Chess Mafia [Game Ended - 3rd party wins]

by **Pikanchion** on Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:22 pm

Skoffin wrote: But he claims he has info due to his role that TELLS him about Ragian - are you suggesting that Pika is outright lying about that part? and if so why?

Truly it is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.

Also Ragian is scum.

by **Skoffin** on Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:31 pm

UNVOTE VOTE PIKA

fuk u

by **Ragian** on Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:30 am

@skoff, we have done that. Could you come back on the mitch train, please.

Also, tough weekend coming up (booze wise). I'll do my best to check in.

by **dakky21** on Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:08 pm

Is it possible that my theory is correct and that Pika is the King and maybe he has a cop role which he doesn't want to reveal and he checked Rage last night and knows Rage is the scum? If it's possible, then the first Skoff hammer of claimed unlynchable Pika and now a second attempt by voting the unlynchable is HIGHLY ridiculous, it seems like Skoff doesn't care what will happen.

by **Skoffin** on Fri Nov 10, 2017 6:15 pm

Sometimes you just gotta not take a Skoffin seriously.

by **dakky21** on Fri Nov 10, 2017 6:54 pm

Skoffin wrote:Sometimes you just gotta not take a Skoffin seriously.

Or sometimes you are a good townie and sometimes a bad scum?

I'm still on Rage because Pika believes he is scum, and as I said, making scum unlynchable is a bastard setup which doesn't makes any sense so he must be the king and therefore I think I am right on this one. If the whole Pika stuff on Rage is still a joke then we need to hear more from Pika, but I doubt that will happen. Anyhow.. continue.

by **Thorthoth** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:47 am

tbh, we seem to be going around in a circle. Several players appear to be voting almost at random...

''Now everybody vote for the person to your left''.

by **Ragian** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 5:27 am

dakky21 wrote:
Skoffin wrote:Sometimes you just gotta not take a Skoffin seriously.

Or sometimes you are a good townie and sometimes a bad scum?

I'm still on Rage because Pika believes he is scum, and as I said, making scum unlynchable is a bastard setup which doesn't makes any sense so he must be the king and therefore I think I am right on this one. If the whole Pika stuff on Rage is still a joke then we need to hear more from Pika, but I doubt that will happen. Anyhow.. continue.

1) Pika is not a cop. If he were, he would be a day cop. If he were, he would have claimed as much. 2) You don't know if Pika is unlynchable. All you know is that he wasn't lynched that one time. 3) Pika isn't even voting me now (which, I presume, will change once I have pointed it out).

You need to carefully examine whom you're voting with, Dakky. You might not be scum, but I'm 90% (ish) sure that Mitch is scum from his gameplay.

@Thor, look at Mitch's play. Tell me that's not scummy or vote for him. Don't vote Mandy because he thinks you're scum. Mandy is not scum. He might be one-sided, but he's not scum.

by **Skoffin** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:05 am

dakky21 wrote:
Skoffin wrote:Sometimes you just gotta not take a Skoffin seriously.

Or sometimes you are a good townie and sometimes a bad scum?

Outrageous!

Naturally my pika vote was a joke and I have all the intentions of not keeping a joke there. In any case we need to move this along, and the only real contenders here for lynching are mitch, pika and ragonion.
Everyone needs to outright state what they think of each of the three and order their preference for a lynch, and maybe we can actually get something done. Mitch I'm certain is scum, but of pika/ragato I am uncertain as rag has not appeared scummy to me at all and pika has some sort of weird role thing going on.

unvote vote mitch

by **madmitch** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:45 am

now I know where to look for the other scum right Skoffin, Rags don't look scummy to you OPEN YOUR EYES ](*,)

by **mandalorian2298** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:21 pm

dakky21 wrote:Is it possible that my theory is correct and that Pika is the King and maybe he has a cop role which he doesn't want to reveal and he checked Rage last night and knows Rage is the scum? If it's possible, then the first Skoff hammer of claimed unlynchable Pika and now a second attempt by voting the unlynchable is HIGHLY ridiculous, it seems like Skoff doesn't care what will happen.

QFT

I don't know about Pika's investigative skills, but I 100% agree that Skoffin's vote on Pika is, in the context of Pika surviving a lynch, really scummy.

FOS Skoffin

The reason why I'm not voting her is the fact that I understand her frustration with Pika's play so far so maybe it was just a badly expressed anger. My vote stays on Thorth, as he still seems the scummiest to me. However, if Skoff's vote stays on Pika, I am willing to be part of a bandwagon against her.

At this point, barring a huge revelation or a slip-up, I very much doubt that I am going to be voting for someone other then Thorth or Skoffin today.

@Pika If you are horsing around, now would be a good time to start actually playing. On the other hand, if you are sincerely trying to convince people to vote Ragian, you might want to change your approach and actually give us a reason (and No!, you haven't done so already).

by **BuJaber** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:45 pm

Vote Count:

Ragian (2) - dakky21, madmitch
Thorthoth (2) - mandalorian2298, Pikanchion
mandalorian2298 (1) - Thorthoth
Madmitch (1) - Ragian

There is currently no deadline.
With 8 alive it takes 5 to lynch.

by **Skoffin** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:29 pm

Mandy, my last post literally votes for mitch. :evil:

by **Skoffin** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:31 pm

In seriousness I actually can't vote today so literally my votes are meaningless.

by **Ragian** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:23 pm

You can't vote today? That explains the vote count.

by **dakky21** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 8:13 pm

Ragian wrote:You can't vote today? That explains the vote count.

Of course Skoff can't vote because her votes aren't BOLDED!

BuJaber wrote:3. All votes and unvotes must be in bold to be counted. You can type in any color you want but for everyone's sake - pick one that's easy to read and easy on the eyes please. If you want to change your vote you must unvote first. This is just to make your intentions clear.

You two sound like a pair, my vote stays on you Rage and Skoff is playing erratically so ... I don't know what proof we need more...

by **Skoffin** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:52 pm

I voted in bold earlier in the day and that wasn't counted either.

Skoffin wrote:
Ragian wrote:Mandy probably put his blinders on. It happens. Tell me about mitch, woman! You can do it in a fight if you so wish.

I've been so tired and overworked that I forgot the differences between this game and Cyoc wololol. I have valid reasons, I just don't remember exactly what they were.
His overall demeanour screams scum; he gets both defensive and aggressive, gets cranky, seems slightly more determined than what he is doing when town etc.

Mitch is still scum. Vote mitch

by **Thorthoth** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:08 pm

Skoffin wrote: I voted in bold earlier in the day and that wasn't counted either.

Skoffin wrote:
Ragian wrote:Mandy probably put his blinders on. It happens. Tell me about mitch, woman! You can do it in a fight if you so wish.

I've been so tired and overworked that I forgot the differences between this game and Cyoc wololol. I have valid reasons, I just don't remember exactly what they were.
His overall demeanour screams scum; he gets both defensive and aggressive, gets cranky, seems slightly more determined than what he is doing when town etc.

Mitch is still scum. Vote mitch

Maybe somebody is a voteblocker?
Is that actually a thing?

by **dakky21** on Sat Nov 11, 2017 11:11 pm

Well if BuJaber didn't mess it up then it makes sense. You did bold your vote on mitch and then (without bold) unvoted and then again voted mitch, but anything of that didn't appear in the last vote count.

Anyway, I still don't think anyone would make unlynchable scum, as that doesn't makes any sense.

But ...

BuJaber wrote:11. Under very specific situations where it becomes apparent to me that the game is broken in some way I may choose to make changes to someone's role, or influence the game in some way.

It is possible that scum gets a vote blocked due to rules and maybe one person being AWOL - Flores.

Since we can't agree on either Ragoo, Mitch or Thor, I'll go ahead and

unvote, vote Skoff

by **Skoffin** on Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:09 am

That is literally the dumbest reason you can come up with. You make the assumption that flores is an afk town and that the mod would penalise scum by making a member voteless? Wtfbro. No mod would break a game in that manner.

How about the more logical explanation which is that someone used an ability on me last night and I received a message that my vote has been removed for the day. Christ almighty.
Considering that Pika made comments that I had been "dealt with" and has not explained what that means, I am assuming he is the one that removed my voting ability.

by **Ragian** on Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:44 am

I don't see what else you need as proof that Skoffin is town. And yes, dakky. We may be playing "as a team". You should try playing on town's team. You expressed concerns about Mitch earlier. Why don't you join me?

Same goes for Mandy and Thor.

by **mandalorian2298** on Sun Nov 12, 2017 6:16 am

@Skoffin My bad, I see now that you have said that it is a joke vote and switched to Mitch. UNFOS

@Dakky Connecting Flores' absence with Skoffin's lack of voting to conlude that Skoffin is scum is a BIG logical leap. Add to that your "We can't agree on these three people so let's just gang up on the random fourth" is very random and scummy FOS Dakky

@Ragian I'm not joining you because I think that Thorth is much more likely to be scum then Mitch. Why don't YOU join ME?

by **Ragian** on Sun Nov 12, 2017 6:17 am

I'm not sold on Thor. What has he done that's scummy?

by **ZaBeast** on Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:09 pm

The Hobbit has slowed down, and this game doesn't look too bad either, so I can replace Flores. I don't plan on writing long ass posts like in the hobbit (hopefully)