Moderator: Community Team
Ragian wrote:jfm10 wrote:Loose Canon wrote:The point about Traf claiming is, unless someone says wait I have that role, I would have to clear Traf for now.
Where I am right now with Traf is this not quite claiming hardens my suspicions of him, but I'd be happy to be wrong with a claim.
I am suspicious of you and Ragian now.
If Traf answered anything but 1 he would get my vote on him, Why do you both seek more information?
I think I've written that a fair few times. Others have echoed it. When put at L-2, you claim. If we let go of that rule, there's no reason anyone should claim, which ends with town losing the ability of counterclaiming and vetting claims. Basically, not claiming at L-2 is anti-town. It is noted that jfm disregards that aspect.
FP'ed by Traf. Ironically.
TrafalgarLaw01 wrote:So we can now be sure Max is not the 3P and I'd say that it's most likely town
Loose Canon wrote:jfm - it needs 6 votes to lynch Traf - there have only ever been 4 (including mine)
I too agree that looking at other candidates is ok for now.
I've previously said that I have suspicion on Strike.
Beyond that, right now, I don't have anyone that I want to lead a grilling of because it wouldn't be genuine.
Reason being although I've unvoted Traf, its in my head that he says he used his reporter ability on the one player who has already said he didn't do anything last night - Max.
Max is bothering me though - was his not being sure of his exact role - a blatant I'm the traitor don't quite know how to play this mafiosi signal?
Loose Canon wrote:jfm - it needs 6 votes to lynch Traf - there have only ever been 4 (including mine)
I too agree that looking at other candidates is ok for now.
I've previously said that I have suspicion on Strike.
Beyond that, right now, I don't have anyone that I want to lead a grilling of because it wouldn't be genuine.
Reason being although I've unvoted Traf, its in my head that he says he used his reporter ability on the one player who has already said he didn't do anything last night - Max.
Max is bothering me though - was his not being sure of his exact role - a blatant I'm the traitor don't quite know how to play this mafiosi signal?
Ragian wrote:Charle is playing the mod, too. The reason I don't like that (this goes for Loose too) is that no one town aligned knows anything apart from their own role (unless you're Max, in which case, apparently, you know less than John Snow). So, saying that you don't believe a claim due to mod info enables you to go, "Aww crud, I wouldn't hafe thought that that role was in the game." Effectively, you're giving yourself a free lynch because basically it's the mod's fault.
If you lynch due to not liking a claim because a) the claim was stalled, b) the claim is too convenient given that it allows the claimant (I don't know if I'm using this correctly) to having moved last night and coming nights if checked by town PRs, and c) because the claim incorporates another player, which could be a scumbuddy (though that would be very early to do that) or a low profile player to be taken out or whatever if the claimant is lynched, I'd accept the arguments, and I'd even back that lynch if nothing better presents itself D2.
However, the willingness of Charle and Loose to gung-ho it with a week more of D2 to go seems like an attempt to get a cheap lynch that reveals nothing to town and can be filed away under mod responsibility.
FoS Charle and Loose
Fp'ed by Loose
Ragian wrote:Loose, you're playing the mod now.
@jfm, even if we are to lynch traf, there are more things to do today. Loads of people are coasting. Let's apply pressure there. We can always return to a traf lynch if that is town's decision.
Loose Canon wrote:ok jfm and rag lets talk tactics.
I don't believe there is a town reporter role AND a town cop role.
So if a cop comes forward I would almost certainly get back onto lynching Traf.
I suppose any cop could be tempted to wait another day.
I don't think they should but thats up for debate.
I'd probably follow a pressure vote lead from one of you to try to get a second claim providing its not on a player I'm not leaning town on.
I'm not sure who that would be.
If I were to take the lead it would be on Strike.
I posted earlier today when he positively aroused my suspicion and it was around the timing of trying to disrupt a forming town consensus.
His vote on Traf reinforces a get on a town mislynch disrupt any town consensus that way potential hypothesis.
So I'm on for pressuring a 2nd player D2 if that 2nd player is a reasonable prospect to me of being mafia.
I think my tactical position is slightly different from each of you?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users