Return to “Arkham Mafia [ENDGAME]”
I agree with the highlighted sentence, wouldn't that also be a reason for the mafia to kill him if they thought he was Robin too? Either situation, if they thought he was bad and on the opposing mafia team or if they thought he was Robin I'd see him as someone they would choose.MovingPictures07 wrote:Okay, so regarding the d1 no lynch, I don't understand why so many people are upset. I know it sucks not to have a result, but chances are most likely that a civilian would have been lynched (mathematically). Furthermore, I don't understand why people are eliminating or leaning against Robin having stopped the d1 lynch. If I remember correctly, that's the only public reason the lynch would be stopped based on the role listing. Why wouldn't Robin stop it, especially if it gave him information on that insanely close vote tally?
I wouldn't go so far as to call it an accusation. I just thought it was weird for you to be so vocal against her on day one when no one has any info. For all the players who seemed to be on her yesterday I think yours would be the opinion I'd put the most faith in.Turnip Head wrote:AWR was a different game Sorsha. I certainly went back and forth on her and considered all possibilities in light of the info we had.
As for your other question you'd have to ask SVS if she can read me well, but it's a weird thing to accuse me of. If I was bad and needed to get rid of SVS I could just kill her.
And if you read my posts I currently think SVS is indy.
I didn't mean that you were suspecting her for no good reason here. But even in BTS in that game you didn't think she was really bad iirc.Turnip Head wrote:Well, one difference is I'm not bad this game :P You and Golden had all the civ cred in AWR, it wouldn't have had the same impact if that case came from me.Sorsha wrote:Turnip Head- I've been trying to get a handle on why you've been suspicious of SVS. In AWR you and I had it worked out in BTSC how SVS was bad- lots of night action results plus her defense of some of her co-baddies, probably some other things I'm forgetting- yet you still didn't want to confront her in the thread in that game. So what's different this game? I don't think you'd be suspicious of her for no good reason if you were a civ and didn't really think she was bad, but day one just seems odd to me when there is so little to go on.
I don't suspect her for no good reason. I think I've laid out my thoughts on SVS as clearly as I can.
Dom wrote:Do you think that means we shouldn't lynch him if that's the case?Sorsha wrote:I don't think wilgy is bad. He hates being bad and his posts usually reflect that imo. His posts in this game seem like he's having fun. Maybe he's an Arkham inmate but I doubt Mafia.
I won't argue against it today. I don't even know who I'm going to vote for. I thought I was going to have another hour to catch up but this ends in a few minutes 
I don't think it will either. I think zebra was trying to discredit the info that sig has (whether she did or not remains to be seen) but that doesn't mean zebra is bad.Turnip Head wrote:I don't care for it either, I don't think it's going to lead to anything worth voting for.
Judging by Typhoony's reaction to what zebra said I think what she told you is true.sig wrote:I think her plan is to give either real or fake info that she got in an attempt to frame me/trip me up. From the limited information people have given I do think this all connects whether it give game knowledge.
What do you think zebras plan is? Do you think she understood you 100% when you posted this:sig wrote:@Zebra Oh yes your plan. I was tone reading you as civ but all this talk of a secret plan doesn't seem civvie to me at all. Having said that I'm like Switzerland the land of bank accounts (I wish) chocolate and not going to war, so lets not engage in a wall post war.
Besides me who else are you pinged by?
linki: Enrique how would you discuss it? You obviously have an idea of what she is doing, but there is no way you know for sure unless you meant for that to be in BTSC and posted it here by mistake? :P (last part was a joke)
Because I don't think she did.sig wrote:I could discuss it Zebra yes and I plan to, but I don't want to be one of the only players to do this.
Basically someone has stolen money from Wayne Enterprise (ooops someone is getting firrred) and Fox is on the case. Top suspect is Hugo Strange and a possibly location which isn't a map location. So really no information here at all however, this doesn't mean other locations have no information.
I think the mafia would be more likely to vote for two different locations then just one.
What do you think her plan was though?Enrique wrote:Gun to head, sprit
Zebra isn't backtracking or making stuff up, her plan just wasn't very good to begin with.
If you were pinged by that second quote from sig above why did you share information with him about your location?a2thezebra wrote:That's not what I'm saying though. If you just wanted to discuss locations then I wouldn't think of that as anti-town, but it was you trying to urge people into discussing it that I suspected as having ulterior motives. Here's the post that really pinged me:sig wrote:Okay after thinking about it more I guess not discussing locations isn't necessarily suspicious mafia behavior. Having said this I don't like that Zebra is saying me discussing locations is anti-town I think she is saying this for nefarious purposes.
What I don't get is why you said that the question is who will be hurt from discussing messages...and you go on to immediately advocate discussing them as if that was a rhetorical question that you somehow already knew the answer to. I'm not convinced that you felt that the mafia having BTSC with each other is a good enough reason to assume that what Epignosis said can be overlooked and that the civs will be hurt from not discussing whatever information we've individually gained. So it's not that you wanted to discuss locations that I feel is anti-town, it's that I don't think your reasoning for wanting to do so was genuine.sig wrote:We are allowed to discuses the map options, but it might not benefit certain players. I think some of the messages are nonsensical while others might offer clues. Either way I think it is a neat addition. The question is who will be hurt from discussing messages? The mafia will be talking about it in BTSC so I'd think the civs are most likely to be hurt from not discussing it.
linki - I don't think you're shifty, Scotty. You might be bad though.
Yeah... Because people being too nice to one another is really a problem we have around hereScotty wrote:Here's something that I have noticed, and am starting to trust least: when people are too nice in the early stages. Knocking on doors, handing out booklets of inner peace. I mean, it's nice to have that energy and environment over the opposite (for sure) but I see that more as indicative of not trying to cause waves. If you're a humpback whale in a kiddie pool, you're gonna make tidal waves, even if you try to turn over slowly.
But Scotty, what if I'm just a nice person looking to pat everyone on the back for doing such a good job and I'm actually civ?
Well cool on you. But I'm not buying it.
(I don't have specific people in mind with this thought process, but I'm getting it out there now before I pass out from this drunken stupor)
Doesn't really matter for this game but if you or anyone else wants to add it to their "Sorsha meta" that wasn't a slip. I wasn't a civ and I tried really hard to not refer to myself as a civ, I wanted it known that I was a neutral role... hence me always saying "you're wrong DH, I'm not bad" instead of "you're wrong DH, I'm a civ." I'm not sure if anyone got it though.DharmaHelper wrote:Dunno, Sorsha slipped and said "you civs" in GOC and I correctly caught that.MacDougall wrote:I believe that you did. I think you went out of your way to call yourself a civ when the natural way to phrase that sentence would be to refer to civs as "they" but you were worried that someone would find it scummy for you to refer to civilians as that and didn't want to defend from a dumb comment. It's an irksome sentence. At best case scenario it's fluff content that you've created for the purpose of telling us you're a civilian.Turnip Head wrote:No I didn't.MacDougall wrote:You went out of your way to write "we" here.Turnip Head wrote:Civvie behavior is hard to define because we pretty much always act irrationally.
This is how I feel about the "we/they" situation also. There was more to Mac's suspicion of TH though, this was just the latest bit.DFaraday wrote:So by the end of Day 0 we have like five feuds simmering already.
As far as the TH thing, it seems he was caught between a rock and a hard place. Scylla and Charybdis, if you will. If he said "we" someone will say he's trying too hard to seem civ (which Mac did). If he said "they" someone would say "Why aren't you including yourself in the civs?" So that's not suspicious to me. I know that, as both a civ and baddie, I've considered how to phrase things like that so that people won't jump on my wording.
