Twin Peaks Mafia FIRST GAME: {GAME OVER}

#351

S~V~S wrote:OH, its a 48 hour poll. I thought this was a sytandard 24 hr speed poll.

Derp~

I don't think it was meant to be 48 hours. Or maybe it was, I dunno

#352

Kate wrote:
S~V~S wrote:OH, its a 48 hour poll. I thought this was a sytandard 24 hr speed poll.

Derp~
I don't think it was meant to be 48 hours. Or maybe it was, I dunno

I was under the impression that this one poll was extended to make up for early confusion over the ending time.

#353

LOL, well when I voted, I thought we had less than an hour and no one had voted.

#354

According to me the poll would have ended abot 40 mins ago anyway. Can someone tell me the time now?

#355

it ends tomorrow at 330 eastern standard time.

#356

Snow Dog wrote:According to me the poll would have ended abot 40 mins ago anyway. Can someone tell me the time now?

It's 5:17 eastern right now.

#357

Nevinera wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:According to me the poll would have ended abot 40 mins ago anyway. Can someone tell me the time now?
It's 5:17 eastern right now.

Thank you, telephone time information announcer person!

I will call back in a few minutes to ask again, so be ready.

#358

Nevinera wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:According to me the poll would have ended abot 40 mins ago anyway. Can someone tell me the time now?
It's 5:17 eastern right now.

Thank you.

#359

I am five hours ahead of EST then

#360

Snow Dog wrote:I am five hours ahead of EST then

Greenwich Mean Time ftw.

#361

no comment...

#362

So many pages!

Thoughts hopefully coming ASAP. Probably will be a while.

#363

Effective immediately, Matahari has replaced blindfaeth.

#364

Hrm, interesting. Why would he quit suddenly like that?

#365

Okay, I skimmed a ton of that. There's no way I have time right now to do anything else and for that I apologize. I have asked INH if he has a willing and ready person to replace because I thought I'd have time for this and I don't. I can't remember if I said anything specific here; I know I did in boo's VGM game over on RM. But I have BEC (the 3rd part of my CPA) on May 15th, I've decided I want to tackle Audit before the end of May because June is no testing (and I'd have to wait until July at the earliest, but I am also job searching and it looks like I might be working at CPA firm by then) so I have to put in even much more studying than I was before because I'm balancing two tests simultaneously -- in combination with the end of the semester and other such things.

So to address Vomps or whoever else it was that said I was posting less than normal, that's why. It has nothing to do with my alignment, which, if anyone has played games with me should know -- I participate just about equally as civvie and baddie. When I have variations in that it is purely because of IRL limitations.

As to today's vote, I really don't know where to go. I guess my gut still is leaning Nevinera with my vote anyway. As to the strategy, I don't know which would be best at this point. I still defend the plan on Day 1, I thought it was a great idea -- because we avoided an NK and because it was so early in the game I highly doubt we'd have anything better than luck to catch Bob or his minion that early on anyway -- but that's just me. I don't think we want to do the same thing again now though, as I've said in previous posts. I do think we need to spread it out to some extent though. Maybe leave 3 or 4 people with no vote who people agree might be most currently trustworthy? Then if we see a kill, we'll know at least 1 of those is a minion and we can go from there?

Linki with SVS: I think it can be attributed to his being busy with work, but also to what happened in the thread, given his most recent comment. It's a shame because, if INH has no other replacements, I could have possibly used that replacement, and I do think BF was contributing and I do always enjoy playing with him -- even though I wasn't sure how to read him.

#366

I am now looking for a replacement for MovingPictures, by the way.

#367

Don't sweat over it too much, INH, I think I can stick it out. Players will just have to be understanding that mafia is lower on my priority list for the time being. That being said, if you do find someone who has the free time and is totally willing and able to play, I will accept replacement.

#368

I read back and xoxoxo Kevin I don't think we are that kind of a crowd[/b]

And I was going to say that in a recent game at RM, Viral Vid 3, we were baddie teammates and he was not happy with the way things were going and he up and quit~. So

I don't know what to think. I want to see what Mata has to say.

#369

Weird, so you think he could have given up and quit because of the suspicion? That's possible, I suppose. I don't know him well enough in that regard; every time I've had BTSC with him he has not been replaced.

#370

Also, I'll have to vote tonight, which means I need to vote soon -- unfortunately. What do people think, how many players do we want to leave uncovered or what?

#371

Another public notice, from Wednesday morning to Thursday afternoon, I won't have wi-fi, and I'll end the night early, and begin the next day that morning.

#372

Sounds good, INH. I'm cool with that.

Well, I have to do a few things still before the end of the night, so my free time is up. I need to vote now, I guess I'll vote Nevinera because that was my ping I had from earlier and he has no votes yet -- and -- skimming over everything I just had to didn't change that nor do I feel anyone else is super suspicious or anything. I think I most support the idea of leaving maybe 3 people without votes? Maybe Snow Dog, Kate, and SVS? I'll let you guys figure that out, unfortunately.

Also, I'm going to be gone all day/night tomorrow because of work, studying, and Cincinnati Reds game with Daisy -- then her birthday is the day thereafter -- and I have tons of end of the semester/studying stuff to get done, so this week will likely be sporadic for me, and I'll probably miss the next Night vote.

#373

Hi y'all. I need to read through the whole game, so I'll post after that. Yay! I love twin peaks, I even have some! I loved Dual Spires too, but I dont have any of those. Ok, later!

#374

I do not think we should leave more than 2 people uncovered at a time rotating with who we feel most comfortable with. If we have more it could lead to more civ lynches trying to ferret out the baddies with two its one or the other.

#375

Bye bf! Sorry to see you go, especially if it's because you felt discriminated against. Welcome, Matahari!

Snow Dog wrote:Could she be being manipulated by Ben or another?

I thought you and Kate had established that Ben changed a player's vote after they posted it and that the change wouldn't be visible to us? If so I don't see any powers that could have affected her vote.

SVS, I appreciate you explaining the timing of your vote, but you didn't say much about the vote itself. What's pinging you about vomps?

And Rox, your idea of only leaving 2 uncovered to narrow a suspect list in the event of an NK seems ok for today. However, as BOB's voting bloc gets bigger it could be dangerous to spread the votes quite that much, I think

#376

S~V~S wrote:I read back and xoxoxo Kevin I don't think we are that kind of a crowd[/b]

And I was going to say that in a recent game at RM, Viral Vid 3, we were baddie teammates and he was not happy with the way things were going and he up and quit~. So I don't know what to think. I want to see what Mata has to say.

SVS, I have no idea why he left the game. He was not a recruiter, nor was he recruited, so it must have been unrelated to the game. If I'm understanding things correctly, I would be happy to have a vote on me. But I could use some guidance on who to vote. After reading, I'm thinking a vote on BWT would not be ridiculous. But I want to make sure that my vote will help protect us tonight, so I'll wait for tips from the master vote-planners.

#377

I'd prefer one vote on me tbh. Then if there is an NK I won't be suspected. Anyone actually want to volunteer to have no votes?

And welcome Matahari

#378

Anyone has any feelings at all who may be Bob?

#379

Russ, I said it was next best to random. We wanted to spread it out, so I voted for someone I had no opinion on.

#380

S~V~S wrote:Russ, I said it was next best to random. We wanted to spread it out, so I voted for someone I had no opinion on.

Ok, fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.

Snow Dog wrote:Anyone has any feelings at all who may be Bob?

I don't have any hunches yet. Unfortunately, as you said, BOB may not even have BTSC with his minions and thus could be the hardest baddie to find

#381

I am fed up of always being suspicious of BWT whatever his role. But....I am leaning towards him now. Maybe he should change his avatar?

#382

Russtifinko wrote: And Rox, your idea of only leaving 2 uncovered to narrow a suspect list in the event of an NK seems ok for today. However, as BOB's voting bloc gets bigger it could be dangerous to spread the votes quite that much, I think

Idk understand how covering the people who we find bad with votes is bad? It seems to me as the game wears on you will never want to leave too many people without votes - remember those that are Bob or are his minions - if they receive a vote then there is no kill. If we don't spread the vote every time we will run the risk of unpreventable civ NK's.

Snow Dog actually wanting a vote makes me not want to give him one tbh. If you are in fact a civ you should have no problem being off of the poll.

Linky Snow Dog - wtf?

#383

Roxy wrote:
Russtifinko wrote: And Rox, your idea of only leaving 2 uncovered to narrow a suspect list in the event of an NK seems ok for today. However, as BOB's voting bloc gets bigger it could be dangerous to spread the votes quite that much, I think
Idk understand how covering the people who we find bad with votes is bad? It seems to me as the game wears on you will never want to leave too many people without votes - remember those that are Bob or are his minions - if they receive a vote then there is no kill. If we don't spread the vote every time we will run the risk of unpreventable civ NK's.

Snow Dog actually wanting a vote makes me not want to give him one tbh. If you are in fact a civ you should have no problem being off of the poll.

Linky Snow Dog - wtf?

What are you "wtfing" about? What did I do?

#384

Roxy wrote: Snow Dog actually wanting a vote makes me not want to give him one tbh. If you are in fact a civ you should have no problem being off of the poll.

True for today, but not in general - if Bob every recruits Ben, then being an un-alibi'd civ is dangerous. We do have some decent evidence that Ben has not yet been recruited, but that could change tonight.

#385

Snow Dog wrote:I am fed up of always being suspicious of BWT whatever his role. But....I am leaning towards him now. Maybe he should change his avatar?

This post is why I said wtf.

You thinking Teeth is bad b/c of his avatar? If not what is the point of that sentence? If you are suspicious of him why not say why in thread eveidence?

#386

What do you mean Nev? What am I missing? We want to cover people whoo we think are bad with votes while testing some with no vote. Right?

#387

I will take no vote no problem. I cannot kill. And I don't need an alibi. I think its unciv like to insist on an alibi at the risk of a civ life.

#388

Roxy wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:I am fed up of always being suspicious of BWT whatever his role. But....I am leaning towards him now. Maybe he should change his avatar?
This post is why I said wtf.

You thinking Teeth is bad b/c of his avatar? If not what is the point of that sentence? If you are suspicious of him why not say why in thread eveidence?

Oh I see what you mean.

What I am saying is that I always seem to view BWT with suspicion. And yes, maybe....just maybe..his avatar is influencing me. I have no further evidence.

#389

Kate wrote:I will take no vote no problem. I cannot kill. And I don't need an alibi. I think its unciv like to insist on an alibi at the risk of a civ life.

Really? I don't see that.

#390

Roxy wrote:What do you mean Nev? What am I missing? We want to cover people whoo we think are bad with votes while testing some with no vote. Right?

If you are the one (or one of a few) that is not covered, and Ben is bad, then he can uncover himself and kill someone, and it will look like you did it. That's why I keep referring to the vote as an 'alibi'. It's also why I'm confident that Ben was not recruited already - we left just one player uncovered yesterday, and nobody died; if Ben had been bad, he would have *jumped* at the opportunity to kill one civ and let us hang another for it.

#391

Kate wrote:I will take no vote no problem. I cannot kill. And I don't need an alibi. I think its unciv like to insist on an alibi at the risk of a civ life.

That's silly. Selfish maybe, but 'unciv-like'? Who here doesn't want a good defense against being lynched?

#392

Nevinera wrote:
Roxy wrote:What do you mean Nev? What am I missing? We want to cover people whoo we think are bad with votes while testing some with no vote. Right?
If you are the one (or one of a few) that is not covered, and Ben is bad, then he can uncover himself and kill someone, and it will look like you did it. That's why I keep referring to the vote as an 'alibi'. It's also why I'm confident that Ben was not recruited already - we left just one player uncovered yesterday, and nobody died; if Ben had been bad, he would have *jumped* at the opportunity to kill one civ and let us hang another for it.

I think everyone had a vote so no one was uncovered.

#393

Kate wrote:I will take no vote no problem. I cannot kill. And I don't need an alibi. I think its unciv like to insist on an alibi at the risk of a civ life.

^ this tbqh

#394

Snow Dog wrote:
Nevinera wrote:
Roxy wrote:What do you mean Nev? What am I missing? We want to cover people whoo we think are bad with votes while testing some with no vote. Right?
If you are the one (or one of a few) that is not covered, and Ben is bad, then he can uncover himself and kill someone, and it will look like you did it. That's why I keep referring to the vote as an 'alibi'. It's also why I'm confident that Ben was not recruited already - we left just one player uncovered yesterday, and nobody died; if Ben had been bad, he would have *jumped* at the opportunity to kill one civ and let us hang another for it.
I think everyone had a vote so no one was uncovered.

Ben was. Nothing we can do about that. That is how boogs died.

#395

Nevinera wrote:
Kate wrote:I will take no vote no problem. I cannot kill. And I don't need an alibi. I think its unciv like to insist on an alibi at the risk of a civ life.
That's silly. Selfish maybe, but 'unciv-like'? Who here doesn't want a good defense against being lynched?

Selfish/uncivlike....tomAto/tomato.

#396

I will not be lobbying for a vote either, since I know I am not a recruit and would rather the vote go to someone who possibly is.

I still don't know who I'm going to vote for yet, but I'm leaning Russ. His convenient forgetfulness on Elohcin's replacement and Boogs' death struck me as a little off.

#397

Kate wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Nevinera wrote:
Roxy wrote:What do you mean Nev? What am I missing? We want to cover people whoo we think are bad with votes while testing some with no vote. Right?
If you are the one (or one of a few) that is not covered, and Ben is bad, then he can uncover himself and kill someone, and it will look like you did it. That's why I keep referring to the vote as an 'alibi'. It's also why I'm confident that Ben was not recruited already - we left just one player uncovered yesterday, and nobody died; if Ben had been bad, he would have *jumped* at the opportunity to kill one civ and let us hang another for it.
I think everyone had a vote so no one was uncovered.
Ben was. Nothing we can do about that. That is how boogs died.

I don't recall anyone not having a vote.

#398

Kate wrote:
Snow Dog wrote: I think everyone had a vote so no one was uncovered.
Ben was. Nothing we can do about that. That is how boogs died.

Oh, I forgot - we had that conversation because we weren't sure somebody would show up, but then they did >.<

That does still imply that Ben wasn't recruited though; he could have killed two people if he was (moving the vote on himself to someone to get them lynched, then NKing someone else).

#399

Omg are you serious right now? Please read back. This has been explained at least 4 times.

#400

Sorry that was to snow dog not nev

Meanwhile...