The Mass Effect Mafia (Game Thread)

[Rummy]

You definitely lost the game. You were town and the mafia won - that, again, is the definition of losing the game and I called it the minute it happened. If you want to come away feeling a winner, then I'll leave you to it. This is exactly my point.

 

(and if you wish to call my tactics and strategy into it - I'll point out that I got ganepark lynched faster than you got Yvonne lynched, accounting with/for my own death in the mix. I also out-survived you and did not get killed by my own team)

Edited March 16, 2013 by Rummy
Automerged Doublepost

[Sheikah]

Was so damn close to voting for DuD but a lot of Dedede's defence was built around him questioning Jimbob's PMs and how his role was worded and I thought that was weaker.

 

Regarding Sheikah, obviously you're not going to change how you play but you tried to get Yvonne lynched through lies and manipulation which made you completely untrustworthy in my eyes. If you thought Yvonne was mafia there were better ways to go about it. At the time your suspicion was based on practically nothing. In your end post you were as sure about Dedede being mafia as you were Yvonne. I hope you can see why I didn't follow you. You may have been right about Yvonne but your actions got you lynched which meant the town lost a valuable player (not just on about your role) for no good reason. Trading your own life for one scumnag was not a good deal considering your role.

 

It was damaging to the town for sure but I wouldn't say it cost us the game at all.

 

Actually my vote on Yvonne was based on not being able to find him and from the way I generally perceived him the day before. I knew the kill protector was dead and that I was probably the only remaining protector (other than you, but you never came out to say you protected Yvonne as a defence). So all in all it seemed unlikely a townie had made him untargetable. I know it's not concrete, but you voted for Aqui1a for less reason the day before.

 

As for lying and manipulation, Cube lied in the previous game and nobody reprimanded him at the end of the game. He was a cop and lost his power but pretended he was still a cop; for good reason, it made him more powerful. I don't believe town should always tell the truth...it removes a certain strategical element and can sometimes play into the hands of the Mafia. I also don't feel like my information would have convicted Yvonne, whereas at least with the path I took I was fairly sure Yvonne would be lynched after me. I think one townie death for one Mafia death is a fair trade.

 

I completely respect that you didn't want to trust me at the end of the day Peeps.

 

Ironically what made me cast suspicion on Dedede, which had a big impact on the end of the game, was not my lies, but my truths - I protected myself, so I know I couldn't be tracked, yet there he was claiming to track me. I would love @Jimbob to clear that up. :p

 

You definitely lost the game. You were town and the mafia won - that, again, is the definition of losing the game and I called it the minute it happened. If you want to come away feeling a winner, then I'll leave you to it. This is exactly my point.

 

(and if you wish to call my tactics and strategy into it - I'll point out that I got ganepark lynched faster than you got Yvonne lynched, accounting with/for my own death in the mix)

 

Ehm...ok, I don't know if you're being arrogant on purpose here - I don't deny that I, along with the rest of town, lost the game. But the way you were phrasing it was like saying "you caused the loss of the game" which I don't agree with.

 

I don't really think speed of lynch has much to do with it, Ganepark was easier to get on board with as he hammered a lynch. Pretty much the argument was that he was a shifty guy who hammered a lynch, the town agreed, and lynched him. :p I don't really see the point about tactics there.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Sheikah
Automerged Doublepost

[Rummy]

As Cube pointed out - his decision of a lie was not a sole decision. It was made between three people on town's side - playing with and in the interests of the team(with waryness of a mafia sleeper, even). Additionally it lynched a neutral though he did not vote straight away, he made a false claim and waited to see what it brung - it revealed the neutral and then they were lynched - he revealed his deception the next day almost immediately. He had all the time in that day to back off on the bluff, and he wasn't arrogant enough to do it all by himself and to go on it full throttle. It isn't the same thing at all.

 

I don't really think speed of lynch has much to do with it, Ganepark was easier to get on board with as he hammered a lynch. Pretty much the argument was that he was a shifty guy who hammered a lynch, the town agreed, and lynched him. :p I don't really see the point about tactics there.

 

Yet you criticise mine! Your eyes for strategy doesn't seem to extend to any other players. It was as simple as knowing as soon as the town knew I was the town roleblocker in such a small numbers game, they'd lynch him. You can't even see that? However to have revealed it in thread would both put me at a greater risk of death from the mafia in the night(and I don't know who made the kill on me, but my decision of roleblock was between ganepark and yvonne) AND risk of them framing in the thread. I started telling people to go for ganepark as soon as I knew his role; so I knew he was mafia just like you suspected Yvonne and I did something about it - without lying, and with quicker success than yourself, and without confusing any townfolk on the way. Also, with mr-paul's questions of me, with the info actually somewhat hidden in plain view(easy for me to see, maybe not others). Your own lies made people, including the double voter Peeps who held much power, doubt the lynch in Yvonne. Despite your belief it would lead to a lynch on Yvonne next day; it didn't for that fact. You retrospectively confirm things only as you like, you don't see the implications it has. Would you disagree with this, even?

 

We both thought we knew a mafia. I got mine lynched faster than yours. You, in fact, got yourself lynched. Of course, my strategy is clearly bad here.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Rummy
Automerged Doublepost

[Sheikah]

As Cube pointed out - his decision of a lie was not a sole decision. It was made between three people on town's side - playing with and in the interests of the team(with waryness of a mafia sleeper, even). Additionally it lynched a neutral though he did not vote straight away, he made a false claim and waited to see what it brung - it revealed the neutral and then they were lynched - he revealed his deception the next day almost immediately. He had all the time in that day to back off on the bluff, and he wasn't arrogant enough to do it all by himself and to go on it full throttle. It isn't the same thing at all.

 

What difference does it make if it was a combined decision or a single one? Surely the fact that that 3 people agreed to lie shows that more people are actually of the belief that lying can have benefits. Also that decision in the end was wrong as the lynched person was a neutral (brought the endgame closer), whereas my vote was ultimately correct. Also as was pointed out - Cube and his chums didn't know for certain that they were all town! So to say it was a well reasoned, thought out collaborative effort is something you are deducing retrospectively.

 

What I find pretty bullshit about your reasoning is that if Peeps or Cube had added a vote (I know, you didn't, but let's imagine), or if the double vote holders were people that went along with me, then you would probably be congratulating me on daring/good play. The fact is, when you take these risks, just like Cube and co. did, you don't always know what's going to happen. At least I knew that if I failed, Yvonne would probably die shortly afterwards, whereas if I succeeded then the rewards would have been pretty damn nice.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Sheikah

[Mr-Paul]

See to me it was clear that Sheikah was still town even though he'd lied, a mafioso wouldn't backtrack on what they were saying like that.

 

I too would like to know what Jon Dedede actually got - I didn't trust him because his info seemed to go along with Yvonne, and he was claiming a reflect power, which I had, so thought he must be my mafia opposite. Turns out he was town and Yvonne had the same powers as me and Jon combined. It was easy to suspect Dedede because I don't think he came out with any useful info in the game at all.

 

I think people really are overlooking the fact that a lot of voting power was in a small pool of people. Peeps didn't trust Sheikah, and Cube was just following wherever Peeps was voting, generally, that's 4 votes, which was 2/3s of majority even at the start of the game, even later, even more influential. We had a lynch train on day two, for god's sake.

 

I think it is definitely unfair to blame the town's loss on Sheikah. We subsequently lynched two mafia, before the wrong decision was made for the last mafia, and I don't blame Peeps, I'd find that a tough decision too - both DuD and Dedede seemed scummy. I've been in his position before several times and made the wrong choice. It happens.

 

I think it's really bad and unsporting that there's an argument of whose fault it was the game went the way it did. The way a game goes is never down to one person, it's always a combination. No need to try and apportion blame onto people.

[Rummy]

What difference does it make if it was a combined decision or a single one? Surely the fact that that 3 people agreed to lie shows that more people are actually of the belief that lying can have benefits. Also that decision in the end was wrong as the lynched person was a neutral (brought the endgame closer), whereas my vote was ultimately correct. Also as was pointed out - Cube and his chums didn't know for certain that they were all town! So to say it was a well reasoned, thought out collaborative effort is something you are deducing retrospectively.

 

What I find pretty bullshit about your reasoning is that if Peeps or Cube had added a vote (I know, you didn't, but let's imagine), or if the double vote holders were people that went along with me, then you would probably be congratulating me on daring/good play. The fact is, when you take these risks, just like Cube and co. did, you don't always know what's going to happen. At least I knew that if I failed, Yvonne would probably die shortly afterwards, whereas if I succeeded then the rewards would have been pretty damn nice.

 

 

 

No, you miss my point - of playing with and in the interests of your team. As I mentioned, silence and lies are mafia tricks - who refuted that? Oh, Ganepark did. Cube played with his team. He didn't lie so strongly, either - he played more tactically in saying 'hey guys magnus is mafia buy don't vote for him!' - that to me made me wonder - if you're sure someone's mafia why would you NOT vote for them? You however, lied a lie that was unsubstantiated, didn't admit right away that you protected yourself(which I didn't get) and ultimately got yourself lynched(losing a town, in a small number game); didn't get Yvonne lynched for another day after the day after your lynch. Your call on Yvonne itself is irrelevant, because if he was still lynched but actually town - we lose another town. Cube's play; he left it open - he could easily clarify it wasn't the case. Admittedly you coutner this somewhat by revealing your lie before your death - but this lead to Peeps NOT wanting to lynch Yvonne.

 

 

And as I said - we both suspected someone; I got my guy lynched faster without lies or confusion for town. How do you still think I have no idea of tactics or strategy considering that, your play vs mine - mine was more efficient? You'll also recall, I was on your side - I made enough of your strategy to realise you were town; but not everyone will. If you do things like that, you need to convince everyone(again, Cube did a better job of this because he didn't lie too extravagantly). You still think your play was optimum, though?

[Sheikah]

...

Well that's great - you had actual information to reveal, I didn't. So I dared to lie to get Yvonne lynched, eventually. Which yes, I do think I strongly encouraged as people were saying they would vote Yvonne if I was town.

 

Also your reveal that you were a roleblocker and town, thus Gane must be Mafia, was actually quite a bad thing to seed (there were two town trackers for instance). DuD also used this to discredit there being another protector (again, I was another protector). Basically your argument about Gane was based on assumption, not something I'd say was hard fact. Really I think the most suspicious thing about Gane was his hammer, and people were already suspicious of him. I also don't see why you are gauging strategy on speed of lynch - sure my affair was drawn out, but we got a good feel of the players in the process, and did we all not have FUN? (the most important thing )

[Rummy]

I think it is definitely unfair to blame the town's loss on Sheikah. We subsequently lynched two mafia, before the wrong decision was made for the last mafia, and I don't blame Peeps, I'd find that a tough decision too - both DuD and Dedede seemed scummy. I've been in his position before several times and made the wrong choice. It happens.

 

I think it's really bad and unsporting that there's an argument of whose fault it was the game went the way it did. The way a game goes is never down to one person, it's always a combination. No need to try and apportion blame onto people.

 

My argument is more about the arrogant playstyle and its results, really. He just said I have don't have as much an eye for strategy as some others, which I'd dispute or at least say I have a better eye for it at least than he does. I'll admit I got suspicious of you when you asked who roleblocked you, I wondered if the mafia had some sort of power investigator and wanted to confirm me as a roleblocker/frame me, but when you backed off I was hoping you'd be able to survive me and say why. Out of interest did you know that I had roleblocked aqui1a on N1?

[Sheikah]

No, you miss my point - of playing with and in the interests of your team. As I mentioned, silence and lies are mafia tricks

 

I think we will have to agree to disagree here then, as the bolded part I do not believe is a 'set in stone' rule for town (although often it is the case), whereas you do, so I don't see anything more coming out of this.

 

My argument is more about the arrogant playstyle and its results, really. He just said I have don't have as much an eye for strategy as some others, which I'd dispute or at least say I have a better eye for it at least than he does. I'll admit I got suspicious of you when you asked who roleblocked you, I wondered if the mafia had some sort of power investigator and wanted to confirm me as a roleblocker/frame me, but when you backed off I was hoping you'd be able to survive me and say why. Out of interest did you know that I had roleblocked aqui1a on N1?

 

See you're saying I was being arrogant, but I was genuinely, without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt convinced that Yvonne was Mafia, but I literally felt I had no means to prove it given my role and information. My information was enough to convince me, but I don't think it would have done enough to convince town. In fact, if I gave my information I was pretty fearful it would have just incriminated me.

 

I'm not saying you don't have any eye for strategy Rummy, just that you're taking such a hard line on the lying which can be useful to do sometimes.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Sheikah
Automerged Doublepost

[Rummy]

Well that's great - you had actual information to reveal, I didn't. So I dared to lie to get Yvonne lynched, eventually. Which yes, I do think I strongly encouraged as people were saying they would vote Yvonne if I was town.

 

Also your reveal that you were a roleblocker and town, thus Gane must be Mafia, was actually quite a bad thing to seed (there were two town trackers for instance). DuD also used this to discredit there being another protector (again, I was another protector). Basically your argument about Gane was based on assumption, not something I'd say was hard fact. Really I think the most suspicious thing about Gane was his hammer, and people were already suspicious of him. I also don't see why you are gauging strategy on speed of lynch - sure my affair was drawn out, but we got a good feel of the players in the process, and did we all not have FUN? (the most important thing )

 

Me vs Gane was that we were both straight roleblockers - the protectors weren't 1 for 1 but yeah, I had fun. I'm just saying, you call my strategy into it and still feel you played optimally - I'm just saying I played with what I had and got a lynch on the guy I suspected faster AND without being killed by my own team. I'd say my strategy is good enough - and yes I had info to reveal but as you saw, I didn't - for strategic reasons. I'm saying your playstyle does you little favours - for yourself and for confidence of your team(except maybe when mafia, I haven't been mafia with you yet).

[Mr-Paul]

My argument is more about the arrogant playstyle and its results, really. He just said I have don't have as much an eye for strategy as some others, which I'd dispute or at least say I have a better eye for it at least than he does. I'll admit I got suspicious of you when you asked who roleblocked you, I wondered if the mafia had some sort of power investigator and wanted to confirm me as a roleblocker/frame me, but when you backed off I was hoping you'd be able to survive me and say why. Out of interest did you know that I had roleblocked aqui1a on N1?

 

Everyone has different play styles, sometimes one may work, sometimes it won't. I think it's silly for anyone to try and advocate one over the other.

 

On night one I used my reflect power to turn your power back on yourself, hence why I knew you were a roleblocker. The PM I received told me there was someone else in the room with you. So you were still successful targeting Aqui1a then? I was keeping an open mind, but felt that the other person in the room must be someone else targeting you, or mafia team-mates!

 

When I was then roleblocked the following night, I knew it may have been you, but never really suspected it, because I did think from your postings that you were good, and why would someone who was good roleblock someone who wasn't on the lynch train of a good guy? I just had to make sure, which is why I was questioning you that day. As soon as Ganepark said he had targeted DuD, I thought it to be way too convenient, so thought he must have targeted me.

[Yvonne]

The thing is though, me voting to lynch someone early as a mafia indicator is going to be a false positive in the next game where I'm town, which will more likely than not be the next one.

 

Being positive of an unknown outcome (due to no concrete, only circumstantial, evidence) and going on to inventing information is ballsy, and yes, arrogant. Still, I appreciate it for the flair.

 

This is one of those games where I would LOVE to have seen the parallel universe where one single decision was made differently. And I think that speaks to the great balancing of the design by Jimbob.

[Rummy]

See you're saying I was being arrogant, but I was genuinely, without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt convinced that Yvonne was Mafia, but I literally felt I had no means to prove it given my role and information. My information was enough to convince me, but I don't think it would have done enough to convince town. In fact, if I gave my information I was pretty fearful it would have just incriminated me.

 

I'm not saying you don't have any eye for strategy Rummy, just that you're taking such a hard line on the lying which can be useful to do sometimes.

 

It's arrogant for that reason - you had no proof really. I've been convinced on my own information before; yet still wrong. What worried me more, it seemed things weren't entirely clear from the GM - a worthy doubt to incorporate. You felt you should lie to your town team to lynch who you believed mafia - but how can the town then trust you? It's a short term uncertain gain - I think it's such a huge risk.

 

Just consider, what if you were wrong? What if you got Yvonne lynched, and you were wrong? I understand you were playing the 'lynch him then lynch me' play, but that often doesn't actually happen* - and if it did we'd be two town down! Of course, it wasn't the case here - but you have to consider how good was your 'evidence'?

 

(*actually was surprised people didn't go for yvonne after your town flip, but that's exactly the point)

[Sheikah]

I think people really are overlooking the fact that a lot of voting power was in a small pool of people. Peeps didn't trust Sheikah, and Cube was just following wherever Peeps was voting, generally, that's 4 votes, which was 2/3s of majority even at the start of the game, even later, even more influential. We had a lynch train on day two, for god's sake.

 

I think it is definitely unfair to blame the town's loss on Sheikah. We subsequently lynched two mafia, before the wrong decision was made for the last mafia, and I don't blame Peeps, I'd find that a tough decision too - both DuD and Dedede seemed scummy. I've been in his position before several times and made the wrong choice. It happens.

 

Yeah I agree - Peeps held a lot of power, and I don't criticise Peeps in any way on his decisions as on paper I did seem quite scummy. But when you look at it another way, if it was say you who had a double vote, and Cube joined his vote to yours, it would have gone entirely differently. It was just unlucky really that there was a vote powerhouse not with me.

 

I think it's really bad and unsporting that there's an argument of whose fault it was the game went the way it did. The way a game goes is never down to one person, it's always a combination. No need to try and apportion blame onto people.

 

Thanks. Yeah, Aqui1a lynch not happening could just as easily have prevented the game over when it happened, me not protecting myself would have got me killed in the night phase before rather than the later day phase after I had cast suspicion on Yvonne. There are so many possibilities really. Which is why @Rummy, the reason I have responded a lot here is because I don't find it nice/sporting to be told that my lies are what lost the game! I don't think most people agree anyway, more a combination of factors and the final lynch being a toughie.

 

It's arrogant for that reason - you had no proof really.

 

You had no proof. Your argument was that you were a roleblocker townie so Gane couldn't be a roleblocker townie, rather roleblocker Maf. Yet there were two town trackers and 3 town protectors of varying degrees. So your call at the end of the day was founded on meta assumptions, as was mine.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Sheikah
Automerged Doublepost

[Rummy]

Everyone has different play styles, sometimes one may work, sometimes it won't. I think it's silly for anyone to try and advocate one over the other.

 

On night one I used my reflect power to turn your power back on yourself, hence why I knew you were a roleblocker. The PM I received told me there was someone else in the room with you. So you were still successful targeting Aqui1a then? I was keeping an open mind, but felt that the other person in the room must be someone else targeting you, or mafia team-mates!

 

When I was then roleblocked the following night, I knew it may have been you, but never really suspected it, because I did think from your postings that you were good, and why would someone who was good roleblock someone who wasn't on the lynch train of a good guy? I just had to make sure, which is why I was questioning you that day. As soon as Ganepark said he had targeted DuD, I thought it to be way too convenient, so thought he must have targeted me.

 

Haha, ahh - well as I said Jimbob didn't sent me a PM originally - then I asked if I *was* successful(as I assumed with no PM) and he said I was! I assumed I was too, because aqui1a claimed to have been roleblocked N1! I only really voted(despite not being counted) for him on his inactivity/lack of defence - didn't really suspect him beyond that. One reason I thought Sheikah was town was from how vocal he was beyond a point - I felt mafia might have just left it. I have absolutely no idea what went on with you and me on N1, but I was half worried/half glad when you asked and didn't push it. I felt if I died, you might be able to explain why I kept expressing suspicion of ganepark.

[Yvonne]

Also worth noting, in some mafia communities there is a policy called Lynch All Liars, where anyone admitting to a lie is lynched. It makes it easier for town to win. Also too most of these games would be won by town with a D1 massclaim, but we generally don't do that. That's something that could be addressed in future theme games. I tried to do this to some extent in wire mafia where I gave the mafia known unoccupied roles to claim, but then the powers are the hard thing to stay honest about.

[Sheikah]

Just consider, what if you were wrong? What if you got Yvonne lynched, and you were wrong? I understand you were playing the 'lynch him then lynch me' play, but that often doesn't actually happen* - and if it did we'd be two town down! Of course, it wasn't the case here - but you have to consider how good was your 'evidence'?

 

(*actually was surprised people didn't go for yvonne after your town flip, but that's exactly the point)

 

My justification was fairly good - he appeared to me to have speed lynched Aqui1a, then I couldn't find him when I went to track him that night. I couldn't ascribe anyone having protected him to explain why he wasn't around, so chances were it was a Mafia ability. Also as the day went on it got worse as he was saying he tracked me which was pretty damn unlikely given I was protected, and I didn't believe he would have just targeted the right person to exonerate himself by chance.

 

Really though is there ever 100% verifiable proof in Mafia? It's kinda a punt whenever you start a lynch (even cops can be fooled). If the lynch was incorrect then I would have been shocked, but at the end of the day it is a game and the end result of a bad lynch is not having your nads chopped off in real life...

[Rummy]

You had no proof. Your argument was that you were a roleblocker townie so Gane couldn't be a roleblocker townie, rather roleblocker Maf. Yet there were two town trackers and 3 town protectors of varying degrees. So your call at the end of the day was founded on meta assumptions, as was mine.

 

I know. Again, this is my point. I had no proof, same as you, but I never lied, nor argued and pushed the case on just my own suspicion. I left it up to the town to draw the same conclusion I did with my information - luckily they agreed with my suspicions and made the lynch. Had I been alive the next day, I'd have revealed(I almost did so at the end to save you and try to convince Peeps to vote Yvonne) and left it up to the town. However, my approach didn't put me at risk of a town lynch(which is not in town benefit) - therefore it's more beneficial. Lynching ganepark depended on my death at the hands of the mafia and getting a GM town reveal - or me revealing the information and risking death at hands of the town early on.

[Sheikah]

Also worth noting, in some mafia communities there is a policy called Lynch All Liars, where anyone admitting to a lie is lynched. It makes it easier for town to win. Also too most of these games would be won by town with a D1 massclaim, but we generally don't do that. That's something that could be addressed in future theme games. I tried to do this to some extent in wire mafia where I gave the mafia known unoccupied roles to claim, but then the powers are the hard thing to stay honest about.

 

Oh, now where is the fun in that.

 

Has anyone tried a game where everyone reveals their complete lot of information at the very beginning of the game (Mafia lying of course).

[Yvonne]

Thing is, it really is in the best interest of the town. At first it would chafe, but then it would influence future game design. Perhaps I will do it in the next themed game (oh look i've started playing already. meta!)

 

seriously when's the next game

[Sheikah]

I know. Again, this is my point. I had no proof, same as you, but I never lied, nor argued and pushed the case on just my own suspicion. I

 

But you were massively assisted by the existing suspicion on Gane because of his hammer... I think if Gane never hammered, I don't think your claim would have resulted in his swift lynch.

[Rummy]

Yet there were two town trackers and 3 town protectors of varying degrees. So your call at the end of the day was founded on meta assumptions, as was mine.

 

Just to add - these roles were all different(including the two town trackers). However mine and ganepark's role was essentially exactly the same barring his on top info gathering in cases where people had it, he was always a straight roleblocker like me nonetheless. Combined with his claim of targetting DuD it was fishy either way.

 

But you were massively assisted by the existing suspicion on Gane because of his hammer... I think if Gane never hammered, I don't think your claim would have resulted in his swift lynch.

 

It helped, but I think it was the roleblocker vs roleblocker tbh. As I said, I left it to the town to decide - they drew the same conclusions as myself. You've ignored my repeated points;

 

I got him lynched(no one else was pushing it before I died), I didn't get killed by my own team. I didn't lie. It worked, it was efficient. Of course, it's complex enough you can take every argument I make and make a counterpoint - but my core points were these. My approach worked more efficiently than yours because you got killed by your own team and seeded doubt in the town's double voter through your actions. I thought Peeps trusted me(don't know if this was the case) but I couldn't convince him either. You were worth so much less dead than alive, and you sent yourself there.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Rummy
Automerged Doublepost

[Sheikah]

 

It helped, but I think it was the roleblocker vs roleblocker tbh. As I said, I left it to the town to decide - they drew the same conclusions as myself. You've ignored my repeated points.

 

Well, you can think that.

 

You had it easy to get that lynch...people had voiced that they wanted to lynch him already even if they hadn't acted on it. You placed a vote on him...people followed. I'd hardly say you were instrumental in securing his lynch, it's not like you really had to convince people. What if I really was an alignment investigator? I'd still have had to have gone through all the convincing just as I did. The path was easier for you as people didn't need convincing for Gane; they already thought he was suspicious.

 

Also bear in mind that Yvonne didn't have the role I did so it wasn't something as simple as saying 'he has my role, so he must be scum'. You're comparing apples with oranges.

Edited March 16, 2013 by Sheikah

[Yvonne]

Rummy's strategy is more consistent, endears himself to town more easily, and would be more successful in the long run. Easy lynches are like easy saves for a goalie - they're easy because they put themselves in the right place at the right time for it to happen without much effort. Hard lynches on the other hand make for pages of entertaining mafia.

[Rummy]

I placed a vote on him and people followed after I was dead? Or they followed a day later, as is of course often the case in a mafia game, right?

 

 

Anyhow, you've delightfully and very welcomely illustrated my point made earlier which is why I've continued the discussion;

 

You won't accept any of this though, and that's why you're a risk.

 

It's clear it's still the case and so, as often seems to be your post-game resolution with other players - we shall have to agree to disagree.

 

 

@Jimbob, as said, despite the confusion - quite an enjoyable game. Would anything have happened to me/Cube had he fulfilled his task of passing me some info?