MtG: Parallel Universe Mafia (Tar's subgame): Game Over

qwints · Post Post #389 (isolation #0) » Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:33 pm

I've been following but not too closely. I'll re-read and give my opinion.

@my old game
If I hadn't been moved, I'd be voting boxman today.

qwints · Post Post #396 (isolation #1) » Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:28 am

Vino, what did you try to do and what mistake did you make in submitting your actions?

qwints · Post Post #399 (isolation #2) » Wed Aug 19, 2009 6:42 am

Why does a doc have two targets?

qwints · Post Post #403 (isolation #3) » Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:10 am

@Vino
The flavor on your card (http://magiccards.info/autocard.php?car ... riksdotter) bothers me. It suggests that you'd have to sacrifice yourself to be a doc. It also provides no explanation for why you'd have two targets. Comments?

Also, what did you try to do last night?

I'm quite disturbed by your incompetence, but I don't see how it could represent a scum tell itself.

qwints · Post Post #405 (isolation #4) » Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:02 am

Pyromaniac wrote: The flavor doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

This bit me in the ass in an ongoing game. Remember tar games always* have safe claims.

*Everyone that I've seen.

qwints · Post Post #423 (isolation #5) » Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:45 am

veerus wrote:However his claim sort of checks out with the card. And it is not unlike Tar to reject a night action due to incorrect submission.

*cough* SAFECLAIMS *cough*

As another player has said, if Vino doesn't claim in his next post what he TRIED to do last night, that's where my vote goes.

qwints · Post Post #429 (isolation #6) » Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:58 am

Still waiting on Vino to claim what he tried to do last night.

qwints · Post Post #466 (isolation #7) » Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:57 am

vote: vino

You're being way too recalcitrant for an honest PR. Given that you've claimed doc, what could you still have to hide?

qwints · Post Post #472 (isolation #8) » Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:32 pm

I stand by my hammer. Vino was obviously stalling when there was no good reason to.

qwints · Post Post #476 (isolation #9) » Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:52 pm

@SSK's game, if I were a vig, I would vig Boxman.

qwints · Post Post #477 (isolation #10) » Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:06 am

On further reflection, I would not vig boxman.

qwints · Post Post #492 (isolation #11) » Thu Aug 27, 2009 2:21 pm

The suspense is killing me. SSK and our game should both be going to game pretty soon. That'll give us a lot of info to go on.

qwints · Post Post #506 (isolation #12) » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:10 am

The 443 theory makes sense to me.

vote: zazier

qwints · Post Post #507 (isolation #13) » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:38 am

Also, I now know boxman is scum. Sorry for the confusion.

qwints · Post Post #509 (isolation #14) » Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:56 pm

I have role info that Boxman is not town aligned.

qwints · Post Post #510 (isolation #15) » Sat Aug 29, 2009 6:34 pm

Never mind. Due to some crossed wires, I don't know that boxman is scum. I only know that either he is non-town aligned or he wasn't targeted for a kill N1.

qwints · Post Post #519 (isolation #16) » Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:18 am

Zakeri wrote:
Never mind. Due to some crossed wires, I don't know that boxman is scum. I only know that either he is non-town aligned or he wasn't targeted for a kill N1.
So from what we can tell of this is... Boxman is not dead.
I would say that this information is helpful, but I'm having a hard time trying to figure out how to frame the sentence so that it's read as sarcasm without blatantly saying "It's Sarcasm."

@Zakeri, it wasn't sarcasm; just the extent of my knowledge.

Also, Papa Zito is town.