At least you are consistent. Back to school tomorrow so I'm making the most of it
Mafia XI - An Unknown Evil -GAMEOVER Town/Anarchist Victory!
- Thread starter Milk not bear jizz
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
At least you are consistent. Back to school tomorrow so I'm making the most of it
S
Super G Ted'inho
Guest
S
Super G Ted'inho
Guest
Earlier
Been on my phone all day so not exactly been taking notes. You did make a joke of it though
At least you are consistent. Back to school tomorrow so I'm making the most of it
Hope your trousers fall down in front of the class and everybody laughs. Karma for singling me out
Hope your trousers fall down in front of the class and everybody laughs. Karma for singling me out
Teacher training only
You like fat birds covered in mint sauce! Kinky!Covered in mint sauce
On a serious note, why ars you trying to 'out' the Medium so early? Seems a bit shady.
I think there are three evil teams so four teams in total.
I'll see what I can do. With AFC and now ACS by my side, the chaos could be Rad!
I'll follow your lead gaffer.
[HASHTAG]#bykergrove[/HASHTAG]
Valley is dodgy in my eyes because he keeps accusing me. And also Obi Wan has a fair point about Style not getting involved at all. With other players I can understand, like RHC, why they aren't on because they aren't at certain times but I feel Style is deliberately holding back. Good or bad ? IDK.
So as well as Bill & Ted do we now have Ant & Dec too? I suppose you'll be getting ready to rumble soon.
S
Super G Ted'inho
Guest
- May 22, 2011
- 73,291
- 27,980
- 113
Good point.
And Bodanki - don't think he has posted at all? (Astro might be interested in that for his theory). Bod usually at least complains about being a non-role townie.
Well **** me - just spent an hour and a half re-reading the whole thread and I'm not sure it helped much!!
Just gathering my thoughts for an AFC style post (and I don't mean it will be Bodacious!!) ......
Just gathering my thoughts for an AFC style post (and I don't mean it will be Bodacious!!) ......
Kiling two evil players was an excellent start (though ACS returning was not so good unless he has come back as good - which I doubt will be the case). However, the two that were killed surprised me and I can't find many clues as to why they were targeted, especially ACS. I see four possibilities. Firstly a couple of people have played a blinder and been very clever with reading tells. Secondly, some people may have received some level of information to help them at the start of the game and interpreted it correctly. Thirdly, ACS and JPF were targeting people with killing roles and they were picked out for self-defence. Fourthly, the killers could be acting randomly and just got lucky (although with ACS being the victim rather than the perpetrator this seems less likely).
The wording of ACS's kill makes me think that he was certainly taken out by a good guy. JPF could have been taken out by a rival evil side, which would make me think that they were players he was targeting as guilty. The same could also be said of Lucaas' failed assassination attempt. I think we are definitely dealing with at least 2 evil teams, but probably three.
I think the lynch result wording was also significant - 'according to the rules of the game this meant no lynch'. Does this mean that AFC was protected in a tie? Was this for good or bad reasons? I can't see any clues to that yet.
Without seeing evidence of a reward it is impossible to read into whether the whole Gerrez/AFC thing was the truth or not. It may not be advantageous to share the result of the reward immediately though, so again we can't read anything into that. The whole story still carries a lot of unanswered questions. As the timing got closer and closer to the lynch last night I got more and more wary of lynching them both incase they were being truthful. That could be down to good game play though. They are two of the players most capable of turning a hopeless situation around. There is definitely something to the use of all the bill and ted words, but the explanation could be the ones they have given us. Obi and MITO also used them too though to a much lesser extent. Does that mean anything?
Lots of players have now put themselves in the limelight by targeting Gerrez and AFC (including myself). Probably the only players who come out of the vote looking good are those who voted No Lynch.
I didn't see the late vote switch I expected. It wasn't AFC I was expecting to move, though his non-move could also be telling. Did he already know how a tie would turn out?
Was Lucaas being protected significant? Could have been good or bad, but why did either side think he might be targeted enough to read that he needed protecting? Or did he protect himself? Again, need more clues on that one.
Some players have been very very quiet. RHC only posts at work so probably can't be read into. However, Mikey, Bodanki and Style have all posted only a handful of times. Bodanki has only posted once. That is very out of character. Could his participation be limited by something explainable? Perhaps he needs to be voted for before he can fully take part. He hasn't been voted for yet I think, though being allowed to post once seems strange if that is the case. Why are they keeping quiet?
More questions raised than answers. There are some tells available though. Certain associations that may be showing themselves. For day two I am going to go back to a blank sheet as much as possible, but also bear in mind the clues we have. I think we need analysis now more than accusations. We are in a stronger position than we were yesterday. We don't want to reverse that tomorrow.
The wording of ACS's kill makes me think that he was certainly taken out by a good guy. JPF could have been taken out by a rival evil side, which would make me think that they were players he was targeting as guilty. The same could also be said of Lucaas' failed assassination attempt. I think we are definitely dealing with at least 2 evil teams, but probably three.
I think the lynch result wording was also significant - 'according to the rules of the game this meant no lynch'. Does this mean that AFC was protected in a tie? Was this for good or bad reasons? I can't see any clues to that yet.
Without seeing evidence of a reward it is impossible to read into whether the whole Gerrez/AFC thing was the truth or not. It may not be advantageous to share the result of the reward immediately though, so again we can't read anything into that. The whole story still carries a lot of unanswered questions. As the timing got closer and closer to the lynch last night I got more and more wary of lynching them both incase they were being truthful. That could be down to good game play though. They are two of the players most capable of turning a hopeless situation around. There is definitely something to the use of all the bill and ted words, but the explanation could be the ones they have given us. Obi and MITO also used them too though to a much lesser extent. Does that mean anything?
Lots of players have now put themselves in the limelight by targeting Gerrez and AFC (including myself). Probably the only players who come out of the vote looking good are those who voted No Lynch.
I didn't see the late vote switch I expected. It wasn't AFC I was expecting to move, though his non-move could also be telling. Did he already know how a tie would turn out?
Was Lucaas being protected significant? Could have been good or bad, but why did either side think he might be targeted enough to read that he needed protecting? Or did he protect himself? Again, need more clues on that one.
Some players have been very very quiet. RHC only posts at work so probably can't be read into. However, Mikey, Bodanki and Style have all posted only a handful of times. Bodanki has only posted once. That is very out of character. Could his participation be limited by something explainable? Perhaps he needs to be voted for before he can fully take part. He hasn't been voted for yet I think, though being allowed to post once seems strange if that is the case. Why are they keeping quiet?
More questions raised than answers. There are some tells available though. Certain associations that may be showing themselves. For day two I am going to go back to a blank sheet as much as possible, but also bear in mind the clues we have. I think we need analysis now more than accusations. We are in a stronger position than we were yesterday. We don't want to reverse that tomorrow.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
