Yvonne

My revenge kill has nothing to do with emotion; it's pure carrot and stick, which, if all actors were behaving logically, should lead to the intended positive results. As I've said before, everyone wants to have nukes and no one wants to use them. If they don't follow through with the threats, then the nukes may as well not be there. You destroy to make good on the promise. This also lets people know for the future that I am not bluffing.

I think you see now quite how perfect DuD's game design was

There's nothing classic about this mafia. The tactics are all different. Cube and Dohnut are right and should vote @Jimbob, at least until he comes out with some info

Oh well! @DuD I did my best to play the way you'd have wanted! See y'all in Valhalla. Bedtime now.

LOL Peeps stole your vote Rummy. I'm so glad I spent all that time trying to convince you to ally with me! Fuck @Magnus Peterson you've seen my argument. What say you

Win the battle and lose the war. As long as you admit it isn't sensible rational or optimum, I accept death gladly.

Of course I'll get lynched, there are tons of people who would benefit from it, two of which have double votes. Today and tonight my winning IS in line with your winning, which means for today, you can trust me 100%. You'll see this is where your team threw away any chance at a win in the endgame. (also btw note how we are arguing in a civil manner? Take note dear readers)

I'm essentially trading my life for giving my partner, and failing that, your team, the best shot at winning possible. It's inevitable that you would later turn on me I play optimally, I don't play dirty. Even my threat is optimal. If you want to win you should also play optimally.

because you should realise that my best shot of winning is helping you during this day phase and night phase. Our biggest threats are fire & ice. The others will definitely kill me before the endgame, so you should extract as much value from a partnership with me as possible while the going's good. If I kill you tonight after you help me, not only do I give the game to fire & ice, fuck my partner and you, I will be screwed for any deals in the future

The difference between us is I want a shot at winning

Yeah, the entire point is for this moment. Without the assured destruction, a MAD threat is empty. We have nukes but we never want to have to launch them. @heroicjanitor, wanna team up? You're talking way more sense

It's in my best interest to co-operate with you tonight. The same can't be said for fire & ice. They would be served well by eliminating water, then they have an even shot at winning. The endgame for town without an ally is jsut choosing who they get killed by

1 night isn't long enough for us to wipe you out, only to kill you. Already you're too weak to win without an ally. The mafia are all reading this thread too.

yeah, which is why scenario 2 exists. Mutually assured destruction

You would be able to tell who we killed from the writeup. I have nothing to gain from betraying you

Yeah Rummy, you obviously protected Sheikah and was told about his activities. We can just as easily take out a teammate of yours, if that's what it takes to bring down your team. I would much rather ally with you.

The opponent mafia team claiming my plan is bad is the best recommendation for doing it that I could think of. Also

OK scenario 1: water team and town team up. I make kills that benefit us both during the night, and I give you two votes. If my partner is feeling cheeky we can actually quickhammer our way to endgame vs you. At this point your townies could easily disable my team. Fire & Ice have nothing to fear from town until the player numbers are low. Lets say there are three mafia left, Ice Fire Water 3x townies At this point you could take your pick of allies and win the game easily. But right now, you are in a very bad position. I don't expect to win, but my best shot is to ally with you, this will balance all win chances. scenario 2: The alternative is that I get voted off. I trust my teammate to follow through with a revenge kill in that case for posterity.

it's simple game theory Rummy. I offered you a scenario that would be mutually beneficial, and a scenario which would be mutually destructive. You decided to give the game to Ice/Fire instead of choosing the optimal win route. And why? For no good reason.

I notice MP removed vote before a count could be made. If DuD rocks up and I'm dead MP is he. Dinner time, brb

If Rummy wants to die on principle, I wont stand in his way. It wasn't your choice, it was his.

cooking mama??? ok Magnus Peterson is town but seriously folks, if Magnus Peterson is town, mr-paul isn't. This is a very important question that deserves attention

You probably have a single vote. What's your character?

vote Jimbob

That is really stupid. You have a chance to turn the game around and do something interesting, but you choose to go out quietly? If I have 5 votes on me, Magnus Peterson is the third DV mafia. If 4, it's between Jon and Jimbob. I still think it's Jon from his BS earlier.