EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
/in Holidays are coming up for me anyways, I'll have more time. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
To answer the questions proposed: 1) I still am not sure whether or not lurker kills on day 1 are good, it's a high variance move which I don't necessarily like, but if no one has come off as being scummy, it's better than having an obvious mislynch. 2) I'm sure there will be some sort of pressure voting happening in this game, especially since we don't know how many mafia there are, they could easily start ganging up on one person and it'd be a lot harder to detect than last game where it was guaranteed to be 2 members, it could be fairly high at 3 + even a serial killer who would be willing to lynch anyone since they don't care whatsoever. 3) I don't even know if I have a slight allergy to them, my mouth gets itchy when I eat prawns  Moc: Low quality post are just filler posts which doesn't really help encourage discussion or which are kind of pointless and can be considered just posting to create noise. The latter is the type I dislike more though, since it becomes a lot harder to catch up on the thread without getting lost and having to backtrack and read again. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 19 2012 11:09 Mocsta wrote: @Sylencia I appreciate that you are busy today. At some stage in the game, all of us will be in the same situation. For me personally though, this does not make you void from a vote. For the time being ##fos:Sylencia I will re-consider once I have read more comments from yourself. Not saying I'm always going to be busy, I was just stating that you might consider me a lurker for now but that's just due to the schedule I have over the 2 days in which this period runs. I wasn't using it as an excuse to try exclude me from a vote. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I have played in 1 game - Newbie XXXII where I lost as a vanilla townie. I've now also caught up on the thread a little, but at this point in time I really can't get anything out of the group. Unlike the previous game in which I played, there was a lot of activity early on and so everyone had to kind of get involved and in the action, but this game seems to be the opposite, where no one seems that keen/willing to talk. This definitely brings the advantage to the scum since they currently don't feel pressure in needing to talk, so if they don't talk, they don't reveal anything to us. I guess what's happened is an attempted case to bring up stuff against Corazon, but with only 5 or so posts to go on, there's not too much to talk about. I'm not sure myself though where the topic could lead to, but I'll be here for a few hours if anyone wants to discuss anything. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
If you're town, please don't just roll over and die, defend yourself better, make a case for yourself and actually help out the town rather than stating that there are facts out there and people just need to see it and find it for themselves to show that you're not scum. I am going to be forced to vote in about 8 hours, and if someone hasn't made a good case for someone else being scum (or if you haven't shown why you are actually town) , I will most likely be voting for you. (I understand that there is another case going for Mocsta at the moment, so I will be rereading what people have been saying about that too before I decide.) Call it sheeping or what not but last night I didn't have enough information and today I only have time to read everything once so I will be relying a lot on what other people have said to make my decision. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Corazon: Remember that while most of us are newbies, there are players who have obs'd a few games before this, and seen the inner workings on how scum players play, what newbies do and general scum reads. Putting it into practice is of course a lot harder though. But don't be intimidated by all that, just play your best game and hope for the best. Now, for who I am going to vote for - at the moment my thoughts are actually quite split multiple ways. First, I said I wanted to vote threesr, but I feel like the behaviour displayed shouldn't be considered TOO deeply (but still considered of course) because while it annoys a lot of people, the statements made were mostly just noise. However, the unvoting and voting of different targets makes me feel uneasy, as everyone who he has voted for has been in the firing line at some point during the day, and I can't tell if it's a way to try pressure others into following suit by way of numbers or not. In the case of voting for Corazon - this is the easy path for me, I can simply sheep and jump onto the corazon train but I don't know if that's the right way either. He was targeted early, but this was due to the lack of reads at the time and I think that scum have jumped onto the opportunity to get someone out easy, and honestly to me the thing with Corazon is that while he is defensive, he is still clear with what he is saying and is direct in replying to things which are targetted at him. Downside is he did make a slip, and it most definitely could've been subconciously done and I don't know if I should overlook that or not - since I learned from last game you should go with the most obvious pick from the most obvious reads. I chose to ignore it last time and I paid the price by losing us the game essentially. Fatchunk I still have no idea about, I read his filter but I didn't get much from it. I really hate this, but for now I am leaning towards Corazon, since I don't want to be ignoring 'obvious' tells like I did last game. ##Vote cDgCorazon I can still change my vote for the next couple of hours before I leave but at the moment this is where I stand | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
fixed forgetting the bolding | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 20 2012 14:22 Mocsta wrote: Im at work, so will make an effort to put together a well-constructed post when i get home tonight. Prob 8-9hours. I will state now for the record (in the hopes that it might prevent further sheeping) the below: I disprove of your candour in regards to sheeping. *Note: I am not calling you out as Mafia* I don't think sheeping aids the scum hunt. By taking the "easy" path, and either admitting sheeping, or just copying others quotes; you provide no information as to where your allegiance lies (i.e town or mafia). If the motives are town based, then we can not discriminate you as town easily, making the scum hunt harder. If the motives are mafia based, then you are appearing to contribute and thus and satisfy the mafia modus operandi. Ah, I should've clarified what I was saying in my post. I said it was possible to take the easy way out, but I did my vote based on the slip that he did, it wasn't purely off what others had said. I looked at the filters of the suspicious players (this part I admit I only looked at the players people were targetting) but I did come up with my own conclusion based off what I read. I was very much leaning towards voting threesr before I fully read what everyone else had said but since there was the 'accidental reveal', I can't really just ignore it. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
 Will post again after I read the posts, and if anyone needs any answers from me in the meantime, feel free to post it up while I read. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Also note that this doesn't mean I'm implicating Corazon as scum, as what Omni says does make sense, but I'm not going as far as to say he is 100% town. For the previous day, we have ourselves 7/13 (or 12 if you exclude Spag himself) people voting for Spag. Along the way, what we can take away from this is that there are scum scattered around this vote. The exact number is of course unknown, but to get the ball rolling it wouldn't be unreasonable to say there was at least 2 members voting for Spag here. Spaghetticus (7): Aquanim, OmniEulogy, Mocsta, cakepie, Kickstart, Chromatically, shz I've split the votes into 3 groups, the first 3, the next 2 and the final 2. To start with the final 2 votes: These final 2 votes were essentially making the lynch guaranteed, they could have stayed with their original vote, but decided to move over for their own reasons. shz: Very willingly bandwagoned both his votes on cora and Spag, very little analysis behind the reasoning other than not liking spag's defense, a little shady in my eyes, since Cora has quite a high chance of being town, and Spag being confirmed town. Chrom: Listed out his suspicions, but then also bandwagons onto Spag, only saying that the points were already raised by others, though there is a small explanation after. Still keeping my eye out, but isn't so bad. From the middle 2, the fact this area is where the balance of the votes changes, it's likely that at least one of the three could be scum. Kickstart: Hard to say, since it's a complete opposite to last game where he posted a lot and was very active, he did make a case, but it didn't really cover too much new information it was the same as what Aqua already said, just reflavoured. Cake: Reasonable points raised, only concern is the really weird part in the middle: Being the fourth vote, having Chrom move to Spag would pretty much call for a death sentence, since I was not around and Spag won't vote for himself meaning it would be a 5/11 vote count. Other than that, looks quite constructive and open with information. From the two in the middle, I would definitely say that Kick is on my watchlist, and while I'm not entirely sure on cake, I am inclined to say he is more likely to be town. First 3 - set the ball in action: Aqua - While I don't agree that posting rationally is scum, I think most of the points found were legitimate, and could've easily convinced me. In addition, Aqua is putting his neck on the line changing his vote from Cora to Spag. Only reasons to do this are: a) Legitimately believed he found the right tells b) Plan on voting Cora (implying he is also scum) but hoping the votes didn't roll in backfired - only considered because the vote was dropped so so early on. Plan b would be a really radical move to do, and I would believe in option A more, and so I'm more inclined to believe he has a higher chance of being town. Omni: So confused. If you were adamant about Cora being scum why would you go and change your vote? In my mind it makes little sense because the way you voted for Spag made it seem like you disregarded your strong thoughts on Cora and just moved straight onto Spag because he didn't rebound from Aqua's claims too well. Just stick to your reads because the reasons behind your vote on Spag were way too speculative compared to what you thought about Cora. Mocsta: Well thought out arguments, and during the day was bringing up a lot of discussion points, I like to think of Moc as more of a townie than scum at the moment. Now - naturally this list might not actually say too much but I am going to say that it is VERY unlikely for there to be (7+Spag)/9-10 townies vote for an innocent player. There had to be some manipulation going on in, it is just a matter of finding out who. If I had to list my two suspicions from the list - I would say I am suspecting Kickstart and Omni. There is something extra about Omni which doesn't feel right, I'm not completely sure what it is but I feel like there's something there. I'll post about the non-voters next, but this one took me a lot longer since I got distracted by 2 games of dota.. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I think I worded that kinda bad, since it sounded right in my mind but it looks awkward here but I dunno how to really explain what I'm thinking... | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
The upside is that the thoughts on Omni seem to match up with what I posted last night, but now there's been a lot more meat put into the argument against him, but before I vote I'd like to see what the defense is like. As for orange, if we see him being mroe active today - hopefully I am too - we mght be able to get a better read on him, since at the moment it's still a little hard to nail him down as any role. Cora: I'd like to think there isn't an SK for now, since as you said there was only one kill. If cake was the SK, would you really think he'd come out and openly admit he was roleblocked, only for there to be 2 kills tomorrow? :\ | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
7-9 VT + 1 RB + 0-2 other blues(/SK)? 2 mafia + 1 RB seems plausible I guess, but having 2 role blockers in the game suggests a lot more blues than usual.. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 22 2012 17:43 Aquanim wrote: @Sylencia Who do you think you would have voted for if you'd been here near the day 1 lynch? I would say I would stick to Cora, but it's really hard to say objectively since it's already in the past and there's some bias now as to my thought process. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 22 2012 21:18 Aquanim wrote: @Sylencia: Who's your top scumread at the moment? If it's Omni, who's your second? It'd have to be Kick atm but only because his play has been completely different, very lurky seemed like he sheeped onto the Spag vote and it was a critical vote too, since it pretty much pushed Spag into the guaranteed to be lynched zone. I know that people have also been suspicious of FatChunk understandably, but I really want to hear a defense from him since he hasn't posted at all today - so none of that has cleared up at all. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 23 2012 10:47 FatChunk wrote: @Aqua I apologize, i meant to say i don't think the evidence is conclusive against chrom, but Mocsta brought up some good points regarding Chromatically's agression and alignment to Omni to give me a mild scum read. I am suspicious of Omni, and it would be foolish to ignore the post Mocsta made regarding his and Chrom's alignment. I suggest we pursue Omni, while keep an eye on sHz. A mafia turn on Omni would cause an increase in suspicion in Chrom, and a town turn on Omni would eliminate interplay between the two. Seems hard to believe that Omni and Chrom would be aligned since that would mean that Chrom was throwing Omni under the bus 3 minutes into Day 2. In the case where everyone takes what Mocsta said seriously and agrees that they are both scum I could see it happening, but since there wasn't too much response to it at the end of the night, it wouldn't be natural to throw them under first opportunity you get. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 23 2012 08:29 Aquanim wrote: I don't think Syl is the most active poster at the best of times (on a quick read of XXXII, where he was VT). I'm prepared to give Syl a little more time to get his head in the game and start contributing and committing to reads... my patience is running out, though. The problem that is frustrating for me is that even if I do say anything, literally nothing comes out of it. Honestly, I'm happy that FatChunk made a point against me, but even the point he makes was completely ignored by all but you :| It's like I'm a ghost around here :{ | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
If Omni flips scum, I'd be more inclined to believe Chrom is likely town If Omni flips town, I am not sure it really gives much info about Chrom. Do you have a different perspective on that? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I've mainly held off because I've also considered Omni who has been on my watchlist from last night when I made my post, but I haven't been 100% convinced about voting him yet. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
At the very least, why are you not at least making a case on Cora rather than making these claims and leaving them be? Your day 1 vote was apparently a pressure vote which turned into believing what people said., but now we're on Day 2 and been defending yourself against the pressure laid against you and Chrom - however unlikely the links were - but you never thought to bring up any more points against Cora, rather you just say that he is scum and vote for who everyone else is/was again? ##vote Omni | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Aqua, do you have any questions you want to ask me? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I think the term 100% is just a term that is being thrown around, but it isn't necessarily a tell. Generally scum are a bit more careful in what they say, they won't go about spouting incorrect facts which are due to be revealed a few hours later to show they are wrong. So I'm inclined to think this is more of a way to give impact to his case. Aqua: I can tell you who my town reads are, which are you, cake, the now threesr replacement and myself. My top suspect now goes back to Kick who was my 2nd choice in the previous day, this is due to his uncharacteristic lurking, which differs completely from his normal playstyle. Problem is, I also suspect shz pretty highly, and we have Kick accusing shz from night 1. This conflict means that there's a good chance that I would be wrong with one of the two - or they are masking their relationship well. Chrom pings on my radar a little bit, after he backtracked at the end of the day/start of the night. On December 23 2012 23:38 Chromatically wrote: [u]I do not understand how we are considering lynching lurkers (threesr/Orange) over the very scummy players in this game. On December 24 2012 09:20 Chromatically wrote: Okay, I still think that shz is scummy, but at least 2 of the mafia are hardcore lurking right now. I think that we pretty much have to lynch a lurker today. The problem is that we're basically coinflipping, but I don't think that we have any other choice. Considering shz has been a primary target throughout day 2, why should we suddenly flip over to lynching a lurker? Other than that, I really don't have a good read on most of the other remaining players. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 24 2012 13:17 cDgCorazon wrote: How do you feel about me? Is there anything I need to clarify for you? You seem to be a lot more town than in Day 1, there's not really much I want to ask you but I'm just not completely convinced yet. Also, welcome yamato Now, for day 3 coming - is it possible for the town to vote based on who they think is suspicious first - with some reasoning, followed by defenses and then switching of votes? I feel that in the first 2 days there were quite a few people who said X was their prime suspect but then voted for someone else because they were the majority. Leaving a suspect out of the firing line is the easiest way scum can get through the lynching phase and gives the enemy absolutely no pressure at all. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 24 2012 22:37 shz wrote: But, I don't think that really pursuing Chroma is a good move at the moment, while there are still so many lurkers lurking hard. We have to get them to post more and look what we find. ? The lurkers were around before, as they are now, what has changed since day 2? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Now, you're saying that pursuing Chrom is not a good move. Why have you done a 180 on your actions? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Yamato seemed to back up my thoughts on Kickstart playing the opposite game to his usual, which is not something I would expect - so for now my vote goes to Kickstart since he was my 2nd most suspicious player after Omni. ##Vote Kickstart | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I'd like to think that it was option a for this, and if he was given more time the scum probably would've been revealed right off on his first day here. Not something they wanted, so they silenced him. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 26 2012 15:16 cDgCorazon wrote: If you feel that Yamato was on the right idea, are you going to honor his final wish and lynch kick? Do you feel like we need to go in another direction? Or do you feel like we should give kick a chance to defend himself? I have already done so (voted) since his thoughts aligned with mine. As I said in Night 2, it's better we all get our votes in early, see what the accused have to stay, and move appropriately from there. It gives a lot more information for us than blindly bandwagoning and not really putting pressure on your suspects. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 26 2012 15:42 cakepie wrote: Sylencia: Please provide a risk-reward assessment on "lynch shz for voting irresponsibly" vs "lynch kickstart for delibarate calculated lurking". Based on their play and your current read on them, how would you weigh the costs of mislynching if they are town, and the potential damage from not lynching if they are scum? I'll answer this soon, but with your second question are you referring to what happens if we lynch one of them and they are town / not lynching one and they are scum? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Kickstart has been extremely inactive during the course of this game, and has contributed very little to the game.In the case of a mislynch, what have we gained? Not very much - we have removed yet another suspicious person off our list yet it is another townie. That is a pretty bad situation for us, since that means the scum have lurked/blended in well enough that we literally have no idea what is going on. However, what we gain is that we end up cutting off what could be considered dead weight. Having participated the least, and providing nothing, it is hard for us to get anything from him. If Kick is a scum, he is doing so in a very obvious manner. Should he not be voted out today, he will probably be the number one target tomorrow and I don't think very much is going to change that unless he is killed off by the mafia. So if he is scum, and we kill someone who isn't scum, tomorrow would be 4:3, killing him would lead it down to be 3:2 etc. etc. meaning we would need to hit perfectly for the final rounds. Danger of leaving him really depends on how much information we can get out from voting someone else - at the current moment it'll probably be shz or FC. The risk of voting out shz is that if he is town, we're really leaving ourselves vulnerable to scum manipulation in votes. The majority of the town has not really been active in choosing votes, there's just a lot of bandwagoning happening. shz, while he has been voting non-optimally, still gives us a reasonable chance of voting out scum if we find one, if he is town. The problem lies with his loyalty, which is up in the air, but I am honestly unsure of his status. If we leave in shz and he is scum, the reverse of what I mentioned just now happens, where he can easily manipulate the votes with the rest of the scum playing a bandwagon game, requiring only one extra vote to end the game. This can easily be done, and it's rather risky. Personally, I'd still consider Kick a higher priority simply because it's easier to tell by the end of the next day what shz is since he does participate in the discussions. I've noticed people mentioning FC, but I honestly don't have enough to go off him to make any real comment. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Day 2: Omni, cake Day 3: cake, Orange? Just need to make a note down but I'm not 100% sure and I don't want to really scour through the posts to find them at the moment. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
In terms of Kick's actions, he was claiming shz was scum from Day 2, so it's not like he found a window of opportunity to bus shz, he's did it for almost a week. Instead, I feel like it's the people who switched votes who saw it as a window of opportunity to grab the game right there, since it was such a hasty move as well I don't see it as anything but extremely suspicious. Also only just noticed I missed Chrom's post from yesterday: On December 28 2012 06:56 Chromatically wrote: I don't see any scumteam that doesn't include shz and Syl, and I see no scumteam that includes Kick. Both claims look to be completely false, and insanely suspicious too. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 28 2012 14:29 cakepie wrote: 1. how would you order the three suspects? 2. What of shz? Earlier, you mentioned that his loyalty was still "up in the air": Does kickstart's shz vote + the failed switch convince you that Shz is town? We've lynched kickstart, but shz's "non-optimal" voting may still be a liability as town, or mask his intentions as a bandwagoning scum. How would you assess his participation in D3 discussions, notwithstanding the failed wagon on him? 1. FC, Chrom then Orange, the difference between my suspicions of Chrom and Orange are very very slim. Honestly, they both look super shady to me. The reason why FC looks the most scummy to me is because he decided to switch votes at the very last minute, even though he was already voting for someone he 'suspected', and even though he had more of a 'suspicion' on shz he decided not to bring it up or change his vote any sooner. My guess is that because there was the last minute rush, if there was a person who blindly moved over then the vote would be over and there would be yet another mislynch. As for shz, I think the fact the scum tried to kill him off gives him a very strong town image. If he is scum, hats off to them, the last 30 minutes and Kick's accusations of him have really made him look a lot less suspicious. I wouldn't put it past Kick either to be planning that, which is why I'm not completely discounting it, but the other 3 were definitely a lot more shady. His play is still non-commital, but what he has done during Day 3 was definitely a lot more town-oriented than what a lot of the other people were doing. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 28 2012 17:56 Aquanim wrote: Besides the end of day three, what about Chromatic's play strikes you as shady? Honestly, it looks like it was just leftover sentiments from night 2, where he mentioned the lurker lynch stuff, but after reading his filter again I failed to really make a case against him... I'm guess it was just that and the end of day play that make me feel weird about him. I'm still going to be wary of him though. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
If you stay alive, he's making a play at you to vote someone other than himself. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##Vote Orangeremi Anyone need more info from me, go ahead and shoot. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 29 2012 14:20 cakepie wrote: Just to be clear, syl, you were not roleblocked? Actually I was, didn't realise I had the PM. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
Also, when I voted Orange, I was still under the impression I was voting for FC next. There would be no town image projected to him if I was to vote him right after, right? This was before the 1-1 theory came about, and honestly, I'm not exactly sold on the 1-1 theory yet either. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 30 2012 14:54 Chromatically wrote: If FC flips town, then Orange is probably the most likely, with Syl next. I think that a town FC is very unlikely, however. err, if FC flips town, we only have one day left. It'd become 3-2 on the next day. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
But if in the case you do that it'd become 2-1, since I am not scum. (This is assuming Orange is though). | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
FC, you're being suspected. You've already got votes on you. And yet, you're still confident that you'll be around for the next day? You're not going to be killed off at night if you're town, because you act scummy as ever. But when you have information, you give it out to everyone, whether or not it's actually true or not. There is no reason why at this critical moment where we can get a massive lead for killing scum you should withhold any information. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
##Unvote ##Vote: FatChunk | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On another note, RBs both start with C cakepie? seeing as how only 2 people in this town have not been roleblocked and there doesn't seem to be any roleblocked roleblockers.... | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
On December 31 2012 09:00 shz wrote: Why does everyone starts at five minutes before lynch. No time to digest. 1) Scum like it because it gives people less time to change their votes - especially if they are not around 2) All the information, true or false, starts spilling out at the last moment because for some reason the really obvious things such as checking the list of RB claims and then realising there's only 2 people who haven't been roleblocked only gets revealed at the last minute. (I'm personally guilty of this point, since I thought about it last night, but only checked around the same time that cake posted it :\) | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
5-1 currently, 4-1 after tonight, 3-1 if we guess wrong, 2-1 after next night, 2-0 victory. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
| ||
