or something?

# ¿ Oct 24, 2017 20:23

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

##vote b-minus

Grandicap posted:

And finally, when you softclaim you lose all rights to complain about rolefishing. You are telling someone to guess what is in your pocket, then calling them out for their insolence when they ask you what is in your pocket.

Exactly what I was thinking, and also that the most recent set of soft claims completely contradicted the obvious-to-me-as-relative-new-guy explanation of the earlier set of soft claims. (Sincerely not sure if I should elaborate more on this or if it's too much like speculating on town roles to be a good thing to do.)

# ¿ Oct 25, 2017 05:45

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Bifauxnen posted:

btw I've decided to abandon spreadsheeting this game just cause all this hint-hint stuff is going in one ear and out the other rn

Well, if he's going to hardclaim my take doesn't matter anyhow.

# ¿ Oct 25, 2017 05:50

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

flerp posted:

gw team

# ¿ Oct 26, 2017 03:03

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Agreed on B- prob being who they said they were, and definitely interested in what they have to say.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 02:26

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

b-minus1 posted:

I bet you are lol. Did you have a good night?

I was blocked tonight.

I'm a Tracker (with no other nonsense involved.)

First night I followed Asiima, who went nowhere. Second night I was trying to track inf and was blocked.

Came very close to claiming yesterday morning when I was at -2, but held off. Considered claiming during twilight to prevent this exact thing, but wasn't sure how kosher non-jokephase stuff in twilight was and also wasn't sure you wouldn't block me anyway and we'd just have given scum more info.

I didn't particularly expect anyone to believe me until I'm dead if this was what happened, was waiting for you to (more-or-less) declare that you blocked me before posting this in case there was another blocker about. But if Stone Cold is serious about having survived being shot, then, well, you know for sure that couldn't have possibly been me.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 04:10

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

STONE COLD 64 posted:

day one you are most suspicious of me and you make the decision to track...asiina?

I wasn't particularly suspicious of you until day 2, more of Inf and Grandicap. But I was trying to go further down the list to minimize the chance of duplicating Hal's effort, had he survived.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 04:23

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

So, more in the listen to me now and believe me later category, I'm thinking about the no kill, which has to have an explanation. Either someone else stopped it or bminus is scum and they did do a no kill night, and if it's the latter they're going to need to fake an explanation later. Which brings us to stone cold. If he's ever going to want to say that that post was a serious claim to be bulletproof or have been saved and know about a failed attack, he needs to do that clearly today, right?

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 06:34

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

With the no kill and our known role basically confirming my block, I could either lie and claim to be vanilla, or lurk until a completely inevitable -2 or -1, in both cases risking a rush and lynch before getting my result out. (Esp since I didn't claim at -2 before) Claiming right away is the better choice.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 16:23

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:

how does that confirm anything? your role was tracker, how would blocking you result in no kill

unless you're scum and were blocked from your nk

Huh?

I'm saying that the declared block plus no kill was practically an investigative result, and that I should respond to that up front.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 16:44

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Could also be a one shot strongman and you guessing right last night.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 17:42

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Thranguy posted:

First night I followed Asiima, who went nowhere. Second night I was trying to track inf and was blocked.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 22:26

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

I'm starting to suspect opop was actually a death godfather at this point. Not that that does us any good without knowing how many scum there were against all these town roles.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2017 22:54

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Upside/Downside heavily favors lynching TMM tonight. Not much value in mason-watching any more with all of the likely targets outside the masonry. Cop is more valuable even in the worst case scenario of dying tonight instead of me or B- or flerp. So I think we'd need a very strong case to make us want to go the other way today.

##vote TMMadman

# ¿ Oct 28, 2017 01:07

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

I'm thinking it's just that TMM didn't see the breadcrumb and picked the wrong target for his claim. If he'd accused anyone of the other people without a current claim at the time other than Tobbs and Grandi it might have worked.

Or maybe TMM did see the breadcrumb but typed the wrong person as his victim as well as getting AC and asiimi mixed up, was hoping to get copped and cleared tonight, which would have opened the bus-driver theory, but couldn't back out of both errors in the fake claim.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2017 02:43

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

If we're doing full claim today shouldn't we have done that before revealing information from existing claims?

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 00:41

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Sigh. I wish the others hadn't jumped the gun here. I mean, Inf, if they show up at all, is going to claim some kind of Miller, true or not. If we'd done full claim first they'd have had to do that without knowing they'd been copped.

But now that everyone else has revealed their night results and I, by asking the question, have pretty much tipped the person in question off that I have actionable information, we've lost our chance.

Nevergirls visited Bif last night. Got an innocent explanation for that?

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 00:51

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

I have a slight concern that infi might be some variety of Jester...too paranoid, or just paranoid enough?

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 01:53

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

flerp posted:

why would infi be a jester?????

Just thinking through the possible explanations. Scum is most likely, some kind of miller next most likely. We know there aren't any 3rd party killers, but other third party would be possible. Inf has gotten a lot of us reading him as scum before we had the cop read on them, could be deliberate on their part.

But if the cop has time gang flavor, sounds unlikely.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 02:11

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

NevergirlsOFFICIAL posted:

Tbh Infi will be a free lunch tomorrow so why not wait for that

A very strange request from the only other possible target.

##vote infi

Town would want infi flipped asap, hoping they flip some kind of redirector or jack-of-all-trades with a redirect and strongman. Only scum would also want miller infi gone, so both scum is looking like best case to me.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 03:27

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Thranguy posted:

Only scum would also want miller infi gone,

That's "If NG was the only scum of the two", in case wasn't clear.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 03:29

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

Wonder if inf flaked on scum team, because why not use ninja? Fear of roleblock maybe. Or ng had strongman kill? Probably just inf flaking.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 17:40

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

We know Strongman is in the scum toolset this game.

(Stone Cold went nowhere tonight, by the way.)

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 21:08

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

For nevergirls to be innocent requires two scum to explain night three, someone to do the kill and someone to redirect me. (If I'd been redirected to infi I'd have gotten no result because ninja.)

(You'd probably lunch me after that, and the town would be in serious trouble numbers-wise. But 5 scum seems excessive and no combo of two people left even makes sense.)

##vote nevergirls

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 21:43

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 26, 2024 18:07

Thranguy: Apr 21, 2010; Deceitful and black-hearted, perhaps we are. But we would never go against the Code. Well, perhaps for good reasons. But mostly never.

flerp posted:

good game kinda lame scum peetered out but it happens

thanks for modding max

All these things.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2017 23:59

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > The Game Room > [Mafia] Contact in Cudlaty