I am not terribly attached to voting Stubbs at the moment. If someone comes up with another idea I will gladly consider it.Fircoal wrote:Also if we know he didn't do the kill I'll rather go after and target someone who could have done the kill.
Moderator: Community Team
I am not terribly attached to voting Stubbs at the moment. If someone comes up with another idea I will gladly consider it.Fircoal wrote:Also if we know he didn't do the kill I'll rather go after and target someone who could have done the kill.
StubbsKVM wrote:Fircoal, where do you stand on safariguy now?
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
Fircoal wrote:StubbsKVM wrote:Fircoal, where do you stand on safariguy now?
I stand that I am still suspicious of him, however I don't think my arguments hold as much water. Because IB was town, that means that now he had to be trying not to lynch IB because he's town, which would lead me to believe that if he is scum Hensow is as well. (That is, he targeted a teammate for a lynch, and tried to avoid targeting an innocent)
Hensow claimed VT but was still probably going to be lynched until Iron Butterfly posted this:Hensow quickly switched his vote to Iron Butterfly and Dazza and Stubbs where the first to follow. Iron Butterfly has been the center of discussion ever since.ghostly447 wrote:Conveniently though, Hensow was almost our D1 lynch. I cannot remember how that got broken up to where Hensow can continue his minor activity and it didnt get brought back up. Unless I didnt read far enough, I havent gotten enough time to read the few pages from D1 and D2, but if someone could re-evaluate to see if he was ever brought back into question, maybe now is time to do so to at least get the conversation rolling forward in a progressive manor. Hope for, if nothing else, a scum slip to get a better lead.
spiesr wrote:Hensow claimed VT but was still probably going to be lynched until Iron Butterfly posted this:Hensow quickly switched his vote to Iron Butterfly and Dazza and Stubbs where the first to follow. Iron Butterfly has been the center of discussion ever since.ghostly447 wrote:Conveniently though, Hensow was almost our D1 lynch. I cannot remember how that got broken up to where Hensow can continue his minor activity and it didnt get brought back up. Unless I didnt read far enough, I havent gotten enough time to read the few pages from D1 and D2, but if someone could re-evaluate to see if he was ever brought back into question, maybe now is time to do so to at least get the conversation rolling forward in a progressive manor. Hope for, if nothing else, a scum slip to get a better lead.
kgb007 wrote:4 VTs in a 13 player game? anyone care to speculate on the balance?
ghostly447 wrote:kgb007 wrote:4 VTs in a 13 player game? anyone care to speculate on the balance?
Well we have:
1 claimed PR
3 confirmed VT's
1 claimed VT
I would bet the breakdown goes something like this:
3 Mafia
2-5 power roles
Rest VT 8 - 5
OR
4 Mafia
3-6 PR
Rest VT 6 - 3
More mafia, more power roles. In a game with VT's I normally either see 1:3 scum:town or 1:4. So I would bet money there are a couple more power roles and some of these VT claims are going to be fakes.
Hensow wrote:ghostly447 wrote:kgb007 wrote:4 VTs in a 13 player game? anyone care to speculate on the balance?
Well we have:
1 claimed PR
3 confirmed VT's
1 claimed VT
I would bet the breakdown goes something like this:
3 Mafia
2-5 power roles
Rest VT 8 - 5
OR
4 Mafia
3-6 PR
Rest VT 6 - 3
More mafia, more power roles. In a game with VT's I normally either see 1:3 scum:town or 1:4. So I would bet money there are a couple more power roles and some of these VT claims are going to be fakes.
4 VT is well with in your estimates.
I'm surprised at the idea that saf would kill a team mate on day one tho I understand the logic it just seems wasteful.
but I have little to add to whats been said right now.
Hensow wrote:ghostly447 wrote:kgb007 wrote:4 VTs in a 13 player game? anyone care to speculate on the balance?
Well we have:
1 claimed PR
3 confirmed VT's
1 claimed VT
I would bet the breakdown goes something like this:
3 Mafia
2-5 power roles
Rest VT 8 - 5
OR
4 Mafia
3-6 PR
Rest VT 6 - 3
More mafia, more power roles. In a game with VT's I normally either see 1:3 scum:town or 1:4. So I would bet money there are a couple more power roles and some of these VT claims are going to be fakes.
4 VT is well with in your estimates.
I'm surprised at the idea that saf would kill a team mate on day one tho I understand the logic it just seems wasteful.
but I have little to add to whats been said right now.
safariguy5 wrote:Hensow wrote:ghostly447 wrote:kgb007 wrote:4 VTs in a 13 player game? anyone care to speculate on the balance?
Well we have:
1 claimed PR
3 confirmed VT's
1 claimed VT
I would bet the breakdown goes something like this:
3 Mafia
2-5 power roles
Rest VT 8 - 5
OR
4 Mafia
3-6 PR
Rest VT 6 - 3
More mafia, more power roles. In a game with VT's I normally either see 1:3 scum:town or 1:4. So I would bet money there are a couple more power roles and some of these VT claims are going to be fakes.
4 VT is well with in your estimates.
I'm surprised at the idea that saf would kill a team mate on day one tho I understand the logic it just seems wasteful.
but I have little to add to whats been said right now.
I would add that a tracker and watcher combo makes sense, so I would say there's a high probability we have a watcher. Probably a doctor as well or maybe some other combination of protective roles.
jonty125 wrote:No change to VC. Deadline still stands. Iron Butterfly has been prodded.
jonty125 wrote:If there is a draw, there will be a 24 hour run-off period where only voting is allowed and no discussion.
StubbsKVM wrote:vote spiesr
I don't really want to die.
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
I would wager it is OMGUS. Or perhaps the fear the voting for anyone else would trigger an OMGUS from them.new guy1 wrote:Im sure you dont want to die, but why did you vote spies, just wondering? Trying to figure out your thought processStubbsKVM wrote:vote spiesr
I don't really want to die.
new guy1 wrote:StubbsKVM wrote:vote spiesr
I don't really want to die.
Im sure you dont want to die, but why did you vote spies, just wondering? Trying to figure out your thought process
Of course he wants to live and the way the deadline works voting someone else is part of that. The real question is why does he think I should be lynched out of all potential candidates.kgb007 wrote:he voted spies bc stubbs would have been lynched by spies one vote against stubbs if no one else voted so it was part OMGUS and part self preservation since it forced a (now) 3-way tie in votes against stubbs, spies and saf
spiesr wrote:Of course he wants to live and the way the deadline works voting someone else is part of that. The real question is why does he think I should be lynched out of all potential candidates.
spiesr wrote:I would wager it is OMGUS. Or perhaps the fear the voting for anyone else would trigger an OMGUS from them.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users