TL Mafia LV - Page 84

On May 31 2012 15:33 VisceraEyes wrote:
No one is SUPPOSED to glean that I'm a vigilante from it...crumbs are for determining targets posthumously....not for proving claims Maju.

On May 31 2012 16:10 wherebugsgo wrote:


so if you died and flipped vig you think an upside down question mark would make it apparent that you tried to shoot zealos?

That's one of the funniest things I've ever heard hahahahaha

That being said I'm fairly convinced the vets are posting no matter of alignment and the not-vets are hiding between lurkers if they're mafia, which makes it so hard to figure them out.

7. This game follows Extended Majority Lynch. In order for a player to be lynched, they must reach majority before the deadline, or else a no lynch will take place. Majority is #Players alive / 2 Rounded up.

On May 31 2012 17:00 wherebugsgo wrote:
I don't like lynching VE cause he always flips town whenever he does scummy shit.

On May 31 2012 15:18 VisceraEyes wrote:
And there you have it - the resident lurker places his vote, surely to vanish into the night. My fate is sealed. With a kiss.

A case is coming, it's dominant. Probulous I asked you to check out Storm earlier, if you've done that the case will be much easier to read...I'll reference it a lot. In short, Kita's town play is easily identifiable, as I'll show, and his play this game is not his town play, as I'll also show.

On May 31 2012 15:41 VisceraEyes wrote:
K MZ, thx for the input. I'm paranoid about stupid cryptogram breadcrumbs, so I was a little more ambiguous.

Anyway, I'm not arguing about the breadcrumb. You guys find it inadequate, that's fine...I generally don't even bother.

I'll be making my case against Kita, so while you're busy trying (and succeeding) to get me lynched MZ, I'll be trying to find scum. So good luck with your little crusade there buddy.

On May 31 2012 17:04 wherebugsgo wrote:
I like how everyone's all "let's lynch zealos gogogogogo lynch zealos gg"

and then Meapak wants to kill VE so everyone switches and is all like "let's go lynch VE gogogogogo"

If VE turns out to be town then I'm going to be fairly suspicious of those people who derailed the zealos lynch by moving their votes.

Basically anyone whose name is not Meapak, since he's pretty much confirmed town.

For now though my vote stays on Zealos since I'm more confident that he's scum. Based on VE's past few games I can't say I have what it takes to get a proper read on him.

On February 21 2012 07:33 kitaman27 wrote:






These quotes come from couples therapy and ptp2. You were town both games. So why the change in play-style red?

On February 21 2012 08:50 kitaman27 wrote:


So to be clear, you did not have a mafia epiphany causing a change in playstyle to support policy lynches? Instead you pushed the policy simply to generate discussion?

On February 22 2012 00:25 kitaman27 wrote:


This type of language makes you look scummy. If you don't know what to think about an action, why are you bringing it up? Providing no opinion is essentially summarizing, which is an easy way to contribute without contributing. If you think someone is scummy call it scummy. Calling things weird doesn't say anything one way or another.



Without announcing it in the thread? lol you act as if I'm voting you without ever mentioning you. Who cares if I post it in the thread.

Yes, I voted tyrran in the first post of the game. I do that in most games. Do you believe that's scummy?

Yes, I attacked you for your discrepancy in opinion, does that make me scummy?

Have any of the reasons in your omgus vote pointed to me being scummy?

You pushed a policy lynch and immediately backed off an hour into the game after getting in trouble. You didn't even mention that you still wanted to lynch tyrran. Instead it took my questioning for you to even bring it up. If tyrran was your preferred lynch, why did you switch to me hours later? You said you dropped tyrran because you didn't think you could get him lynched. Does that mean you're more confident that you can push my lynch? Or is it that you are simply attacking your attacker?

You discredited the ability to scum hunt on day one, push a policy lynch because of a mafia epiphany, drop the policy lynch because you were simply generating discussion, go back to supporting the policy lynch after being questioned, and then swap to the guy who is questioning the policy lynch.

Nap time. As much as I enjoy talking about red, I'll try to look at everyone else when I wake up.

On May 28 2012 00:52 kitaman27 wrote:


I think GreYMisT just wanted to brag about being a Grubby mod. CAUGHT YOU!

I agree with Wiggle's statement about the pardoner. The only person who we should elect as a the runner-up should be a player who states in the thread that he is unwilling to use the role on anyone but himself.

Blazing, you may not be a troll, but you spam like no other. 37 posts in the first few hours of the game? -_-

Mayor and pardoner elections are less important without bodyguards. The focus today should be determining the mayor's day one lynch. I may dislike policy lynches, but grush has failed to address any concerns. With a lyncher possibly in play, its extremeley likely that he has decided to run for mayor. I suggest we elect someone who has not declared their candidacy yet.

##Vote Hyaach. You got this.

On May 28 2012 00:52 kitaman27 wrote:


I think GreYMisT just wanted to brag about being a Grubby mod. CAUGHT YOU!

I agree with Wiggle's statement about the pardoner. The only person who we should elect as a the runner-up should be a player who states in the thread that he is unwilling to use the role on anyone but himself.

Blazing, you may not be a troll, but you spam like no other. 37 posts in the first few hours of the game? -_-

Mayor and pardoner elections are less important without bodyguards. The focus today should be determining the mayor's day one lynch. I may dislike policy lynches, but grush has failed to address any concerns. With a lyncher possibly in play, its extremeley likely that he has decided to run for mayor. I suggest we elect someone who has not declared their candidacy yet.

##Vote Hyaach. You got this.

On May 28 2012 02:39 kitaman27 wrote:


Do you disagree with my assessment or do you just really want to get elected? :p



Lyncher is likely to run for mayor. Picking someone who isn't running reduces the odds of electing a lyncher. It doesn't really matter if we elect a lurker or less skilled player as long as they are town. Mayor isn't really a town leader in this setup without the bodyguards.



Lies. Foolishness put much more effort in endorsing his candidate.



Because he is a newer player and I want to hear more from him. Do you agree that it is more likely that a lyncher will be running for mayor?

Lets lynch meeple.

On February 22 2012 12:23 kitaman27 wrote:
Dang it, I'm a sucker for blue claims. Funny to see the votes pile up on red after the claim, rather than before. On one hand, a mafia player who is set to die should always be claiming blue, but on the other, his claim ties up a potential roleblocker. Tracker is a tricky claim because even confirming it doesn't necessarily mean he isn't a mafia stalker or something. I'll be keeping my vote on him for the moment.

Now to everyone else:

I've enjoyed comedy hour with Jackal, but his filter is completely void of content. Not a single post showing he isn't just along for the ride.

Toad appears to be going through post-Arkham depression or something. A lot of fluff and he isn't very willing to share his reads.





These two statements by prpl completely contradict each other. You argue how you don't think red is scum, but you're willing to vote him to avoid no lynch? How does that make sense? If you're going to argue that he really is blue, then of course a no lynch would be more beneficial. How about push a different lynch if red isn't your priority? This is really poor from him.

I know I already picked on Dirkzor for his language, but I'm going to do it again.



"Hey guys. Look at me and my protown attitude!"



Only scum say this.



Lack of aggression and confidence.

On May 31 2012 14:44 kitaman27 wrote:


You're always a pleasure to play with VE <3

So you're a vig who shot night one, but didn't call your shot?

On May 31 2012 14:51 kitaman27 wrote:


If you vig'd him at night and was roleblocked, why am I you're primary lynch target going into day two? Wouldn't it make more sense for your target to be the guy you just tried to kill?

On February 24 2012 12:43 kitaman27 wrote:
bah I just spent 2 and a half hours reading the thread and going through filters/past games and I don't have much to show for it other than some town reads and some kinda-maybe inactive scum reads. I'm pretty exhausted from earlier today so hopefully I'll have something more concrete tomorrow after a good night's sleep. On a side note, I really really hate no flip -_-

A zero kp setup seems extremely difficult to balance, especially for a "normal game". Scum might have a poisoner (in which we wouldn't have a notification), town might have ton of roles punishing mistakes, or scum might have some sort of conditional kp, but it seems much more likely they missed on their hits.



This makes me feel good about bugs since its certainly true from lotr. Additionally, he didn't spearhead the lynch on day one, which is a common bugs scum pattern. I was somewhat weirded out by the "I love you" comments, since he did the exact same thing with chaoser in arkham, but I disagree with VE that he is the best lynch for today.

syllo has more posts on day one than he usually does in an entire game as scum. Unless he has drastically changed his scum game, he is looking town.

It's already been said, but I'll agree that an inactive RoL is a scum RoL. He promised a good showing, but right now he being considered for a lynch. Got anything to say?

I dislike people passing off prpl as bad. He had a monster scum game in the large game hosted by GM and had a good showing in responsibility. That being said, his "I don't think red is scum, but I'll vote for him to secure the lynch" post is really poor. It was really early in the day, why isn't he providing an alternate lynch candidate instead? Additionally, his posting has been really defensive and it shows that not getting himself lynched seems to be a priority.

nuke hasn't done any scum hunting. His explanation for his vote was "because syllo said so".

I'll see if I can come up with a better case on someone tomorrow, possibly chaoser.

On May 28 2012 04:08 kitaman27 wrote:
Hmm, mason would be a great claim for a lyncher. Doesn't matter if he's telling the truth on day two since he's already won by then.

As much as I'd like to see a town role elected, we can't automatically assume toad is town.

On May 28 2012 05:49 kitaman27 wrote:
Lets end the discussion right now.

Toad is our pardoner.

It's the best of both worlds. It ensures we don't have a scum pardoner, which is the more dangerous of the two roles and it protects us from a mayor lyncher. If you're town toad, then great we denied the role. If not, then we don't really care if you would prefer mayor.

In the OP, the Mod wrote:
Lyncher
Must get his target lynched to win. If he does not, he loses.