Mafia 2.0

Right now If you want you may vote like alex and just use the gun as an extra lynch.

Day 2 Vote count 3:
1 Alex Steiner (L-2) {TKOE}

Death Event 1 Votecount 1:
1 Extra lynch {Alex Steiner}
1 Reverse Simplicity {RS}
1 Throw it away {SO}

Extra lynch sounds wonderful (and unbalanced!).

I vote to use the gun as an extra lynch.

So, L-1? Should I claim?

I would, but with a massclaim on the cards (it seems), I'll wait until asked to do so.

Vote: Use the gun as an extra lynch, letting no one take it out of sight

TIM TAM RAWR

More later.

You people suck at lynching therefore I'm voting to throw the gun away (before you ruin everything, I mean THINK OF THE CHILDREN)

Alex Steiner wrote:So, L-1? Should I claim?

Claim when someone willing to hammer has asked for it.

Eggs, do you know when the deadline is? If so, tell us!

Darth, who do you suspect and (this is important) with how much certainty?

I have told you who I suspect all with 0% certainty because you can never be certain about anything in this game.

Darth Skywalkerbacca wrote:I have told you who I suspect all with 0% certainty because you can never be certain about anything in this game.

So how do you get a specific top three? Why implicate them? Also, are you going to vote?

The deadline is the 8th. I targeted Alex. If your town I want you here. If your scum you are the one who would send the kill. Those were my reasons. I vote to give rs the gun he knows how to use kills.

Day 2 Vote count 4:
2 Alex Steiner (L-1) {TKOE,SO}

Death Event 1 Vote count 2:
2 Extra lynch {Alex Steiner, SO}
2 Reverse Simplicity {RS, Eggs}
1 Throw it away {Darth}

just so you know if it's a tie then the gun will be destroyed/ throw away. Also any replacements for Tim would be appreciated.

Is it a daykill or nightkill?

probably day but possibly night

^ Thats useful.

What is the justification behind giving a single player a kill, to use however they want, rather than putting it under the complete control of the town?

The King of Eggs wrote:I vote to give rs the gun he knows how to use kills.

Where did you pull this from (sorry, but Mikey kill in Mk II)? He hasn't yet proven that he is town, so why risk giving him the kill. Granted, he is looking townie, but why take the risk of giving anti-town another kill?

Alex, consider claiming as deadline is near.

Supreme Overlord wrote:but Mikey kill in Mk II

That was poor jusdgement I admit. But since then when have I steered the town wrong unintentionally?

Supreme Overlord wrote:What is the justification behind giving a single player a kill

Because we are pretty sure two of the other are scum. Giving them partial control over another kill would be stupid.

Alex claim please, lack of other scumtells I am about ready to hammer.

Supreme Overlord wrote:

I wrote:I vote to give rs the gun he knows how to use kills.

Where did you pull this from (sorry, but Mikey kill in Mk II)? He hasn't yet proven that he is town, so why risk giving him the kill.

I have other games to refferenece, games played on mafiascum, Reverse Simplicity has proven to be an effective vig in the past.

Reverse Simplicity wrote:

Overlord wrote:
but Mikey kill in Mk II

poor jusdgement I admit. But since then when have I steered the town wrong unintentionally?

I don't like this personally, "when have I ever streered the town wrong unintentionally" (have you done it intentionally?), but he makes a valid point, he made a judgement error, we all do.

Deadline is only days away, i agree with RS, Alex claim if you would.

I am a snitch. I can investigate 1 erson each night, but my data is fluffy. Because of my investigation methods, I appear untrustworthy to observers.

Night 1 I investigated Overlord and got inconclusive results, which isn't surprising.

Supreme Overlord: you know I don't vote I have made that clear, also in the first game we played I did not implicate anybody, for this you claimed I was anti-town there is just no pleasing you is there.

Well you are kinda useless then... Millar is a classic scum claim, incase someone has investigated you. In light of the deadline (2 days) Iwill not be unvoting unless a more promising candidate appears.

Oh, and before the virus, Overlord was a doctor. What I can find on him is "spotless", but I was stopped from leaving my home to do further investigations by a car.

Upon rechecking my role PM, it is not my info that is fluffy, it is the PM that is fluffy.

I assume that I thought it was fluffy because of the roleblock I assumedly received.

Reverse wrote:Because we are pretty sure two of the other are scum. Giving them partial control over another kill would be stupid.

Unless you are one of the other two that are scum, in which case you’ve just received FULL control over an extra kill.

Eggs wrote:I don't like this personally, "when have I ever streered the town wrong unintentionally" (have you done it intentionally?), but he makes a valid point, he made a judgement error, we all do.

Well, scum mislead intentionally. My point is, even if he’s town, what’s preventing another judgment error? At least with a lynch, there is accountability. We can’t afford to policy lynch a wrong kill, but we can use votes as evidence in a larger case.

Darth wrote:Supreme Overlord: you know I don't vote I have made that clear, also in the first game we played I did not implicate anybody, for this you claimed I was anti-town there is just no pleasing you is there.

I do want you to implicate people and have suspicions, but, when you give a list, I want to know your reasons. Be clear whn you give a list; do you think they're posting strangely, do you think they've done something *gasp* scummy, or is it just a joke?

Alex, how did you get a partial (doctor) result on me if you were roleblocked? Do you know what kind of results you could have gotten?

I apparently received "half what I would have".

Alex Steiner wrote:I apparently received "half what I would have".

Eggs, does your jailkeep roleblock? Does it prevent your 'victim' from kills, or any action. Because Alex seems to be claiming his action went through, which pokes a bit of a hole in your claim.