Day 12 ~ 2015 Game of Champions

[MacDougall]

rip me!

Argh avatar and post combo is giving me acute depression.

[MacDougall]

Three civilians in a night?

that is not good.

I wonder if Ghost Illyria is responsible for the death of DF.

And, Bea welcome!

I reckon that's a pretty good assumption tbh. The way the kills came out it looked like the main kill was Zebra and then Faraday was like an afterthought or something.

[Long Con]

3 kills on night 2 is weird. Surely the scum don't have 3 kills on a single night? The flavour makes it sound like one role was responsible for all three kills. What kind of role would be able to kill three people in a single night this early in the game? I've played with the demo man role before but that wouldn't have been able to kill that many people yet.

I wonder if those three players all did something to trigger their demise. I will take a look.

I think that there were probably three different killers, and each of them were given a Shadowsock to send as an Anonymity Assassin.

[Long Con]

Three civilians in a night?

that is not good.

I wonder if Ghost Illyria is responsible for the death of DF.

And, Bea welcome!

I reckon that's a pretty good assumption tbh. The way the kills came out it looked like the main kill was Zebra and then Faraday was like an afterthought or something.

That is my assumption as well.

[DharmaHelper]

Metalmarsh has voted for JaggedJimmyJay without posting, so maybe he's silenced.

That's also a lynch I would be happy to support.

To clarify, you'd support a MM lynch or a JJJ lynch?

[Golden]

3 kills on night 2 is weird. Surely the scum don't have 3 kills on a single night? The flavour makes it sound like one role was responsible for all three kills. What kind of role would be able to kill three people in a single night this early in the game? I've played with the demo man role before but that wouldn't have been able to kill that many people yet.

I wonder if those three players all did something to trigger their demise. I will take a look.

I think that there were probably three different killers, and each of them were given a Shadowsock to send as an Anonymity Assassin.

I agree with this. I think the Shadowsocks were probably flavour. But Mac's idea cant' be ruled out.

HB, you felt that sig might have stopped a kill on night one, and said something about evidence pointing that way. Can you be more specific about what you were referring to?

[Long Con]

Metalmarsh has voted for JaggedJimmyJay without posting, so maybe he's silenced.

That's also a lynch I would be happy to support.

To clarify, you'd support a MM lynch or a JJJ lynch?

JJJ please!

[MacDougall]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

[Golden]

Has there been a role like this before?

I recall something like that this year but I can't remember the game, possibly it was Biblical.

[Epignosis]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

It's a neat way to get rid of busy moms too.

[MacDougall]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

It's a neat way to get rid of busy moms too.

Lol people who can't post heaps can still vote.

[Dom]

LC, summary on JJ pls

[Epignosis]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

It's a neat way to get rid of busy moms too.

Lol people who can't post heaps can still vote.

People who can't read heaps can't cast an informed vote.

[Golden]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

It's a neat way to get rid of busy moms too.

Eloh, you could say, was gotten rid of by a role being used to its potential (Rico's). I'm sorry Eloh couldn't keep up and enjoy the game, because it is much funner when she can.

But I'm not sure what your point is.

[Dom]

I'm not sure what the point of engaging in that discussion in the game thread is.

[Golden]

I'm not sure what the point of engaging in that discussion in the game thread is.

The question is - why three kills.

And in some ways I agree with you, in that we can speculate all we like but we don't have any evidence (that I can see).

[Dom]

I'm not sure what the point of engaging in that discussion in the game thread is.

The question is - why three kills.

And in some ways I agree with you, in that we can speculate all we like but we don't have any evidence (that I can see).

That's not the point I was talking about.

But also valid.

[Golden]

I'm not sure what the point of engaging in that discussion in the game thread is.

The question is - why three kills.

And in some ways I agree with you, in that we can speculate all we like but we don't have any evidence (that I can see).

That's not the point I was talking about.

But also valid.

Well, what point were you making? Because all the stuff about Eloh comes directly from Mac's speculation of there being a role that can kill for non-participation.

[MacDougall]

I just feel like Brian would have been a really weird choice for a kill otherwise, he hasn't done anything, he hasn't even voted. I know some mafia players like killing lurkers to get around potential protects so that's obviously the more likely answer.

[Epignosis]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

It's a neat way to get rid of busy moms too.

Eloh, you could say, was gotten rid of by a role being used to its potential (Rico's). I'm sorry Eloh couldn't keep up and enjoy the game, because it is much funner when she can.

But I'm not sure what your point is.

I'm not sure what the point of engaging in that discussion in the game thread is.

If you'll look at what I was talking about, I wasn't talking about this game. I was talking about Talking Heads.

That's a lot of talking.

In Talking Heads, Eloh had trouble keeping up. Then she ended up having to make like 30 on-topic posts or something like that. She tried, but could keep up, and got killed for it. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. That's all I was referring to.

[Epignosis]

*couldn't

[Golden]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

It's a neat way to get rid of busy moms too.

Eloh, you could say, was gotten rid of by a role being used to its potential (Rico's). I'm sorry Eloh couldn't keep up and enjoy the game, because it is much funner when she can.

But I'm not sure what your point is.

I'm not sure what the point of engaging in that discussion in the game thread is.

If you'll look at what I was talking about, I wasn't talking about this game. I was talking about Talking Heads.

That's a lot of talking.

In Talking Heads, Eloh had trouble keeping up. Then she ended up having to make like 30 on-topic posts or something like that. She tried, but could keep up, and got killed for it. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. That's all I was referring to.

Oh right, I get it now.

Yeah, I can see how someone might be attracted to writing that kind of role if they have a history of people not really participating in your games. On the other hand, I don't see SVS including a role like that, tbh.

[Epignosis]

I don't either.

[thellama73]

The RadicalFzz kill was obviously because so many people were calling him a definite civ. Today I intend to look at those who were eager to paint a target on his back.

[Golden]

The RadicalFzz kill was obviously because so many people were calling him a definite civ. Today I intend to look at those who were eager to paint a target on his back.

Bullsuit.

Voting llama

I was waiting to see who ran that argument first. I find it much more likely that RadicalFuzz would be killed by someone who wanted to run that argument. I was wondering if it might be DH. I've never been part of any mafia team that has talked about killing someone because others are reading them as civ, nor have I ever hosted a mafia team having that discussion.

[Dom]

I wonder if Brian's death was related to the fact that he missed the vote? Not a mod-kill but perhaps someone has the ability to somehow kill no voters.

I recall in TH we had a role that forced people to multiply their post count or be killed if they failed to meet their post count limit. Perhaps there is a scum or rogue role that makes it so if a person misses a vote they can be hit or you target them and if they miss a vote after that at any point they die. Could be a neat way to get rid of non contributors. Has there been a role like this before? I can see why RadicalFuzz was hit on account of bossing but Brian was barely around and neither was timmer so they seem like less tactical, more "because I can" type kills.

It's a neat way to get rid of busy moms too.

Eloh, you could say, was gotten rid of by a role being used to its potential (Rico's). I'm sorry Eloh couldn't keep up and enjoy the game, because it is much funner when she can.

But I'm not sure what your point is.

I'm not sure what the point of engaging in that discussion in the game thread is.

If you'll look at what I was talking about, I wasn't talking about this game. I was talking about Talking Heads.

That's a lot of talking.

In Talking Heads, Eloh had trouble keeping up. Then she ended up having to make like 30 on-topic posts or something like that. She tried, but could keep up, and got killed for it. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. That's all I was referring to.

I understand now.


Llama, who's your biggest suspect?

[DharmaHelper]

The RadicalFzz kill was obviously because so many people were calling him a definite civ. Today I intend to look at those who were eager to paint a target on his back.

Bullsuit.

Voting llama

I was waiting to see who ran that argument first. I find it much more likely that RadicalFuzz would be killed by someone who wanted to run that argument. I was wondering if it might be DH. I've never been part of any mafia team that has talked about killing someone because others are reading them as civ, nor have I ever hosted a mafia team having that discussion.

If I might have run the argument first, or if I might have been involved in Fuzz's death? Or both, I guess.

[Golden]

That's even ignoring that fallacy that baddies would put a target on his back only to then kill him. It's like the chicken and the egg.

@DH - yeah indeed. As a rainbow hater I mean.

[HamburgerBoy]

The RadicalFzz kill was obviously because so many people were calling him a definite civ. Today I intend to look at those who were eager to paint a target on his back.

Do me first, do me first!

Bullsuit.

Voting llama

I was waiting to see who ran that argument first. I find it much more likely that RadicalFuzz would be killed by someone who wanted to run that argument. I was wondering if it might be DH. I've never been part of any mafia team that has talked about killing someone because others are reading them as civ, nor have I ever hosted a mafia team having that discussion.

In fairness on RYM that kind of stuff has definitely come up in scumchats before. It's just long-term planning; the further the game goes, the less chances you have of eliminating the townlier folk come lylo. I disagree with llama regarding painting targets since it also provides a target for protection, but in absence of role info, and without a good blackmail plan or similar, it seems pretty reasonable for scum to kill the guys that would be hardest to lynch.

[MacDougall]

I don't get your point at all Golden. I think supertown players who are being civ read by everyone almost always come up as kill targets in scum chats for being unlikely to be lynched. And I also said it in different words when I said I feel like he was killed for bossing it.

Have you genuinely never discussed killing a player in a game who wasn't attracting suspicion? I find that extremely hard to believe.

[Golden]

I don't get your point at all Golden. I think supertown players who are being civ read by everyone almost always come up as kill targets in scum chats for being unlikely to be lynched. And I also said it in different words when I said I feel like he was killed for bossing it.

Have you genuinely never discussed killing a player in a game who wasn't attracting suspicion? I find that extremely hard to believe.

I mean, getting close to end game/lylo you need to take out people who are obviously town, for whatever reason. But I tend to find those decisions much more complex than solely who seems to be a top town read.

Taking out someone solely because a handful of people are putting them as a high town read? No. And especially it doesn't seem likely to me by night 2. The game turns around all the time, you don't know if the person town read today will be lynched tomorrow. Much more likely is who is linked to who, who seems like they might have what ability, who can read me well, whose kill do we look least connected to.

Even if 'who is most civ' comes up (and I honestly can't remember it ever coming up in a mafia chat I was in... much more focus on who seemed most dangerous, not who was most town read), it is hardly in a vacuum as the factor that determines the kill.

[HamburgerBoy]

That's not the only reason I suspect Lorab. I also suspect her because Black Rock came out early against her, which I would not expect if Black Rock were bad and trying to set Lorab up. Her suspicion of Lorab would be subtler, and as I said if you are reading the thread and paying attention to people's posts, please take the opportunity to include a number, whether spelled out or not, in your next post- I would appreciate that very much. As I said, if Black Rock is bad and setting up Lorab, I would be surprised, because I don't see her doing that if she is bad.

But her thing against LoRab seemed mostly built on your and Sorsha's cases against her, so I don't know if I'd call that early as much as a convenient, off-bandwagon pick. I don't know Black Rock's meta, but agreeing with a couple townies with a case against another townie doesn't sound outlandish for any scum to me.

285726597156.

[Epignosis]

But her thing against LoRab seemed mostly built on your and Sorsha's cases against her, so I don't know if I'd call that early as much as a convenient, off-bandwagon pick. I don't know Black Rock's meta, but agreeing with a couple townies with a case against another townie doesn't sound outlandish for any scum to me.

Her reason for voting Lorab was independent of mine. That's because you think tone = wording.

[Golden]

I disagree with llama regarding painting targets since it also provides a target for protection.

This point too. I've been in chats where expressly staying away from killing the least suspected person has been discussed.

[Long Con]

I'll get my JJJ case together, just got back and wanted to say two things:

1. I think Fuzz very likely got killed for being Everyone's Favourite Trusted Civ. Maybe next time, tone down that talk, because it does paint a target. Do baddies need to paint targets on people like that?

2. Do we get two lynches in a row?

[Golden]

Do baddies need to paint targets on people like that?

Precisely.

[Long Con]

Referring to this:

timmer has died. He was Michael Bay, a civilian.

Michael Bay - Film Directors
A hack director known for explosions and getting his way. Every time two baddies are lynched consecutively, Bay may force the game into the Position of his choice. If he is lynched, there will be two Nights in a row. If he is killed at Night, there will be two lynches in a row.

[HamburgerBoy]

Good point, and I just noticed the 3.0 in the title; implies there will be a 3.1 as well.

[Marmot]

Metalmarsh has voted for JaggedJimmyJay without posting, so maybe he's silenced.

That's also a lynch I would be happy to support.

I'm not actually silenced, I was just being lazy.

[HamburgerBoy]

HB, you felt that sig might have stopped a kill on night one, and said something about evidence pointing that way. Can you be more specific about what you were referring to?

It was Turnip's "At least there was only one death!" shortly followed by DFaraday's death, which seemed like a nod that the latter was for some unrelated reason. Additionally, if there's only one mafia team, it would imply that the intended mafia kill was blocked unless Zebra was forced to shoot herself or something like that.

[Golden]

HB, you felt that sig might have stopped a kill on night one, and said something about evidence pointing that way. Can you be more specific about what you were referring to?

It was Turnip's "At least there was only one death!" shortly followed by DFaraday's death, which seemed like a nod that the latter was for some unrelated reason. Additionally, if there's only one mafia team, it would imply that the intended mafia kill was blocked unless Zebra was forced to shoot herself or something like that.

Oh, I just took that as evil host being evil because he knew DFs death was about to be posted by SVS.

[DharmaHelper]

Oi real quick before I clock out tonight, Anybody wanna talk about why the fuck the thread says "Day 3.0" and not "Day 3"

[Golden]

Oi real quick before I clock out tonight, Anybody wanna talk about why the fuck the thread says "Day 3.0" and not "Day 3"

LC and HB do.

[Epignosis]

What's with the hesitation on Lorab? I suspect her because of her wording regarding Ricochet, and her response was too measured, too kind. Black Rock claims to read Lorab well and says she's bad (and I believe her, because Lorab's tone is a mystery to me and I've only played a handful of times with her). Is that not a one-two punch? What's the deal? Lynch her already and be done. Then see where we stand.

That's my position. Still.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I'm in for a really busy day, so this might be a quiet phase for me. I'm changing my continent of residence in a few months.

[HamburgerBoy]

What's with the hesitation on Lorab? I suspect her because of her wording regarding Ricochet, and her response was too measured, too kind. Black Rock claims to read Lorab well and says she's bad (and I believe her, because Lorab's tone is a mystery to me and I've only played a handful of times with her). Is that not a one-two punch? What's the deal? Lynch her already and be done. Then see where we stand.

That's my position. Still.

Even her very first post regarding LoRab is actually one of suspicion built on agreeing with Rico's case on her, and as you have said yourself, Rico was spewing bullshit. BR's next post was basically (if indirectly) agreeing with your case on LoRab. She then said a couple things about wanting to see LoRab address points to her, and then ignored that LoRab actually did later. After that, she then proceeded to agree with Sorsha's post against LoRab. Sorry, not a one-two punch to me, it looks like for the better part of day 1, her only concern was agreeing with people that found LoRab suspicious.

In fact, in light of the Rico-LoRab thing I had overlooked before, what do you think of the possibility that Black Rock was bussing? I don't find BR's case on LoRab to be coming from anywhere genuine.

[Dom]

Oi real quick before I clock out tonight, Anybody wanna talk about why the fuck the thread says "Day 3.0" and not "Day 3"

you could read the thread and find out!

What's with the hesitation on Lorab? I suspect her because of her wording regarding Ricochet, and her response was too measured, too kind. Black Rock claims to read Lorab well and says she's bad (and I believe her, because Lorab's tone is a mystery to me and I've only played a handful of times with her). Is that not a one-two punch? What's the deal? Lynch her already and be done. Then see where we stand.

That's my position. Still.

I suspected LoRab earlier, so I'll look into those reasons again.

[Boomslang]

*votes Boomslang*

Boomslang was the first vote I cast in the game, as I recall, because he made me suspicious back then:

Spoiler: show

Tranq's slip of calling Finn McMissile mafia (the role was part of a second civ team) is too easily fact-checkable to be intentional, imo.

It wasn't a slip. It was Tranq being a nub. Hence my opening post.

What I'm seeing here is, on the surface, a possible Boomslang-Tranq baddie teamup. That's just surface though, and I don't really think that's what's going on here.

However, my ideal civ-mindset would hold back and wait to see if anyone jumps on Tranq opportunistically, rather than defuse the situation with some textbook "let's not get too finger-pointy" sanity. Short-term "obvious Civ" statements can be long-term "don't worry about me, I'm cooler than being cool" baddie groundwork.

And recently his sig vote twanged me in the twingiest of ways. So, Day 3 starts with a vote on him, foremost of my suspicions.

Never thought too much about it before, but Boomslang is a pretty kick ass handle.

Do you think Tranq is civ? Do you think his behavior over the past few nights has changed the value of that (very early) post of mine?

[DharmaHelper]

Oi real quick before I clock out tonight, Anybody wanna talk about why the fuck the thread says "Day 3.0" and not "Day 3"

you could read the thread and find out!

What's with the hesitation on Lorab? I suspect her because of her wording regarding Ricochet, and her response was too measured, too kind. Black Rock claims to read Lorab well and says she's bad (and I believe her, because Lorab's tone is a mystery to me and I've only played a handful of times with her). Is that not a one-two punch? What's the deal? Lynch her already and be done. Then see where we stand.

That's my position. Still.

I suspected LoRab earlier, so I'll look into those reasons again.

Sassy fucker.

[Dom]