Mini Normal 2174 | Korean Pop Music | Mafia Wins!

nopointinactingup · Post Post #92 (isolation #0) » Mon Oct 26, 2020 8:56 am

Good day all! It's good to make a first post after a four year hiatus. Forgive me if I'm not familiar with the current meta and probably some new terminologies. Looking to do some mighty fine scum-hunting with a secret weapon o' mine. Will leave an analysis post on what happened shortly

nopointinactingup · Post Post #103 (isolation #1) » Mon Oct 26, 2020 9:32 am

@Thoughts about shits and gigglez at the beginning: I'd keep a note to myself that the 3 participants is leaning town based on the conversation. I also think it's a townish sign to start the first wagon quickly since scum benefit from stalling the game. Noraa, Gitch, Plus can be town for now.

In post 46, Trendall wrote:
In post 43, Noraa wrote:the question is more why did you not vote in general?

By not voting and seeing how people react to that
, I am participating in the beginning stages of the game just as much as anybody else is.

I feel that this is a little bit contrived. It feels more like you thought of this reason when asked. Have you done this in any of your previous town games?

In post 51, bob3141 wrote:
In post 33, Glitch wrote:
In post 31, Flubbernugget wrote:VOTE: bob
Not enough drama
Lockscum

In post 31, Flubbernugget wrote:VOTE: bob

This blind vote leaves me feeling flubber is town. The fourth vote on the first rvs wagon is almost always from town especially the more blind it is. As scum tend to have trepidation when voting a townie on the first rvs wagon i find. They might vote early or after the ice is broken but not that on the tipping point between being nearer no votes and being near exec.

Based on this response to the wagon I'm leaning town on Bob because he's showing scum-hunting intent rather than self-preservation.

In post 55, Trendall wrote:
In post 49, Flubbernugget wrote:t doesn't seem to be doing much
How do you know? I could have figured out who all the mafia are by now for all you know.

This seems defensive. Keeping knowledge and even reads and opinions secret are bad for town and good for scum.

In post 90, Trendall wrote:Agree with what Noraa says in post #88, I thought the same thing too before she said it.

VOTE: Glitch

This feels really sheepish. Which part of Nora's post do you agree with? Why do you think scum-Glitch would necessarily try to push on Nora when you are his biggest suspect?

VOTE: Vote:Trendall

nopointinactingup · Post Post #118 (isolation #2) » Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:00 am

In post 107, Trendall wrote:
In post 103, nopointinactingup wrote: It feels more like you thought of this reason when asked. Have you done this in any of your previous town games?
Yes, virtually all of them as far as I can remember. Certainly all the ones I've played this year. A person can easily look this up.

I checked 3 of your latest games.
The latest game you did RV on your first post and was town.
Two games before you did not RV and was scum in one and town in another.
But you didn't mention

not voting on purpose to facilitate discussion

on any of the games so I'm still inclined to believe you made it up.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #119 (isolation #3) » Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:02 am

In post 114, Trendall wrote:Games where I don’t post a random vote in my first post as town are Newbies 977, 989, 1024, 1053, 1066, 1084, 1793, 1893, and 2035. So I’ve been doing exactly this for about ten years. Which again, anybody could have easily looked up. Unless they didn’t actually care and just wanted to cast suspicion on me, I guess.

In games 1075 and 1094, I place a random vote for people who don’t have avatars, but both of these games are from 2011 and I wouldn’t care about this sort of thing nowadays.

It's completely ok imo to not RV in the first post. I'm more concerned about the contrived reason you gave for not RV-ing. Why didn't you just say you do it all the time and quote your games?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #122 (isolation #4) » Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:11 am

Nora, doing stupid things is fine but having un-genuine reactions when asked about said stupid things is pretty scummy. Also not sure why you're white-knighting Trendall here after a whole lot of fluff postings.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #124 (isolation #5) » Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:14 am

In post 46, Trendall wrote:
In post 43, Noraa wrote:the question is more why did you not vote in general?
By not voting and seeing how people react to that, I am participating in the beginning stages of the game just as much as anybody else is.

Yes you did, but this is your initial reaction

nopointinactingup · Post Post #312 (isolation #6) » Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:21 am

This is a prod dodge. It seems like a lot of content has been generated, I'm taking a close look in 4 hours

nopointinactingup · Post Post #317 (isolation #7) » Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:02 pm

In post 125, Noraa wrote:
In post 122, nopointinactingup wrote:Nora, doing stupid things is fine but having un-genuine reactions when asked about said stupid things is pretty scummy. Also not sure why you're white-knighting Trendall here after a whole lot of fluff postings.
I'd like to take all the credit for moving us out of RVS thank you very much.
All jokes aside, I think I have fluffed but I also think I have posted lots of game advancing(even if only a little ) content

What game advancing contents are you talking about .. I've yet to seen you post anything substantial despite all the fluff and you haven't moved your vote at all from RVS.

In post 126, Trendall wrote:Yes which there is nothing wrong with.

There is nothing wrong with it except for the high likelihood that you made it up on the spot. At the very least it's a bit weird and defensive.

In post 128, Glitch wrote:
In post 114, Trendall wrote:Unless they didn’t actually care and just wanted to cast suspicion on me, I guess.
Do you consider it AI to cast suspicion on players in the first 5 pages without any reason to suspect them?

Can you clarify AI? Sorry, old-fashioned player here.
Edit: Got it

In post 130, Hiraki wrote:
In post 103, nopointinactingup wrote:@Thoughts about shits and gigglez at the beginning: I'd keep a note to myself that the 3 participants is leaning town based on the conversation. I also think it's a townish sign to start the first wagon quickly since scum benefit from stalling the game. Noraa, Gitch, Plus can be town for now.
Weird.

In post 103, nopointinactingup wrote:This seems defensive. Keeping knowledge and even reads and opinions secret are bad for town and good for scum.
The post was clearly in jest - you even said it yourself - "thoughts about shits and gigglez". This is weak and weird.

Is there any particular aspect of it you find weak and weird? The logic of your post eludes me.

In post 130, Hiraki wrote:
In post 103, nopointinactingup wrote:Which part of Nora's post do you agree with?
Why is this important? What produces town to say that they like X part and scum to say they have Y part?

It's important because I am trying to gauge whether Trendall's vote on Glitch was because Trendall genuinely thought Glitch was scum or because he was trying to start an opportunistic counter wagon to save himself. When people sheep votes without adding to the evidence or thoughts behind their vote, it's generally not a town sign.

In post 132, Trendall wrote:
In post 130, Hiraki wrote:Are you saying that you only random vote as scum? That would be a pretty lame way to play.
No, I've only drawn a mafia sided role on this site once. And in that game I never placed a random vote at the start of the game. Why would I ever do what you're suggesting?

Do you see my point Trendall? From my perspective, the only time you were scum you didn't place a random vote and in this game you didn't place a random vote PLUS making up a strange reason for not placing that vote.

In post 162, Glitch wrote:
In post 103, nopointinactingup wrote:@Thoughts about shits and gigglez at the beginning: I'd keep a note to myself that the 3 participants is leaning town based on the conversation. I also think it's a townish sign to start the first wagon quickly since scum benefit from stalling the game. Noraa, Gitch, Plus can be town for now.
Now, as much as your pocket is enticing, I'm gonna have to pass.
What makes you think scum wouldn't participate in shits and gigglez early on? I do agree about the bob wagon though.

In my experience, scum usually stay behind the scene, stall the game and make town lynch randomly. That being said, I only think the shit and giggles are slight town sign not overwhelming.

In post 164, Glitch wrote:
In post 103, nopointinactingup wrote:I feel that this is a little bit contrived.
It feels more like you thought of this reason when asked.
Have you done this in any of your previous town games?
Great point here; I hadn't really figured out how to put that into words but I think this is accurate. I'm just trying to sort between whether Trendall's play is newbish, playstyle, or AI.

[/quote]

I don't think Trendall is new he has loads of games. It is fair to say that he does abstain from RV in a lot of his games as town and scum, so I don't see why he has to shut down as town when suspicion was thrown his way.
Edit: After reading through his wall of post, I suppose it is possible that Trendall was just a super defensive town player. Scum is slightly more likely to make things up under pressure but it would be an overstatement to say town never does this.

In post 176, Staarling wrote:If we're struggling to get serious stuff going, how about we get no one today and try on the next day? We'll have a night of information then to work things out VOTE: Skip?

I don't think this is a good idea. If we lynch scum it's great. If we mislynch at the very least we have some information. NL is not good.

In post 207, Noraa wrote:But also, glitch, don't tunnel 9 pages in...
its just not a good idea imo and it feels bad being tunneled early on.

Isn't this the point though. Tunneling helps bring out emotions and thoughts that are difficult to hide. Then town can analyze them as a collective to distinguish between town and scum. I'm little bit harsh here but if you feel personally offended then mafia might not be a great game for you.

In post 227, Trendall wrote:
In post 192, Glitch wrote:If he truly thought I were scum, he would engage me, ask me question, poke around, and then case me. But he doesn't.
So this is the crux of the problem for me, the guy's way of playing this game is going 'mafia act like this, and town act like this', and in reality people act in all different ways irrespective of their alignment due to personality styles and play styles and whatever else. So I know already, if I don't 'act right', he's going to think I'm mafia, and if I do make any attempt to 'act right' he'll accuse me of contriving reasons and so forth, he's completely inconsistent with what he wants from me. So I'm just stuck here, aren't I? There's nothing I can do about it other than hope that if I get lynched the other players in the game are capable of interpreting what's happened.

So did you make an attempt to "act right" when you made that post about not RV-ing to bring up discussion? Honestly I can think of ways you could have done that as town or scum so shutting down and refusing to communicate only cause people to suspect you more.

In post 230, Keita wrote:
In post 222, derp wrote:
In post 212, Keita wrote:Why does it feel like Trendall and Noraa are both scum?
If Trendall flips scum I would be inclined to vote Noraa next.
we can maybe be friends actually, could u elaborate on this?
It seems to me Noraa is trying really hard to strike a balance between deflecting the Trendall accusations without seeming like they are buddied. See post 198.

I agree with this. I think post 198 even indicate Nora scum even in the case Trendall is town. It's just very weird to white-knight someone as if you knew their alignment.

@Wall of text between Glitch and Trendall: This actually makes me feel a little better about Trendall since his post does seem emotionally coherent. For now I feel the trendall wagon has been productive.

UNVOTE: VOTE: Nora
Crimes include fluff posting, white-knighting for no reason and constant emotional appeal.

In post 298, Trendall wrote:Well, on my part it was just this relentless stream of excellent well argued points that could not more clearly have come from a town-sided player. I mean I'm sure for anybody reading it...it must have been like 'woah this guy couldn't be more town', and then I'd post another post and it'd be like 'shiiiit I didn't even know it was
possible
for a player to be that obviously aligned with the town, this is amazing, what a great player'.

Glitch was pretty towny too. I'm not sure whether he thinks I'm town or mafia at this point or how confident he is about anything, but he did unvote me because I guess he felt like he got everything he needed to from that avenue of inquiry for now.

So basically at this point you have a very strong town read on me and a fairly confident town read on Glitch too.

Then again this post feels super odd, like a gloat when you've managed to stave off pressure as scum.

In post 314, PlusJOYED wrote:
In post 312, nopointinactingup wrote:This is a prod dodge. It seems like a lot of content has been generated, I'm taking a close look in 4 hours
13 pages in 3 days is rookie numbers. Last mini we had like a 150+ page day 1.

LOL xD What happened to the meta. In my days, people get lynched for posting random bs

nopointinactingup · Post Post #319 (isolation #8) » Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:26 pm

Why would scum necessarily tunnel early in the game instead of coasting by? And I'm not sure you realized but you voted Glitch AFTER he stopped tunneling?!

nopointinactingup · Post Post #403 (isolation #9) » Fri Oct 30, 2020 7:18 am

In post 324, Noraa wrote: Yeah, I do butt into other's business and overreact over things like this cuz I personally know that if I get tunneled day 1, legit regardless of my alignment, I am 90% dying that day.

And you're absolutely positive that you react the same way under pressure as town and scum? Can anyone who's played with Nora give opinions on this?

In post 324, Noraa wrote: I react so shit to pressure it's not even funny.

Looks like you're doing just that imo.

In post 324, Noraa wrote: And the moment I felt like Trendall was getting legit upset(like I do when getting tunneled), I was like ok no like no this is not ok. I still stand by this and will defend anyone that is put in a situation where I believe regardless of alignment, they will react badly.

More emotional appeal that has nothing to do with finding scum. You don't seem as someone who makes confident reads, what makes you think he's town in the first place anyway?

In post 333, Noraa wrote:
In post 331, Keita wrote:Noraa, if you had to choose which of Glitch v Trendall is the scum and why?
In TvTs that get big and die down, I generally always think the tunneler is the scum unless the one being tunneled did some crazy shit.

Can you answer my previous question? What makes you think scum would necessarily tunnel on day one?

In post 324, Noraa wrote: I like Hiraki. super towny vibes. town book for now.

In post 365, Hiraki wrote:I'll explain more later -

Vote: nopointactingup

An ultra town read that came out of nowhere and an immediate chain-saw defense. Connection noted.

In post 393, JohnnyFarrar wrote:Nopo calls Trendall sheepish here for voting glitch off his little tiff with Noraa, and that's a little misleading for a couple reasons: Noraa wasn't voting glitch at the time and I don't personally think Noraa was at a place where she was inspiring sheep. Feels like a stretchy reason to give for voting Trendall and a way to gas Noraa up at the same time.

This is a failed attempt to undermine me. Nora voted Glitch on her third post of the game.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #469 (isolation #10) » Sun Nov 01, 2020 7:40 pm

In post 408, Hiraki wrote:Admittedly this is a gotcha that I didn't expect to work but sometimes you throw softballs to get strike outs.

What is the so called "gotcha" you're talking about here?

[quote="In post 408
So what are the conflicting ideas here that Trendall is supposed to agree/disagree with? Unless I'm reading this post wrong, the agreement is in the entire point about tratiors. I don't really care about this by the way as much as I care about how useless Nopoint's questioning is here. His response to my question on 317 cements that Nopoint doesn't care about the context of the post and was really looking for a very very very fake "gotcha!" by posting something that sounds somewhat sophisticated:
[/quote]

Still don't understand what "gotcha" you're talking about. Trendall's vote on #88 was sheepish and still very much is, he couldn't have "agreed" with Nora in anyway because Nora's assessment of Glitch was a defensive, not an objective point.

In post 88, Noraa wrote:
Kinda confused but like the fellow thing had nothing to do with why I went back and checked. It was actually because I was talking about traitors elsewhere can't remember which thread but like someone said that traitors are a mafia member that isn't known to the mafia and the mafia only knows of their existence. I thought a traitor was like basically a RBer or something but Bob was def in the mafia thread from the start that game so I went back and checked and once I saw that I was like oh, huh so he wasn't a traitor. So I thought I'd share.

Doesnt really have much to do with being self aware and your attempt to dig into this is a bit concerning and kinda a red flag to me. Consider your past pocketing as cancelled out.

Nora said that Glitch's attempt to sort her was a red flag and I found Trendall sheeping that scummy because the point has nothing to do with him. Also, nice try posting my comments out-of-context. My original post shows the reason why I asked that question:

"This feels really sheepish. Which part of Nora's post do you agree with? Why do you think scum-Glitch would necessarily try to push on Nora when you are his biggest suspect?"

In post 421, JohnnyFarrar wrote:
In post 403, nopointinactingup wrote:This is a failed attempt to undermine me. Nora voted Glitch on her third post of the game.
Man you looked up exactly when In her iso huh? Do YOU play cautious as scum?

Instead of admitting your argument failed or try to talk about it, you'd rather take random podshots at me. My scumdar is pinging on this slot.

In post 444, Hopkirk wrote: I don't really like how this sums up to townreads on all the active players (which I don't feel there's enough to justify), not a townread on the most obvtown (new) player in the thread.

Check out my response to Glitch post 317. I already addressed that they were only slight townreads. Regarding my thoughts to Starling, new does not mean obv town, I still have a null on that slot since they provided no substantial content.

My god all those unexplained votes on me is scumtastic, this really confirms to me that I'm exactly where I should be. Starting to entertain the possibility that this is a turn-around attempt by the scum-team, ie more evidence that Trendall is probably scum with Nora.

Town: Glitch, Keita ie solid townblock
Null leaning town: Flubber, Starling, Plus, derp
Null leaning scum: Hikari, Johnny, Hopkirk
Scum: Trendall, Nora

nopointinactingup · Post Post #685 (isolation #11) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 4:50 am

Hopkirk, you were the hammer vote on Plusjoy yesterday, not Plusjoy herself. That action made no sense for your claim, this is why I'm not inclined to believe you.

Gonna reserve my vote for now to prevent possibility of a flash lynch. But my suspicion is definitely on derp and Hopkirk

nopointinactingup · Post Post #686 (isolation #12) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 4:53 am

So derp and Hopkirk could possibly be scum together or PR together but there's also a slim possibility that Hopkirk is town but derp isn't

nopointinactingup · Post Post #688 (isolation #13) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:00 am

Let me clarify that. I can see both Hopkirk and derp as scum planning this in the night or as town since Hopkirk's claimed role would make a multiple-doctor set-up much more likely. There is a chance that there's still only one doctor even with a doctor enabler in the game though, but that would really be bastard modding.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #690 (isolation #14) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:08 am

Plus had claimed doctor and without derp's cc I don't think there would have been a Plus lynch. Derp's counter claim did come only 30 minutes after Plus's claim though, which leads me to believe it wasn't coordinated, so it's compelling evidence that derp could be town.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #691 (isolation #15) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:11 am

I haven't played for a long time, so I'm not going to insist on my feelings for set-up speculation, but one enabler one doctor is pretty weird

nopointinactingup · Post Post #694 (isolation #16) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:15 am

Trendall was looking like a wagon I could have compromised on when I came back to the game. Don't think I would have compromised on Flubber

nopointinactingup · Post Post #696 (isolation #17) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:23 am

I also felt that wall-of-text was very Town, but his other posts are terrible and non-contributing. But he was only making efforts to defend yourself and not progress the game, that's why I'm wary of the possibility that he was just really good at faking it.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #697 (isolation #18) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:32 am

Looking back at the Plus wagon, I'm pretty sure that it had major scum influence, probably at least two scums on it ie Derp/Hopkirk, Derp/Nora, Johnny/Nora scenarios

nopointinactingup · Post Post #701 (isolation #19) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:50 am

In post 700, Hopkirk wrote:
In post 698, Trendall wrote:So if Hopkirk is a real doctor enabler then it's weird because why didn't they bring this up yesterday, like if you know you're a doctor enabler then it seems unlikely there'd be one of these just for one doctor.

But then if they were mafia it seems pointless to fake claim that just to protect derp, like surely just let them get eliminated? So I think Hopkirk and derp are probably both real.

UNVOTE:
I looked at the list of past setups.

Link to this?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #704 (isolation #20) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 5:57 am

Also if derp's was mafia, he'd have to do it to protect someone or many people from one of the prominent wagons, which is one of the Nora, trendall and me.

In post 552, JacksonVirgo wrote:

VC 1.7
PlusJOYED (3)
- derp, JohnnyFarrar, Glitch

Noraa (2)
- nopointinactingup, Keita

nopointinactingup (2)
- Hiraki, Trendall

Trendall (2)
- Flubbernugget, PlusJOYED

Keita (1)
- Noraa

Flubbernugget (1)
- Hopkirk

No Elimination (1)
- Staarling

Not Voting (3)
- beeboy

In post 660, JacksonVirgo wrote:

VC 1.8
PlusJOYED (7)
- derp, JohnnyFarrar, Glitch, Hiraki, Flubbernugget, Noraa, Hopkirk

Noraa (2)
- nopointinactingup, Keita

nopointinactingup (1)
- Trendall

Flubbernugget (1)
- PlusJOYED

No Elimination (1)
- Staarling

Not Voting (1)
- The Slime Collective

It takes 7 votes to hammer, meaning PlusJOYED has been eliminated

nopointinactingup · Post Post #705 (isolation #21) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 6:00 am

For now VOTE: Nora

nopointinactingup · Post Post #710 (isolation #22) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 8:02 am

derp/hopkirk is a very possible solution. derp claims to get the doctor lynched and hopkirk gambits himself because the scum team thinks his cc sounds believable enough to prevent a derp lynch. It's a high risk high reward play but I don't think it's impossible. It would in fact explain hopkirk's vote for Plusjoyed yesterday

nopointinactingup · Post Post #711 (isolation #23) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 8:17 am

Also, looking through the finished mini games, I'm realizing that hopkirk could also be mafia doctor enabler with derp being a goon. In that case hopkirk would have an incentive to get himself lynched, and thus probably would be the one to counterclaim Plusjoy instead of derp if they were on the same team.

The scenario of hopkirk mafia doctor enabler with derp town doctor is more terrifying, since if we don't lynch derp today, he will wrongly protect hopkirk every night and town is likely to lose the game in the end.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #712 (isolation #24) » Sat Nov 07, 2020 8:25 am

In post 703, Hopkirk wrote:
In post 701, nopointinactingup wrote:
In post 700, Hopkirk wrote:
In post 698, Trendall wrote:So if Hopkirk is a real doctor enabler then it's weird because why didn't they bring this up yesterday, like if you know you're a doctor enabler then it seems unlikely there'd be one of these just for one doctor.

But then if they were mafia it seems pointless to fake claim that just to protect derp, like surely just let them get eliminated? So I think Hopkirk and derp are probably both real.

UNVOTE:
I looked at the list of past setups.
Link to this?
viewtopic.php?f=53&t=29549
viewtopic.php?f=53&t=15732

On the one side, 2100 games without 2 doctors.
On the other side, a hunch.

No reason not for me to claim here since either way I'm essentially useless the moment a doctor claims.

The very fact that hopkirk is linking me to that list is townish, but not very sure why he didn't mention the mafia doctor enabler role, which jumps at you when you're looking through the set up.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #830 (isolation #25) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 10:07 am

In post 715, Hopkirk wrote:
In post 710, nopointinactingup wrote:derp/hopkirk is a very possible solution. derp claims to get the doctor lynched and hopkirk gambits himself because the scum team thinks his cc sounds believable enough to prevent a derp lynch. It's a high risk high reward play but I don't think it's impossible. It would in fact explain hopkirk's vote for Plusjoyed yesterday
I really don't think it's high reward. It's essentially the same as 2 mafia members claiming to be neighbours (not quite masons) D1 for very little reason. It feels like all risk because if we're mafia then there's other power roles who'd be able to prove we were lying later. Both scum doesn't make sense because we know for 100% that one doctor isn't the full list of town PRS

Good point, the existence of PRs would render this play unviable. Unless the scum team somehow suspects PRs are few and far in between, I'm not too sold on the scum-scum scenario for now.

In post 715, Hopkirk wrote:
In post 710, nopointinactingup wrote:derp/hopkirk is a very possible solution. derp claims to get the doctor lynched and hopkirk gambits himself because the scum team thinks his cc sounds believable enough to prevent a derp lynch. It's a high risk high reward play but I don't think it's impossible. It would in fact explain hopkirk's vote for Plusjoyed yesterday
I really don't get why I'd point out there's been a mafia enabler. I'm only concerned with enabler/doctor/doctor not having happened and doc/doc not having happened, and whether it feels likely based on that. Where does other setups featuring an enabler remotely come into it for me?

If you're open and frank about presenting all the possibilities to town then I don't see why you wouldn't point it out, when a Ctrl F on "doctor enabler" yields roughly half of the results as mafia aligned.

In post 745, JohnnyFarrar wrote:Likewise I don't see hopkirk scum outing themselves like this to save derp. I wanna tinfoil here but I don't think it's worth it.

Hopkirk and derp both town.

In post 746, Noraa wrote:
In post 740, Glitch wrote: Derp is off the table cuz enabler(Hopkirk) claimed. Still dont really understand wtf an enabler is but I think its just something that like confirms there are more than one doctors or something idk. Anyways, if you believe hopkirk is town, then u will have to believe derp's doc claim is real.

Really surprised by the insta Hopkirk is town because of his claim here. True that he might really be enabler but alignment is questionable. As town-doc-enabler, Hopkirk voting off doc-claiming Plus yesterday made 0 sense.

In post 796, derp wrote:
In post 711, nopointinactingup wrote: derp thinks hopkirk is very town but derp is slightly worried about the setup as derp thinks 2 town docs plus a town doc enabler is a bit weird, derp cant help but feel it makes more sense if the enabler was mafia but derp has absolutely no interest in pursuing this as dear derp does believe hopkirk is town

Do you think a town-aligned doc enabler would vote off someone who claimed to be doc? Even when there is a cc, a town doc enabler would know that he has 50%+ chance of lynching the real doc.

In post 800, Hopkirk wrote:Mafia doc enabler + 2 town docs leads to weird stalematey scenarios which don't make sense from a game design perspective (eg 4 alive = mafia win by voting out one of their own members while town has to avoid voting mafia).

It makes much more sense than a doc enabler with 2 docs, which brings about the game breaking situation where docs protect one another and mafia have to NK the enabler for a 1 in (13 - 2 - 2or3 = 8+) chance.

In post 800, Hopkirk wrote: NP seems to be overlooking the obvious point that you just die tonight unless mafia want to play wifom with us, then I die the next night. Saying you'll 'wrongly protect Hop
every
night is weird.

This is a misrepresentation. I said this under the scenario of Hopkirk-mafia, derp-town. In that case, it's a no brainer that Hopkirk will not NK derp.

VOTE: Hopkirk

I'm taking an unpopular stance here, but I'm quite unnerved by Hopkirk's jump on me the moment I simply pointed out a very real possibility that could exist. I would like to know the reasons from those who think Hopkirk is necessarily town for his claim? At the very most I'm hoping to get this possibility out there in the long run if I die.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #832 (isolation #26) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 10:40 am

Because I was not your first vote of day 2 even when I was your number one suspect. You voted Flubber then switched to me the moment I speculated on the set-up. I could only guess that Flubber looked like an easier mislynch based on his presence on the Plus wagon day 1.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #834 (isolation #27) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 10:46 am

Iso-ing you has made me realize that you had almost zero case on me, even as you promised. What was the point of asking people's point of view about me when you never followed up?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #840 (isolation #28) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 10:55 am

In post 837, Staarling wrote:i still dunno about what nopoint is saying on hopkirk

Take the point of view of Hopkirk as a town aligned doctor-enabler on Day 1. Plus claims doctor and derp counter-claims. So would you risk a mislynch when you know that the doctor role exists and there's at least 50% chance that you will mislynch? If I was town enabler, I would keep both of them alive for the utility of the doctor role.

On the other hand, regardless of derp's alignment, there's a strong possibility that mafia-aligned doc enabler would act the way he did to get rid of a town doctor without having to sacrifice himself to make the role ineffective. Looking through the mini games played before show that mafia aligned doctor enabler exist half of the time.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #842 (isolation #29) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 10:58 am

Johnny, while you're here, thoughts on my theory?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #845 (isolation #30) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:08 am

In post 843, Staarling wrote:@nopoint: ohhhh i actually get what you're saying more now! it would make sense for there to be two doctors if there was a doctor enabler as well because then both of the doctors are less powerful

@Hopkirk: why didn't you say you were doctor enabler yesterday?

The existence of a doctor enabler would explain well the existence of multiple doctors yes, though it's still a stretch for there to be two town doctors in the game. It would make much more sense if the enabler was mafia because mafia would be able to make the decision to lose one of their own to disable the doctors in town.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #850 (isolation #31) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:16 am

In post 847, Hopkirk wrote: D1

-'Damn no way there's no doctors'
-Looks through setups to see there's never been two doctors

-'Yeah, CC makes PJ super sus, time to vote'

...
-'Finding Paradise was a good game.'
-'Huh. What if there were two doctors. I should unvote.'
-'Oh, that sure looks like a hammer.'
-'Ah shit.'

d2
-'Lol derp scum. I was being dumb thinking two docs.'
-Although...'
-'Ah shit.'
-'I should probably claim.'

The problem I have with this is the line I bolded. Even if you thought that was a 1 doc - 1 scum scenario, it would be bad for town to make a 50-50 lynch on the doc there.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #851 (isolation #32) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:18 am

In post 846, Staarling wrote:Hopkirk seems so townie with how he's figuring things out though, like when he went through all the past games to find doctors.. but i'm a little paranoid now

The thing is he would go through past games to find the number of possible doctors as both town and scum doctor enabler.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #854 (isolation #33) » Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:38 am

In post 852, Hopkirk wrote:
In post 845, nopointinactingup wrote:
In post 843, Staarling wrote:@nopoint: ohhhh i actually get what you're saying more now! it would make sense for there to be two doctors if there was a doctor enabler as well because then both of the doctors are less powerful

@Hopkirk: why didn't you say you were doctor enabler yesterday?
The existence of a doctor enabler would explain well the existence of multiple doctors yes, though it's still a stretch for there to be two town doctors in the game. It would make much more sense if the enabler was mafia because mafia would be able to make the decision to lose one of their own to disable the doctors in town.
It's so weird you'd be suspicious of the enabler over
the second doctor
which is much more likely to be scum.

Yes naturally I was suspicious of derp at the beginning of D2, but his action yesterday was consistent with his claimed role whereas I soon realized yours is not

In post 853, Hopkirk wrote: It would be great because the counterclaim is farfarfar more likely to be true and the likeliest case there is that PJ fakeclaimed and got caught out. I feel like you're not even trying to setup spec well here.

This is really WIFOMy and I don't see town taking a risk here when doctor can still stay alive and protect and a cop claim can lynch the scum between the two doctor-claims for free.

In post 853, Hopkirk wrote: Scum me just wouldn't claim then would let town lethal Derp. Bringing the role up would be stupid because I'd be giving up a free lethal for a bit of towncred.

It's not a little bit of towncred. Having a scum member seen as confirmed town is game winning.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #932 (isolation #34) » Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:03 pm

In post 858, Hopkirk wrote:It's really convenient for you to say what you'd have done at end of day NP when you hadn't been online for 60 hours and were sitting on wagon that was clearly going nowhere. That way you aren't on the lethal (or there's no lethal) and you can claim you thought whatever you wanted at the time without having had to have done it. We lethaled 2 hours before deadline, where were you the two and a half days before that?

In post 857, Hopkirk wrote:Anyone 'town' who didn't bother checking in the 24h before the lethal doesn't deserve to survive. This includes Flubber/NP and is part of my sus.

Well I did show up before the deadline only to find the lynch had gone through, though I'm sure 2 hours before the deadline was an overstatement .. though I concede the timing issue made it pretty difficult to lynch anyone else. It's been sometime since I'm playing forum mafia again and I'm trying to fit the game in my weekly schedule. I just want to get across that if you are town-aligned, getting a doc lynched when you can prevent it is a terrible play.

In post 890, JohnnyFarrar wrote:
In post 842, nopointinactingup wrote:Johnny, while you're here, thoughts on my theory?
Idk I'm more inclined to believe they're both scum than believe hopkirk scum outs himself for no reason instead of just letting derp swing here

This case is also possible, just very unlikely given derp's cc timing to the Plus claim. For one, a D1 scum cc really doesn't happen a lot. Also, scum would have to coordinate in that 30 minute instance for things like that to happen.

In post 899, JohnnyFarrar wrote:I could also vote nopo. I felt like he and I were on the same page at the start of today and then this hopkirk back and forth happened

Do you think I'm scum for disagreeing with you or Hop? because that's terrible.

In post 907, Noraa wrote:Im going to sit on my Staarling and Keita SRs. If y'all are right and nopo is scum, I will allow you to say "I told you, you dumb dumb" to me once, tomorrow.

This is town. I can absolutely see Nora-scum jumping on my wagon at this point.

In post 919, Glitch wrote:Noraa's posts feel very towny today. Derp's posts feel towny too but the CC is my hangup and I don't want to let that wagon go. Who is willing to lim derp today?

Who is against it?

I've never seen two town doctors in a set-up so I'm not against the idea, but we've already lost a PR so I would really prefer a good lynch today instead of a policy lynch that could go wrong. What do you think of the Johnny, Trendall, Starling slots?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #933 (isolation #35) » Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:13 pm

TSC is likely town atm.
Starling is a tough read even with an ISO, mainly because I don't know hectic.
@Mod: Do we have a prod or replace for Keita?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #972 (isolation #36) » Thu Nov 12, 2020 10:08 am

@Mod: Not sure if the last votecount was correct, did someone give me an extra vote?

In post 957, Flubbernugget wrote:H O T F U C K I N D A M N was that a speedwagon

^

On the other hand, I just realized that this is Keita's first game on the forum and lack of engagement is a decently strong indicator of scum in new players.

Unvote
Unvote

At this point keita should just claim to avoid what happened yesterday. I'm willing to double hammer if it comes to that

nopointinactingup · Post Post #990 (isolation #37) » Fri Nov 13, 2020 10:50 am

No point in yelling out. At this rate, we'll lynch Keita regardless of his claim, which pretty bad.

vote Trendall

This is a suspicion but also a placeholder vote that's better than not voting. I'll try to check back in a few hours. If Keita hasn't claimed by then I will hammer Keita.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #995 (isolation #38) » Fri Nov 13, 2020 3:59 pm

I think Glitch got it

nopointinactingup · Post Post #996 (isolation #39) » Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:02 pm

Just to be sure

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Keita

Sorry bro if you’re town

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1102 (isolation #40) » Tue Nov 17, 2020 6:54 pm

@Mod: I think you got yesterday's final vote count wrong. Trendall was missing on the Keita wagon and I wasn't the hammer, just a back-up hammer

Going to try to catch up and do a full VCA tomorrow so yes it matters to me that the VC were correct.

I'm spent but I'm getting this out once more. I don't mean to sound like a broken record but it's NOT about set-up speculation as some people here has read my case as, I completely believe in his claim. It's about whether or not his Day 1 action made sense for his claim and from there we can deduce his alignment. What happened was:

Hopkirk, the doc-enabler, caught a doctor breadcrumb from Plusjoyed (this made a lot of sense if he was enabler).

In post 578, Hopkirk wrote:VOTE: Flub

I buy the claim. Was the softclaim I spotted for doc intended?

At this point, as an doc-enabler, he should be 100% sure that Plus is the real doctor and it was reflected in his revote.

However, after Derp's claim, he jumped to the premise that Plus was scum

In post 618, Hopkirk wrote:If Plusjoy is scum then his team must suck

In post 624, Hopkirk wrote:I guess I just don't want Plus to be scum because it means the game is going to be super meh/uninteresting tbh

And finally a hammer.

In post 627, Hopkirk wrote:VOTE: PlusJoy

If you were
1. a doc enabler +
2. you saw a doc breadcrumb from someone +
3. they are the first to claim doc (how do scum know there is a doc?)
Why in the world would you believe in a CC and settle for their lynch instead of revealing yourself to save them? Even No lynching was better

The only plausible explanation for this is that Hopkirk realized he could get away with this doc lynch with the support of another doc (possibly town). This is the only solve

Now when I questioned him, all I've gotten are deflections (saying I'm making bad set-up speculations) and excuses, this makes him seem even scummier imo.

I'm also pretty sure the general consensus around Hopkirk being a universal town-read is probably a lie being propagated by the scum team. Although I'm not a fan of partner speculation before the flip, I have a strong feeling that's where I'd likely find the rest.

~~~

Catch-up, VCA and more thoughts on others tomorrow.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1124 (isolation #41) » Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:35 pm

Spoiler: Vote Count Analysis

Points are mostly negative since we haven't gotten scumflip, but ordinal nature still applies.

Scumminess based on VCA:
<---Scum-----------------------------------------------------------Town---->
Trendall - Noraa - Hopkirk - Johnny - derp - Flubber - Glitch - Starling

Will return with thoughts & analysis on non-VC matters and final solve after dinner. Pls don't lynch anyone

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1128 (isolation #42) » Wed Nov 18, 2020 7:53 pm

Catching up posts:

I liked derp's thought process at the beginning even though it's a pain to process.

I'm not sure what derp's case on Noraa is but Nora's OMGUS and Glitch buddying was anti-town at best.

Noraa having a null read on Flubber doesn't seem that scummy. I have similar thoughts on Flubber, he's slightly leaning town for me only because we've had similar reads.

I don't like Hopkirk's push on Noraa in 1028. The Keita wagon was literally the only option at the end of D2 and what Hop does feels like shaming/bullying. Also, this and the royalty part really smells like scum theatre.

Hopkirk's case on Flubber at 968 is not impressive. Pretty much the same points can be made about Trendall with the exception of the fact that when and only when pressured, Trendall actually make an effort in this game, which is even scummier. He said more in one post defending himself than the rest of his posts combined.

Nora saying my set-up speculation is weird IS weird. Didn't she literally say she liked it before.

Not sure what to think about Hopkirk's 180 on me then deriding me as confused. Does he think that's supposed to get him on my good side?

Glitch's posts sound townish, I don't think scum would make an effort in this situation. Not sure how I feel about both Derp and Glitch completely disregarding the fact that Trendall was on the Keita wagon at the end there.

Feels like Trendall is the best lynch here since Hopkirk is off the table for most. Scummy in both VCA and playstyle. Flip would also clarify alignment of Nora, Glitch and Flubber more
VOTE: Trendall

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1129 (isolation #43) » Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:17 pm

In post 1103, Hopkirk wrote: If you were a doctor enabler, had seen no game had EVER had two doctors in it before, and there are two doctor claims then are you going to either
a.) 100% sure there must be two doctors in this game with no reasons to support this
b.) Think the first doctor claim is a claim from scum who got caught out by a counterclaim (this happens all the time in mafia)

The fact that you're considering b as literally 0% likely makes everything you say hard conf.bias and objectively bad. There's a very clear reason for town DE to vote what he thinks is probably a fakeclaim. Why is it LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE that town-Hop thinks that PJ is probably scum that got caught out on a fakeclaim? You have said this outright because you can't see 'any plausible' alternative your your theory.

b by itself is possible of course. But how can you think the first doctor claim is from scum when:
- They are the first to claim doc. How does scum know this is a doc set-up?
- You caught a breadbrumb from the first doctor claim. That supposed to significantly increase the chance that person is really doc.

In post 1103, Hopkirk wrote: - PJ immediately said that he hadn't softclaimed. Scum and town PJ both say that because scum PJ doesn't want to say 'yes' because he didn't and doesn't want to get caught out, while town PJ doesn't want to say 'yes' because he didn't and doesn't want to lie.

Do you think scum would not take credit for a supposed softclaim that make their claim more believable?

In post 1103, Hopkirk wrote: - I vote PJ because a counterclaim is 100% more believable than an initial claim because scum (unless they're in a bad spot already) doesn't have the incentive to counterclaim that town do.

If you are actually town and really think so then this is a dangerous line of thought. It basically gives scum a free pass for yeeting any PR.

In post 1103, Hopkirk wrote: What I bought when I voted PJ was that Derp was town, NOT that there were two doctors in the game. That's very clearly why I voted PJ

Fair point, I still think it's extremely risky to lynch a possible doctor. I'm skeptical you could have developed a 0% PJ - 100% derp mindset at that point. It's not impossible yes, but I'm sus of you because it's more likely to come from scum taking advantage of the situation to get a doc killed.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1130 (isolation #44) » Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:20 pm

In post 1127, Noraa wrote:VCA is stupid. its based solely on how good one's reads are and that's ridiculous.

VCA is about how likely someone is to be scum base of their positions in wagons it has nothing to do with reads. Also, VCA is not the only thing I'm basing my reads on FYI.

nopointinactingup · Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:28 am

I am hider with modifier that I won't reveal for obvious reasons. Some PR claims are scum or fake here

nopointinactingup · Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:36 am

In post 1136, Glitch wrote:
In post 1128, nopointinactingup wrote:Not sure how I feel about both Derp and Glitch completely disregarding the fact that Trendall was on the Keita wagon at the end there.
Wait can you elaborate?

Trendall wasn't on the Keita wagon at all on D2 unless I missed something. If he was on it at the end I want to know but VCs don't reflect that. What am I missing?

Trendall voted Keita before you and the mod made a mistake in the VC

In post 984, Trendall wrote:Ok if there are only 14hrs then whatever

VOTE: Keita

nopointinactingup · Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:41 am

I'm inclined to believe in Glitch's claim. I just realized he suddenly have a Hopkirk town read that came out of nowhere. That means Hopkirk is also town. If you guys are both scum then town is fucked anyway

nopointinactingup · Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:42 am

In post 1208, Noraa wrote:what's a hider?

also these pr claims are getting really worrisome :/

I hide in someone else's house and get murdered with them if scum targets them

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1271 (isolation #49) » Mon Nov 23, 2020 6:47 am

In post 1212, Glitch wrote:Ew that sounds like an awful role

Yes, what I do is kinda creepy if you think about it.

In post 1214, Staarling wrote:everyone got a cool ability but Staarling :<
but is it really too many? i was in a game where i think everyone had an ability

Pretty sure that's not a normal queue game. About 1/3 - 1/2 of towns are PRs in a normal set-up.

In post 1215, JohnnyFarrar wrote: Nopo I'll have to think about because maybe the weirdness i picked up from them was role weirdness and not scum weirdness.

Expand on that "weirdness" if you're gonna put it out there.

In post 92, nopointinactingup wrote:Good day all! It's good to make a first post after a four year hiatus. Forgive me if I'm not familiar with the current meta and probably some new terminologies. Looking to do some mighty fine scum-hunting with a
secret
weapon o' mine. Will leave an analysis post on what happened shortly

I'm sure the scum must have already realized it, but I left a hider crumb on my first post of the game. I tried to sound like PR and was also hard-accusing people all D1 to bait scum into killing my slot.

In post 1238, Hopkirk wrote:I need to look at trend/Noraa again because they're not against each other like I thought they were.

If you read their ISO, they have never been against each other. Nora White-Knighted Trendall on D1 and Trendall has been indirectly defending Noraa and chainsawing me ever since. Their blind defense of each other leads me to think that these are town-reads by decision rather than town-reads by analysis.

In post 1247, Noraa wrote:This game is really just setup spec at this point which I really can't do. Someone that's good should really stand out and make a say right about now.

I don't see how this would help town considering the person who stands out might be scum. I myself am pretty confused about all these claims as there were way fewer PRs in my days. Also, I want you to elaborate that Trendall-town read you have.

In post 1249, Glitch wrote:
In post 1244, derp wrote:i suppose
third person slip, must be caught scum

lolol

I'm not getting this, can you elaborate?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1272 (isolation #50) » Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:04 am

At this point, I do believe both Glitch and therefore Hopkirk is town among the PRs.

I don't think derp and Flubber are town or scum together, as that would make town PRs swing too strong or too weak? (also depends on scum-team composition and someone can debate this premise but for now this is what I think)

Trendall/Nora is a decent solve due to their interactions, plus one of Flub/derp. It's interesting to see that Flub is not voting derp, who is literally his counter-claim right now. That might be a sign that he's town.

If it's not Trendall + Nora then it's still likely to be one of them plus one of Johnny/Starling.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1273 (isolation #51) » Mon Nov 23, 2020 7:08 am

In post 1223, Trendall wrote:
In post 1218, Glitch wrote:What is Trendall's readslist?
4. Amongst the PRs, if one of them is fake then I believe derp, and nopointinactinup's thing about 'hider' makes perfect sense. Hopkirk gets more suspicious the more I think about them, so I try not to think about them too much. So ignoring them, the final mafia would be between Glitch and Flubbernugget. Glitch behaves more suspiciously, but I somehow just don't feel like you give town a rolecop given how the setup seems to work to me (see Hopkirk post 1185), and it's not as though Flubbernugget is not acting suspiciously as well.

Can you elaborate further on why you think my claim "makes sense" and why Hopkirk, Glitch's claims are "suspicious". Hard to understand your thought process when you're just throwing out words.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1305 (isolation #52) » Tue Nov 24, 2020 7:03 am

We have to lynch someone before the deadline. Has it been reached??? A No lynch is really bad here now that everyone has claimed.

It doesn't look like anyone is interested in a Trendall lynch today. I'm not sure if rolecop makes sense as scum when Glitch claimed one-shot gunsmith. If the only investigative in town is one-shot that's way too weak.

Does anyone feel like wagoning derp?? It really feels like mafia doc is the mafia godfather to both town rolecop (doc result) and town gunsmith (no gun result).

Unvote
Vote: derp

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1355 (isolation #53) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 7:02 am

Not a fan of all these votings. I'd rather we all unvote and not end the day early despite any supposed conviction.

As for me, I think derp should be the lynch here.

The reason I mentioned yesterday already is that mafia doc makes perfect sense as a counterplay mechanism for scum in a set up with gunsmith and rolecop, both of which return "townish" result on mafia doc.

Macho enabler doesn't really mean two town docs. Two town docs have no precedence for that statement to have any validity. derp you're going to have to try harder than that to convince me otherwise.

The other two scum is most likely Nora and Trendall. I'm really surprised no one else picked up on their partner vibe. Will consider compromising on any of them if people actually think derp is town. We (talking to town only) need to reach unanimous decision to turn the table here.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1356 (isolation #54) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 7:09 am

In post 1322, Staarling wrote:everyone who thinks i'm a townie keeps dying :<

I feel you bro ..

nopointinactingup · Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:07 pm

VOTE: Staarling

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1390 (isolation #56) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 1:10 pm

Maybe having the doctors informed that there is at least two doctors in the game (town or mafia aligned) would solve that issue.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1392 (isolation #57) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 1:21 pm

I think you made a crucial mistake on D1, lynching a doctor claim when your role tells you that at least one doctor exist. Objectively speaking, even a No Lynch would've been better at that point. I kinda understood later on that you didn't want to reveal your role because you were macho so as soon as you hinted at it, we were getting ready to NK you.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1404 (isolation #58) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:26 pm

In post 1400, Glitch wrote:Damn I should never have let up on Noraa. Shit.

I was actually odd night and investigated Derp N3. Wasnt gonna say anything unless derp was on the chopping block. Fun game though, I enjoyed playing with y'all. Derp you were a lot of fun haha

I figured out before their claim that plus was doctor, hopkirk was enabler and you were odd-night in the scum QT

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1406 (isolation #59) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:33 pm

Yes hehe I preferred a derp lynch yesterday so that we could kill Glitch in the night. I noticed that he already had a hopkirk townread after Night1 and Night1 is not a good night to use a one-shot skill. That’s why I decided not to claim odd night myself but rather two-shot hider

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1407 (isolation #60) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:34 pm

Oh btw no redaction for me

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1410 (isolation #61) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:41 pm

Ahh scumQT, our safe retreat from the drudgery of pretending to be town. We have almost half the number of pages as the game.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1412 (isolation #62) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:46 pm

We da true town

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1415 (isolation #63) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:56 pm

That being said, I feel the set-up is pretty town-favor. 2 solid doctors and 2 investigates while the scums are all pseudo-goons. I guess I like the concept that we have to be creative with our claims and utilize the superior knowledge we have to solve the set-up before town, then lead them to a dark forest. Would have loved to have a role-blocker on our team to at least have the courage to NK an enabler though (would you waste NK on a claimed enabler knowing there are two docs out there protecting him?), or someway of detecting the "macho" modifier.

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1431 (isolation #64) » Wed Dec 02, 2020 6:13 pm

This game isn't finished. We still have to solve the question of whether Staarling is actually Hectic

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1467 (isolation #65) » Thu Dec 03, 2020 8:32 am

Nice, didn’t catch that crumb. My guess was solely based on your town-Hop timing and the fact that there’s an even-night PR

nopointinactingup · Thu Dec 03, 2020 12:29 pm

Can we publish it or only Jacko can?

nopointinactingup · Post Post #1482 (isolation #67) » Sat Dec 19, 2020 8:33 am

kpop is invading another gamee