Mafia 82: International (Game Over)

[Tom Mason]

I would not mind a Tom Mason wagon at all right now. I would simply love to see how he would respond to the pressure.

You want to wagon me when you could not even explain the oddity I pointed out in your words where you suggest your FOS is more important than your vote?

You still have not clarified it. I took nothing out of context. I read what you wrote, posted it back -- twice now -- and the best you can do is reply looking for a wagon against me?

[BlakAdder]

I'm not liking Tom. Especially after this last post. Karne has only suggested a Tom wagon and he's already putting together bad defenses.

[EGL]

Rule 1 of being a watcher. If you see someone go to your target, but the target doesnt die, they are almost certainly not scum. This game could be the exception, with scum having power roles, but its a bit of a reach, with 4 already dead. Anyway, you can have categorical proof that i didnt attempt to kill Skruffs last night- as the only kill which could have prevented it was an arsonist, and he was busy cremating Sensfan.

Another exception is the possibility of the mafia poisoner role where the poisonee doesn't die until the next night.

Well, if we refer to the MS.net flash... That would certainly be the case.

I think it fits considering we had no poisoning kills on the first night as well. Odd that only one poison death occurred Night Three. Perhaps it belonged to someone who was inactive/prodded during that period. Hard to tell, though.

They probably both targeted Hascow N2, because didn't Hascow die N3 and then BA had said he protected Hascow N2 but can only avert one kill?

[EGL]

If Caboose were not the Firefighter, it would be a bold lie to make. The only way for a SK or mafia to find out would be to target him.

And for the Arsonist, it is possible deathwish to target Caboose.

If he is lying, I would have expected someone to immediately jump forward to challenge his claim.

Interesting. There's never been an Arsonist who dies from targeting the firefighter on EWZine (the other site Tom and I play on) and the flash on mikeburnfire says nothing about that.

So where does this come from?

[Tom Mason]

If Caboose were not the Firefighter, it would be a bold lie to make. The only way for a SK or mafia to find out would be to target him.

And for the Arsonist, it is possible deathwish to target Caboose.

If he is lying, I would have expected someone to immediately jump forward to challenge his claim.

Interesting. There's never been an Arsonist who dies from targeting the firefighter on EWZine (the other site Tom and I play on) and the flash on mikeburnfire says nothing about that.

So where does this come from?

I liken it to the concept that in some games doctors could be killed for targeting a mafia member. It really would depend on the way the role was written, obviously. Not saying it is for certain -- but certainly a possibility.

[EGL]

Yeah I still find it strange that you decided to liken it to Weak Doctors or Masons dying if they target a mafia member.

Vote: Tom Mason

for the Arsonist

[Battle Mage]

Rule 1 of being a watcher. If you see someone go to your target, but the target doesnt die, they are almost certainly not scum. This game could be the exception, with scum having power roles, but its a bit of a reach, with 4 already dead. Anyway, you can have categorical proof that i didnt attempt to kill Skruffs last night- as the only kill which could have prevented it was an arsonist, and he was busy cremating Sensfan.

Another exception is the possibility of the mafia poisoner role where the poisonee doesn't die until the next night.

Well, if we refer to the MS.net flash... That would certainly be the case.

wot?

BM

We've been over this already. Just google mikeburnfire and you'll find his "Common Mafia Roles" flash. Mafia Poisoner is in there.

Lol no offence to MBF, but that doesnt really prove anything. Unless he's modding (which he isn't). Has anyone actually seen 'Mafia Poisoner' used on MS? For my part, i think there's a very good reason why such a role is unlikely to be used, especially in a game like this.

BM

[Battle Mage]

Rule 1 of being a watcher. If you see someone go to your target, but the target doesnt die, they are almost certainly not scum. This game could be the exception, with scum having power roles, but its a bit of a reach, with 4 already dead. Anyway, you can have categorical proof that i didnt attempt to kill Skruffs last night- as the only kill which could have prevented it was an arsonist, and he was busy cremating Sensfan.

Another exception is the possibility of the mafia poisoner role where the poisonee doesn't die until the next night.

I've never heard of a Mafia Poisoner. I believe we had this discussion and Armlx and myself concluded that a Poisoner is by no means an anti-town role. That is, unless you have a superior meta to ours?

BM

http://mikeburnfire.sitesled.com/mscumB.swf

I don't know why you didn't follow the link the first time I had posted it, but here it is again.

Also, you and Arm concluding something doesn't mean everybody has.

P.S. - Arm was scum.

I probably did. My memory isnt great. And it doesn't prove anything, so it wouldnt affect my opinion anyway.

I'd say Armlx and myself were probably the most experienced in terms of quantity of games on MS, with the exceptions of perhaps Lowell and Skruffs?

P.S. - I'm aware of this. But scum tend not to lie about provable things...

BM

[Battle Mage]

BM, why did you choose Skruffs to investigate?

You results history please.

The answer to your first question should be fairly obvious if you know anything of mine and Skruffs' history. Likewise, my response to your second point should also be fairly obvious if you give it some thought. You'd think, if i was going to claim results, i'd have done so already.

BM

The more I hink about it the less I like you BM. You see, I expressively
asked you to state your mind on Skruffs today, which would have been a golden opportunity to breadcrumd an innocent or guilty on Skruffs if you were really cop, but you were nowhere near explicit.

Do you have an explanation for that?

You should stop fishing, and start thinking. I'm not voting for Skruffs. So do you really think i have a guilty on him? Your lack of thought is starting to grate on me now. I'm not claiming anything else today.

Are we clear?

BM

[BlakAdder]

vote: Tom Mason

He's getting more suspicious with each post.
@BM: If you've already claimed Cop, why wouldn't you tell us your night results?

[Battle Mage]

vote: Tom Mason

He's getting more suspicious with each post.
@BM: If you've already claimed Cop, why wouldn't you tell us your night results?

You'll just have to trust me.

BM

[Tom Mason]

vote: Tom Mason

He's getting more suspicious with each post.
@BM: If you've already claimed Cop, why wouldn't you tell us your night results?

You'll just have to trust me.

BM

It is becoming hard for me to trust you when you are not in agreement over the poisoner role.

If Skruffs turns up dead in the next cycle... I think we have our answer.

[EGL]

vote: Tom Mason

He's getting more suspicious with each post.
@BM: If you've already claimed Cop, why wouldn't you tell us your night results?

You'll just have to trust me.

BM

It is becoming hard for me to trust you when you are not in agreement over the poisoner role.

If Skruffs turns up dead in the next cycle... I think we have our answer.

Only if it's by poisoning and not cremation.

So don't get any ideas...

[EGL]

Also I'd like to alert everyone that I just found out around 10pm last night that my grandma on my Dad's side died. I don't know when the funeral is but I know it'll be coming up soon, so, just a head's up that I may not be around much that day. I'll keep you all posted so you know when to expect me absent.

And by last night I mean about six hours ago.

[BlakAdder]

I know I agreed not to talk about this, but I have found a flaw in BM's plan. If anyone besides BM does not want me to talk about it, speak up and I might not mention it.

[Lowell]

BA's 2234 looks a little like desperation. That BM didn't vote is information enough. Tom is scummy, true, but he jumped on that after things started turning against him.

I still think Tom is the better play on the chance BA is telling the truth.

[skitzer]

Vote Count Two of Day Four

(4) Tom Mason: Cyberbob, Lowell, EGL, BlakAdder
(2) springlullaby: Skruffs, tubby216
(1) killa seven: Caboose
(1) Caboose: springlullaby

(7) Not Voting: Citizen Karne, Surye, Battle Mage, raider8169, killa seven, Tom Mason

With 14 alive, it takes 8 votes to lynch!

Last Post Count Two of Day Four

Key:
Green - posted in last 24 hours
Blue - posted in last 48 hours
Olive - Posted in last 72 hours
Red - Posted more than 72 hours ago, prodded
Dark Red - Requiring Replacement
Dark Blue - Vacation/Limited Access

BlakAdder

Battle Mage

Tom Mason

EGL

Lowell

Citizen Karne

springlullaby

tubby216

raider8169

Caboose

killa seven

Cyberbob

Skruffs

Surye

Prodding Caboose.
Surye, Skruffs, and Cyberbob may be replaced due to inactivity.

[Battle Mage]

vote: Tom Mason

He's getting more suspicious with each post.
@BM: If you've already claimed Cop, why wouldn't you tell us your night results?

You'll just have to trust me.

BM

It is becoming hard for me to trust you when you are not in agreement over the poisoner role.

If Skruffs turns up dead in the next cycle... I think we have our answer.

This isn't an issue of 1 of us is right, the other is scum. I will accept that i am right until you can prove otherwise. I dislike the way you seem to suggest me disagreeing with you over something you havent even tried to defend is scummy...

@Blakadder- im surprised Lowell hasnt said anything yet. If he intends to, then i see no reason why you cant. But we need to get this sorted before night.

BM

[BlakAdder]

Okay, there were two things:
First, I'm surprised no one has said this yet, but Caboose being an arsonist and not a doc shoots a hole in your idea.
Second, there is no way in your plan to find out if the cop (being you) is innocent. That would be a pretty convenient situation if you were scum.

[Lowell]

^^^^ the first one is the one I was thinking.

[Caboose]

Second, there is no way in your plan to find out if the cop (being you) is innocent. That would be a pretty convenient situation if you were scum.

This is true.
Mind responding to this BM?

[EGL]

Okay, there were two things:
First, I'm surprised no one has said this yet, but Caboose being an arsonist and not a doc shoots a hole in your idea.
Second, there is no way in your plan to find out if the cop (being you) is innocent. That would be a pretty convenient situation if you were scum.

Very interesting. Very interesting indeed.

[BlakAdder]

Correction: By "Caboose being an arsonist" I mean firefighter.

[Battle Mage]

Okay, there were two things:
First, I'm surprised no one has said this yet, but Caboose being an arsonist and not a doc shoots a hole in your idea.
Second, there is no way in your plan to find out if the cop (being you) is innocent. That would be a pretty convenient situation if you were scum.

Lol. In case you hadn't noticed, i'm the only claimed investigative role. How do you suppose i confirm myself, apart from with my results?
As far as your first point goes, i dont really understand. Firstly, Caboose is not an Arsonist, Caboose is a Doc who can only protect against arsonist kills. Obviously because i drafted this plan BEFORE CABOOSE CLAIMED THIS, it could be a stumbling block. But a partial Doc is better than nothing.
Which raises the point- for balance purposes, would we be likely to have another Doc that can only protect from 1 type of kill? Or is the Arsonist immune to the standard doctor's protection?

BM

[Battle Mage]

Correction: By "Caboose being an arsonist" I mean firefighter.

Interesting that Lowell didnt pick up on this.

BM