Hm, looks like there might be three killing roles... Makes a certain amount of sense for three survivors I suppose? I'm not sure about that 'elimination' deal though.

I'm now curious as to whether ABU lived because he's iron or something or because whoever tried to kill him simply failed.

Yeah, I would guess three kill types = three survivors. The day kill was definitely one of them because of the pipe bomb.

My guess is he's the Tank, as the Tank doesn't really mind bullets. Bullets take down any other infected, or awake the Witch.

VC - my guess is that we have the 3 survivors, 5 special infected with roles, and 4 common infected. In the game each level has one of each of the five types of special infected; it wouldn't surprise me to see that here.

I have no clue what their powers would be, but I can make a guess:

Tank is super big and powerful, and usually takes a molotov and a ton of firepower to bring down. He's probably iron, which is why I think he might be ABU.
The Witch is strong, but sleeps and can be avoided if your lights are off and you don't fire near her. Maybe she kills anyone who targets her?
The Hunter is fast and quick, and pounces on players from a distance and is hard to hit. Makes sense he was a tracker/thief.
Boomers throw up bile on players, 'causing tons of infected to jump on them. When they die they explode No clue.
The last one whose name I forget grabs players from distance with their tongue and pulls them away. Roleblocker, maybe?

My count is off; there's probably another common infected... or maybe an SK, and one of the mafia can't kill?

Vote Count:

Count: 1 (Santos)

10 alive, 6 to lynch.

[This message has been edited by NomadicNoodle (edited 10-07-2009 @ 11:37 AM).]

Three killing roles? Thats rather worrying.

Tank is super big and powerful, and usually takes a molotov and a ton of firepower to bring down. He's probably iron, which is why I think he might be ABU.

Do you want me to confirm/deny this?

Well if you are iron you do not have much to lose/fear I would imagine.

I know I speculated last night about 3 kills = 3 survivors, but we should probably be careful treating that as fact. The 'elimination' last night didn't seem like anything that happens in the game in my (admittedly limited) experience.

This might be one of my first Mafias, but let me take the stage, shall I?

Well well well, if we have no information on who is the killer, then we must analyze the information we know about who ISN'T the killer, genius huh?

First we have this list:
1. Blatant7
2. ferret
4. Heir
5. Veridian
6. Count
7. Henrz
8. Sneaky
9. Santos
10. A Banned User
11. dsmi

Now, I know I am innocent so we will just slash me...

1. Blatant7
2. ferret
4. Heir
5. Veridian
6. Count
7. Henrz
8. Sneaky
9. Santos
10. A Banned User
11. dsmi

Now we do a "soft" elimination, we eliminate those who are probably not the killer, I'd say those who were discussing and analyzing in the thread, Blatant7, A banned User, Kyle_Santos, Heir of Elessar, Veridian Cleric, Count Commulus:

1. Blatant7
2. ferret
4. Heir
5. Veridian
6. Count
7. Henrz
8. Sneaky
9. Santos
10. A Banned User
11. dsmi

Now we got a small list of suspects to finish off before they kill us 0_O:

2. ferret
7. Henrz
9. Santos
11. dsmi

Now which one of these bastards is the evil one?, dsmi made many comments that make us think, like all the other posts, but he left a devastating trail of blood from the blade he used to kill the victims.

He made SHORT comments, about roles and such, idle ideas not going with the story, he is just posting to keep himself safe hiding with the sheep, well wolf, this sheep has just found you out dead in your tracks.

Vote: dsmi, I am sure it is him.

If I was arguing on sneaky squirrel's side I would have used dsmi1's meta and say he plays like this every game with his short comments. But that is a very null tell in deciding if he's guilty or not.

However, I have decided: what the hell, why not?

Unvote

Vote: dsmi1

It feels good.

I am sure it is him.

Lol.

This might be one of my first Mafias,

Could have fooled me.

Kyle that makes me sad because now I have to defend this but whatever.

Defence #1
First we have this list:
1. Blatant7
2. ferret
4. Heir
5. Veridian
6. Count
7. Henrz
8. Sneaky
9. Santos
10. A Banned User
11. dsmi

Now, I know I am innocent so we will just slash me...

1. Blatant7
2. ferret
4. Heir
5. Veridian
6. Count
7. Henrz
8. Sneaky
9. Santos
10. A Banned User
11. dsmi

Now we do a "soft" elimination, we eliminate those who are probably not the killer, I'd say those who were discussing and analyzing in the thread, Blatant7, A banned User, Kyle_Santos, Heir of Elessar, Veridian Cleric, Count Commulus:

1. Blatant7
2. ferret
4. Heir
5. Veridian
6. Count
7. Henrz
8. Sneaky
9. Santos
10. A Banned User
11. dsmi

Now we got a small list of suspects to finish off before they kill us 0_O:

2. ferret
7. Henrz
8. squirrel

I AM SURE IT IS #8.

But in case that isnt enough to convince you.

Defence #2 -

He made SHORT comments, about roles and such, idle ideas not going with the story, he is just posting to keep himself safe hiding with the sheep, well wolf, this sheep has just found you out dead in your tracks.

Short comments?

Before your good post i am quoting, the stats where
Me: 121 words, 465 characters
You: 25 words 112 characters

So you could have actually said I am voting for the guy because he has been 4 to 5 times more active than me.

The only comment you made was exactly the thing you are sure makes me evil. The only comment you made

You should probably take in account that this game is left4dead based

well lucky you pointed it out because I sure as hell was confused when I got my role.

...I'd say those who were discussing and analyzing in the thread...

How the hell do you get off saying that I wasn't discussing or analyzing? I've made 5 of the 30 posts in the game, including the longest post and one of the view offering any real insight into what some of the possible roles could be.

Your list is complete, utter bull. Not only was it made just THIRTY POSTS INTO THE GAME, but it doesn't seem to have any basis in reality.
Okay, Hernz I understand, but Heir has made ONE POST and HE JUST AGREES WITH WHAT I SAID. Blatant, one post. What the f did you base your list on, anyway?

That said, I'm not going to vote for you. It's your first game, you're learning, and that's fine. Next time try and justify your list a little more before throwing it out there.

However, I am going to Vote: Santos. Really, Kyle? Really? You know far better than to go along with a list as useless as that one. Yeah, you have a reputation of being a trigger happy player who votes far too often, but really. You're voting "because it feels good"? What kinda excuse is that? I think you're just hopping on an easy bandwagon, trying to speed a lynch through. Classic scum move; because you're a good enough player to know better otherwise.

You should probably take in account that this game is left4dead based

well lucky you pointed it out because I sure as hell was confused when I got my role.

The hilarious thing here is that his comment about being left4dead based mentioned that the zombies definitely can come back to life... while in L4D they aren't zombies, they are infected and they DON'T come back to life.

That list still makes my stomach ache.

I'd made one post of 2 lines, and although the second line was a question that could further discussion, the first was just agreeing with what Ferret said.

No one's really discussed anything so far, and frankly eliminating people from suspicion just because they're contributing to discussion on the setup of the game doesn't help, because even scum will have no problems in discussing the setup. Its when it comes down to discussing who's scummy that the attention should be focused on those who aren't discussing anything. And most scum players are good enough to know when to participate in discussion and when to remain out of it without drawing too much attention.

I can understand this from Squirrel though, seeing as he's new and obviously wanted to cause an impact.

But Santos is obviously a more experienced player. He should've known better than to fall for crap like that list.

Vote: Santos

Cause you shouldn't bandwagon on people as a joke.

Ugh, Santos - two mostly random votes already? You're better than that, and to me it looks a bit like you're trying to get a bandwagon going.

Unvote
Vote Santos

Vote Count:

Dsmi: 2 (Sneaky, Santos)
Santos: 3 (ferret, Heir, Count)

10 alive, 6 to lynch

That should be enough pressure.

And sorry squirrel, but that list just doesn't work.

Hmm, what should I do?

...What does one usually do when pressured early in the game?

The standard options include such tried and true tactics as role claiming, refusing to role claim, ranting and raving, or replacing out because you can't be bothered to do any of the above.

Take your pick, hah.

So I should do one of the above because I have voted a bandwagon? That about sums it up, right?

More because on Day 1 that's the scummiest thing we're likely to see, but essentially yes, you've got the idea.

It wasn't a bandwagon. It was a stupid list that had zero basis in reality. You should know better than giving it any credence, your vote was attempting to take something worthless and turn it into a bandwagon. Rather scummy behavior.

So to put it frankly, I believe we're all asking you to claim. Do so, please.

Well ferret, I never really saw you discussing about this particular mafia game, only trying to see how it fit to the left4dead theme.

I don't call that discussing, hhhmmm, could be kyle santos, but still you didn't vote for me, something is behind this reason, and I doubt it is mercy.

I'm sticking to dsmi though, he just doesn't seem right if you know what I mean...

No. Not really. Usually it's better to present evidence rather than opinions.

Umm, Sneaky? If you didn't realise that your list made no proper sense...

What the hell is going on here?

Sneaky did you even read (the second half) of my last post?

Sneaky I will put this to you again. The only reason you are voting for me is for in your mind behaving like yourself. How is that even close to good enough? That list has to be the worst thing I have ever seen. It makes no sense. The game was 30 posts old (25 words from yourself thanks) and you see fit to break the town into nice neat little categories and make the outlandish claim that -

Anyone discussing or analysing the game is probably not mafia.

Then I am targetted due to this fact above. This is completley ignoring the fact that I have done FOUR TO FIVE TIMES MORE DISCUSSING AND ANALYSING THEN YOU.

Honestly, how does that even make sense to you? How do you think these games work? The good guys talk about the game for 29 posts, while the bad guys hide and voila! We found all the evil because they are not posting about the game in the first 45 minutes. Case closed good job town on another victory wrapped up nice and quickly as usual.

I am getting closer to voting for sneaky for doing his best to derail the towns chances of victory. If this were not a mini we could probably afford to get away with it too but unfortunately we don’t have the time this game so we will need to carry the burden.

I don't call that discussing, hhhmmm, could be kyle santos, but still you didn't vote for me, something is behind this reason, and I doubt it is mercy.

This does not make sense.

I'm sticking to dsmi though, he just doesn't seem right if you know what I mean...

This does not make sense.