Snake's WWE Invasion 'Royal Mafia Rumble'

[Jaffa]

I'm still very, very convinced brownie is scum, but I'd be lying if I was now second guessing my reads thanks to Corey's flip as well.

You're convinced i'm scum based on my 'chainsaw defence' of Corey (who was a WWE Superstar).

 

I'm sorry for daring to challenge DA RULZ but there was zero evidence that Corey was Nexus and we'd be much, much better off right now if someone else was sitting in that spot (someone could PM Deaq - he kicked everyones arse in the pirate game) and we'd lynched an actual suspect.

 

To be honest Mike, if there is a serial killer (and whilst I agree it doesn't look likely, Carbomb could well be right that there is a Nexus Roleblocker, seeing as we had one) right now, you look most likely to be it. Yes, you nailed Nexus, but you also heavily pushed to get rid of a member of the WWE. Added to the fact that you were pushing like mad that Ron was the SK, if there is one. I reckon it's you.

 

As for me, feel free to lynch me if you think it's the best option, but make sure it's the best option for the WWE. Also make it quick.

[Mike Castle]

brownie, I readily pointed out that your alignment didn't rest on Corey's flip. But that you were defending him more than you should have for a player you, supposedly, didn't know the alignment of. As I have said, it's very easy for scum to defend town and claim that it makes them town (when it doesn't). As for the Serial Killer thing. All well and good saying what you did, but all I've got from that is "you said Ron might be a Serial Killer, why couldn't it be you?" Which is along the same lines of "Ron said there might be a Serial Killer on day one, which means it's him" which happened on day 1 if you read back.

 

Heavily pushing to lynch a town player doesn't instantly make someone anti-town. This is something we need to drum out of the games over here sharpish, as it's exactly why so many hold back from pushing cases on people. We get people worrying about being called scum because they were wrong. Hey, it happens. No matter how good you are, in some games your 100% solid reads on someone turn out wrong. The important thing is to work out why something is anti-town. Obviously pushing an easy mislynch is scummy (hence why it's worth looking at lynch wagons and seeing when, and how, people hopped on, some hop on with ease and just stick along for the ride, diving back off when the momentum moves elsewhere, that tends to be scummy if done often).

 

Anyway, point is, if you (or anyone else) wants to make a case on me, fair enough, go for it. But any case that cannot show that the actions of the accused were anti-town (and seemingly deliberately, TripleA's vanilla reveal was terribly anti-town, but obviously not done so in a deliberate "let's try and harm the town" way) is not a case worth presenting (another reason I never comment on everything that someone has said. It's the deliberately anti-town stuff that needs pointing out, as scum will also make pro-town looking posts as well, for obvious reasons, so accusing someone for not showing the pro-town stuff is also ridiculous).

[swiftstrike]

At the moment I can't see how anyone really can be pushing the lynch on Ron as a serial killer, given the 1, 3, 1 nature of the night kills and the fact that two of the night kills from the 2nd night can fairly easily be attributed to a PGO role. For Ron to be a serial killer then someone needs to explain the presence of a third kill on the second day and not a peep of it on the other 2 days. Other than an explanation for that I see the argument for any sort of lynch on Ron as a logic fail.

 

I'm still not happy with Chris B explanation of his quite drastic game changing style in this game in to one that was easily scum implemented in the last game and his push on using Ron as a lynch on Mike in the last day phase and first post of this one smacks of trying to kill 2 birds with 1 stone, if I believe Mike claim and I am falling on the side of Mike being town due to the fact if he believed Ron was the vig, as scum I believe Mike probably would have knocked him off, to avoid a bad night kill for scum and then pointed out after the kill that it was that reason he backed Ron as town.

 

So as he is scummiest

 

VOTE CHRIS B

[Dan Williams]

Surely though Ron's pgo claim negates Mike Castles "bomb" claim? it's looking pretty likely that Ron isn't lying we may have to look at the possibility mike is, I mean he has a pretty good position right now as an advisor to the town it seems which would be the perfect way to divert attention from himself and his potential scum allies? Its something to think about.

[swiftstrike]

It's totally possible, but as I said Mike has townie points for the Ron thing also, claiming bomb after a pgo claim, seems reckless for a mafia to go for unless it's game winning kill at stake so, I am holding off on Mike and trying to see if we can hit scum tonight with Chris B and then take it further in the next day phase.

[Mike Castle]

Surely though Ron's pgo claim negates Mike Castles "bomb" claim? it's looking pretty likely that Ron isn't lying we may have to look at the possibility mike is, I mean he has a pretty good position right now as an advisor to the town it seems which would be the perfect way to divert attention from himself and his potential scum allies? Its something to think about.

What you're essentially suggesting though is that I'm scum despite the fact that I was one of the first to jump on Nexus, pushed him harder than most, and was more than happy to have him lynched (thereby lynching the scum rolecop). Then proceeded to be pretty damned vocal of my suspicions of Corey (who has since flipped town), only to role claim AFTER a claimed PGO to point out that it doesn't add up (at the time) to there being both...

 

I'm still wary of Ron because a PGO and a Bomb shouldn't be in the same game together, purely because it's unbalanced (for the town initially, but then severely for the scum if it's worked out both are town), it runs the risk of the scum being pretty much sitting ducks waiting for us to lynch them. However I wouldn't be surprised to see both in this game either in all honesty.

[Chris B]

And incidentally, one death last night surely debunks that ridiculous 'Ron is a serial killer' theory that's been pushed. Chris, why does the fact I think Mike isn't scum (but don't necessarily buy his claim) make you think I might be scum? Do you think that town members don't tell self-saving lies?

 

No, I don't think town do. I think the only time a lie can be pro-town is in the case of a vanilla townie pretending to be something like the doctor to draw attention to themselves and away from the actual Doctor. This is a case of Mike claiming a role that effectively makes him unlynchable, and he's using it (from your point of view if you're innocent) to try to kill you.

 

I'm entirely unconvinced that you actually think this, because it makes no sense. The only way it makes sense to me is if you're lying, and are worried that you lose the game if you hammer Mike and he either turns out to be a bomb (and killing you) or that it turns out that he's town and it makes you the realistic next lynch. And neither of those options is town. I could understand if you thought he was telling the truth, but you don't. You've said you think he's lying.

 

Meanwhile, swiftstrike is now to the point of making shit up. I don't think my game has been drastically different - it's worth remembering that, in the last game, I screwed up and made myself the centre of attention. The main thing, though, is that the push for the Mike/Ron double wasn't my push. It was Mike's idea, and Family Guy backed it before I did. He's also putting me in constantly non-win scenarios. If I want to avoid a no-lynch and go with the largest wagon, I'm bandwagon jumping. If I stick with who I think is most likely to be scum, I'm trying too hard to kill town. So, if I stick on something, I'm scum, and if I don't, I'm scum. I push for Mike/Ron, and I'm scum. I change it to avoid a no-lynch, and I'm scum. On top of that, I think his turnaround on Bristep is particularly interesting. He pushed hard against Bristep, and then backed down by basically saying 'It's all a trick to capture scum LOLZ'. Considering the decision to kill Bristep MUST have been high in the nexus thread, it suggests to me that he was clearing himself of making a push against Bristep, so he could claim he thought he was town. Basically, I think swift is probably scum at this point - but if he is town, he's shot himself in the foot by coming in desperate to be the MVP again, by assuming that everyone must have missed something, and only he could spot it.

 

Also meanwhile, Mike's still near the top of my suspicion list. There's something about the way he's playing that just doesn't feel right. The unlynchable thing really doesn't sit well with me. The way he's crowing about Nexus being HIS catch bugs me as well. I have to admit, based on the way Nexus has played in recent games, it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that scum may want to get rid of Nexus as early as convenient. However, it's also true that Mike could be anti-nexus, and still not pro-town.

 

My point isn't that I want to get rid of Mike and Ron. It's that I want to get rid of Mike OR Ron, but I'm still not as convinced as I would like to be as to which of the two it is. There's a possibility that both of them are anti-town, but not aligned. I think it's more likely that one of them is telling the truth. Between the two, I believe Mike more than I believe Ron at this point.

[Ron Simmons]

Chris, I really struggle to see why you'd think I'm a suspect at this stage. Not only was I the turning point in Nexus's lynch when I placed an argument against him rather than the bandwagoned Dan Williams, but I've played a very pro-town game. I have doubts about Mike's claim, but just because it's improbable doesn't mean it's impossible. Also, in spite of the fact he's made a dodgy game he's played a pro-town game overall in my opinion. Unless the scum have decided to have a player play the game as normal, just to ensure one lived till the end. But if this was their plan I'm not sure why they'd pick Mike Castle for this role when he's generally one of the most suspicious players each game. I don't mean that he's a bad player, but it's just his playstyle that implicates him. He might eventually turn out to be scum, but I don't think he's even close to being the best lynch right now. I'm not convinced by any case against him yet.

[Mike Castle]

Chris makes a couple of good points there. First swift, (and Ron as I'm sure you've said you don't buy my claim in the past too). Town shouldn't be lying. It's a sure fire way to get lynched. In my case if I'm, say, a cop (we know I'm not as we already lost him) but claim a bomb, then later on say "actually I'm a cop, and here's my results" people will lynch me because I'd have changed my claim, and rightly so (if I flip town cop, then in-game people know some alignments, but post-game I'd get reamed out). If I'm Vanilla and claim bomb to avoid being killed, then I'm actually directing the scum closer to killing town power roles as they'd immediately refuse to kill me.

 

Obviously, it's worth vanillas dropping the odd hint to power roles to hopefully draw the night kill in their direction (in fact that's perfect play for a vanilla, drop hints as to a role (but only light ones) and play very aggressively to try and force scum to need to kill you). However town shouldn't need to outright lie about a role they have, it just leads to a more confused town in the end (hell, look at my vigilante claim in the cluedo game and how confused everyone was there... and I WAS anti-town. Imagine if I flipped vanilla town instead and how confused everyone would have been).

 

So yeah, town shouldn't ever be lying like that (closest to a lie should be claiming you have something to vote someone on early game just to draw some comments out and move the game away from RVS, but even then, you will get stick for it, so it's not always a great idea).

 

The other thing Chris said is that he trusts me OR Ron, and while I trust Ron is possibly the PGO, I can understand that, and can understand a lot of people wondering about it. Especially as it was me who initially stated that both roles shouldn't be in a game together (and I stand by that, and Snake will get a rollicking after the game if he has, indeed, done so). But... if he's included both roles in the game, then holding onto them both is much, much stronger for town than losing one of them (and even stronger than losing both). I mean, say we lynch Ron today, and he flips PGO... tomorrow we wind up lynching me on the basis of "both roles can't be in the game" and I flip bomb... and scum are now laughing their heads off because we just did their job for them.

 

Hell, in actual fact, if Ron is a multi-use PGO, the scum cannot win while he's alive, because in the end game, his role means he would shoot everyone who targets him, which would be the entire scum team (while with me, they would just lose the one player and I'd die still). So to that end, Ron living into end-game (if he's town) is vital for us really.

[Burchill's Buddy]

And incidentally, one death last night surely debunks that ridiculous 'Ron is a serial killer' theory that's been pushed. Chris, why does the fact I think Mike isn't scum (but don't necessarily buy his claim) make you think I might be scum? Do you think that town members don't tell self-saving lies?

 

No, I don't think town do. I think the only time a lie can be pro-town is in the case of a vanilla townie pretending to be something like the doctor to draw attention to themselves and away from the actual Doctor. This is a case of Mike claiming a role that effectively makes him unlynchable, and he's using it (from your point of view if you're innocent) to try to kill you.

 

I'm entirely unconvinced that you actually think this, because it makes no sense. The only way it makes sense to me is if you're lying, and are worried that you lose the game if you hammer Mike and he either turns out to be a bomb (and killing you) or that it turns out that he's town and it makes you the realistic next lynch. And neither of those options is town. I could understand if you thought he was telling the truth, but you don't. You've said you think he's lying.

 

Meanwhile, swiftstrike is now to the point of making shit up. I don't think my game has been drastically different - it's worth remembering that, in the last game, I screwed up and made myself the centre of attention. The main thing, though, is that the push for the Mike/Ron double wasn't my push. It was Mike's idea, and Family Guy backed it before I did. He's also putting me in constantly non-win scenarios. If I want to avoid a no-lynch and go with the largest wagon, I'm bandwagon jumping. If I stick with who I think is most likely to be scum, I'm trying too hard to kill town. So, if I stick on something, I'm scum, and if I don't, I'm scum. I push for Mike/Ron, and I'm scum. I change it to avoid a no-lynch, and I'm scum. On top of that, I think his turnaround on Bristep is particularly interesting. He pushed hard against Bristep, and then backed down by basically saying 'It's all a trick to capture scum LOLZ'. Considering the decision to kill Bristep MUST have been high in the nexus thread, it suggests to me that he was clearing himself of making a push against Bristep, so he could claim he thought he was town. Basically, I think swift is probably scum at this point - but if he is town, he's shot himself in the foot by coming in desperate to be the MVP again, by assuming that everyone must have missed something, and only he could spot it.

 

Also meanwhile, Mike's still near the top of my suspicion list. There's something about the way he's playing that just doesn't feel right. The unlynchable thing really doesn't sit well with me. The way he's crowing about Nexus being HIS catch bugs me as well. I have to admit, based on the way Nexus has played in recent games, it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that scum may want to get rid of Nexus as early as convenient. However, it's also true that Mike could be anti-nexus, and still not pro-town.

 

My point isn't that I want to get rid of Mike and Ron. It's that I want to get rid of Mike OR Ron, but I'm still not as convinced as I would like to be as to which of the two it is. There's a possibility that both of them are anti-town, but not aligned. I think it's more likely that one of them is telling the truth. Between the two, I believe Mike more than I believe Ron at this point.

 

I agree with just about everything here, apart from the fact that Chris, I think you have played a very different game from your usual (although I'm not implying that it makes you any scummier) I think you've played a far less aggressive game than usual, gotten rid of your 'traffic light' lists and from my point of view it makes your points come across a lot more well thought out.

 

I'm also under the impression now that either Ron or Mike is scum. Ron as you know I've been very suspicious of (and voted for) on previous occasions, I still don't buy the multi-use PGO claim 100%, it seems unfairly weighted, but Ron has stated that his PM didn't say if it was one use or not (which implies it isnt). Mike's bomb claim is equally suspicious, almost as if he came up with it during his argument with Ron to counter him and continue to push for his lynch, a situation that he no longer believes in.

 

I think with Mike, it's also his insistence of people being scum that is worrying me, he was very aggressively saying that Ron was scum, even going so far as to offer his own life to prove it, then a few days later he backtracked massively, he was then absolutely certain of Corey being scum, which he wasnt. He keeps talking about his Nexus lynch as his reason for being town, but it's starting to run a bit thin now. It's entirely possible that the scum would have sacrificed Nexus to buy some townie points, which to be fair it has done with me for Mike up until this point.

 

One final thing, I won't post a v/la, but my contribution is going to be fairly low until I get back to work (the 5th) I'll do my best to post at least once a day but getting online is quite tricky until then.

[Ron Simmons]

Family Guy PMSL - OTHER THAN ME, who are your top 3 scum suspects and why?

[Mike Castle]

24 hours and no posts? This doesn't bode well if it keeps up.

 

To everyone who is town, may I suggest if you are lurking, or just not posting much for whatever reason, you do your utmost to post as much as possible now. (Obviously not counting people who are V/LA for whatever reason). Any concocted reasons you may have for not posting much, as town, are definitely wrong. We need to hunt and eliminate scum, and we wont do that without everyone's input here.

 

I'm still almost certain of brownie, but even if I want to push his lynch, it wouldn't happen without pretty much the entire town helping here. With 12 alive, and 4 to potentially be scum, we need almost all of the town to work together to get an elimination, as scum wont be bussing each other at this stage unless it's 100% obvious someone is going to go.

 

I'm actually considering that we should all mass claim, popcorn style (someone claims, then picks the next person to claim, that person claims and picks the next person etc. rather than doing it in any set style. Means the scum have less options for fake claims unless they get lucky and are the final picks for claiming). It would gain us much needed information, and potentially give us some (potentially) confirmed town players to help us work some stuff out.

 

Thoughts?

[Carbomb]

Wow, very little activity at the moment.

 

brownie, I readily pointed out that your alignment didn't rest on Corey's flip. But that you were defending him more than you should have for a player you, supposedly, didn't know the alignment of. As I have said, it's very easy for scum to defend town and claim that it makes them town (when it doesn't).

 

Mike, this is an incredibly annoying point - you've accused brownie of being Scum because he defended a guy you believed to be Scum, and when this guy flips as Town, brownie's still Scum because it's a Scum tactic? That's some crap logic right there, and smacks of tunnelling, quite frankly. Personally, I've seen nothing of brownie to suggest he's Nexus, and I'm not prepared to push for lynching someone who, so far, looks Town, when we've sustained the losses we have.

 

Basically, we need to start being clever and more thorough about our lynches, because we're at a stage where careless and/or flimsy reasoning is going to cost us badly, and we need your tunnelling like a hole in the head. You want to push on brownie, come up with more than just that argument, because it's all you've put forward for the guy since you decided to target him - it's making you look more suspicious than he does.

[Mike Castle]

I'll be honest, it's much more based on gut, and the fact that he defended Corey in such a way that told me he knew more about Corey than the rest of us (hence why I always stated brownie's alignment didn't rest on Corey's flip). The fact he was saying we should have him replaced rather than lynch him, despite the fact there was no ability to just "get him replaced" as brownie was stating, it isn't something I expect to hear from town. Town should be looking at things and questioning it. That's not what he was doing, it made me suspicious in that brownie was either trying to keep a scum partner hanging around, or (not that I felt it at the time, but I did say that Corey could flip town and brownie could still be scum) brownie knew Corey was town, and wanted to buy town points by being against a town lynch.

 

Basically, I don't buy that brownie had the town's best interests in mind with trying to keep a non-poster in the game for as long as possible, on the basis of "we can have him replaced" when it's quite obvious we couldn't just "have him replaced".

[Carbomb]

I'll be honest, it's much more based on gut, and the fact that he defended Corey in such a way that told me he knew more about Corey than the rest of us (hence why I always stated brownie's alignment didn't rest on Corey's flip). The fact he was saying we should have him replaced rather than lynch him, despite the fact there was no ability to just "get him replaced" as brownie was stating, it isn't something I expect to hear from town. Town should be looking at things and questioning it. That's not what he was doing, it made me suspicious in that brownie was either trying to keep a scum partner hanging around, or (not that I felt it at the time, but I did say that Corey could flip town and brownie could still be scum) brownie knew Corey was town, and wanted to buy town points by being against a town lynch.

 

Basically, I don't buy that brownie had the town's best interests in mind with trying to keep a non-poster in the game for as long as possible, on the basis of "we can have him replaced" when it's quite obvious we couldn't just "have him replaced".

 

It wasn't obvious at all. We'd already had a couple guys replaced, and whilst Corey was posting enough to avoid it for the most part, he didn't obviously do enough to avoid the L-1 penalty which, if there'd been anyone else available, would most likely have been a replacement.

 

Either way, though, my point hasn't changed: you're still not bringing anything new to the table. Your entire argument on brownie hinges on us agreeing with your opinion that his behaviour's been scummy, and I'm just not seeing it. If you really think brownie's Nexus, you're going to have to start bringing a lot more to the table than just re-iterating your argument. We're not exactly in a position where we can afford to make calls without being thorough or properly thought-out.

 

Let me put it to you this way: at present, there are at least three people I'm more likely to push right now, purely because they've given me infinitely more to suspect than brownie has. Yourself, swiftstrike and now wolfvinson - you because of your Bomb claim and your repeated declaration that your push on Nexus guarantees that you're WWE, swiftstrike because of his frenetic, yet strangely illogical and shifting accusations of different people, and wolfvinson because he keeps popping up to make accusations he's apparently sure of, but seems reluctant to elaborate further upon.

 

Even after you three, I find Ron more suspicious than brownie - his PGO claim is ringing true for me at the moment, but I can't take that as a 100%, cast-iron fact: all role-claims are going to set alarm bells ringing for me. Dan Williams' erratic behaviour this game has had him in my top five suspects for quite a while. That Chris Stone could very likely be a double-voter and yet has remained quiet doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Family Guy PMSL has had an odd and incredibly scummy-looking habit of making an accusation, backing it up a little, and then only popping up to trot out a one-liner to re-iterate the accusation and nothing else.

 

Right now, the only people I'm finding less suspicious than brownie are Burchill's Buddy, Lawz and Chris B.