Show Posts
26
Forum Games / Re: Cthulu Mafia - Day 6
« on: May 10, 2010, 06:21:12 PM »
Okay, I wrote this up last night after my last post so some of the information is a little outdated.
I am not at all surprised that Bard was the one chosen for the slowkill--he's the only one other than Nikolai (who I'm not even sure scum could have targeted last night) who was basically cleared from being scum, by virtue of the docfather role. (I'd say I'm basically cleared too but Hargreaves still trying to build the case on me yesterday indicates that I'm not clear to absolutely everyone, though I'll certainly go through that argument one final time if I must), and scum killing a non-confirmed townie at this point would have been really stupid and handed town the win. So, moving on!
NATHAN GREAVES is almost CERTAINLY SCUM, and from where I'm standing almost CERTAINLY the person who revived our good friend Gershom/Moses/Jesus/Yahweh/Whatever. Yes, if I'm correct, scum revived town. Keep in mind that, Nathan knew that Nikolai was a rolecop, if an unreliable one. Though this revival took place before Hargreaves took it upon himself to investigate Nathan, he knew that one rolecop existed, who could easily out the revivalist should he have revived a scum role. Moreover, reviving Bike largely cleared Nathan for the next couple of days--just long enough to get us into potential LYLO, and had Nikolai not been a self-reviver, almost certainly have won the game for scum (I assume). A gambit that paid off, if just for a little bit. UNLESS ANYONE ELSE (specifically, Kolmgorov and to an extent Mei Fan Transy) HAS A GOOD REASON NOT TO, ##FOS:Nathan Greaves that will become a vote to lynch when the time is right.
Hargreaves, now. Hargreaves in 85% (Not Xanth here, just kind of estimating that statistic >_>) of all scenarios can't be scum--I have no reason whatsoever to doubt his rolecoppin' abilities (since they have been 100% accurate from what I can tell). Assume he's lying to us just now, and instead of self reviver got back the result that Nikolai was a reviver--if he got that back and was scum, Nikolai would have been killed pretty dang quickly. If he got that back and was town (which I don't believe since there's no reason to lie at this juncture as town), all the more reason to keep him alive. Now, if Hargreaves got back self-reviver, as he's claimed? As town, Hargreaves' explanation makes complete sense, especially since he was right and this revelation coming out now really did help town. As scum? Well, two scenarios there: One, Hargreaves knew that he'd only self revive on a regular kill--all the more reason to slowkill him. Two (the much, much more likely one), Hargreaves only knew that he'd self revive, and had no reassurance that a slowkill would keep a dead dog down, as it were.
We come to that problematic 15%. If Hargreaves only knew he'd self-revive, and didn't know the circumstances of that self revival... then that gives scum a really good reason not to slowkill. Why waste a kill and make things easier for town? It may also give Hargreaves a dang good motive for voting Ethan Hayles to get lynched instead of Kolmgorov, ESPECIALLY considering Kolmgorov's lurking was looking like it was going to get him modkilled (and almost assuredly not revived) at several points during this game.
Do I buy into this scenario? Well... (at this point I've begun writing after reading what's happened) given Mei Fang's investigation coming back scum on Hargreaves? Given both of the pair were the ones who dropped the hammer pretty quickly together (less than 10 minutes within eachother)? Given Hargreaves was trying to build a case against a nigh-confirmed townie earlier? Kinda.
I want to do a re-read of Andrews (and go over Xanth's scumpair theorizing again), since he's the only one who could possibly be scum if Hargreaves ain't, and Bard's assertion's aside I'm not 100% on the whole Hargreaves thing. I'm certainly sold on Greaves being scum, but I also don't like the killing power being potentially in scum's hands (if Hargreaves IS scum we have no reason to trust his "I can only kill the person with the second most votes" malarky). However, I've got more pressing priorities at the moment, soooo yeah.
I'm very comfortable dropping Greaves like so much gravy, and depending on how looking back at Andrews goes I might be good with dropping Hargreaves as well. HG certainly looks a lot scummier in retrospect but we're at LYLO and I want to be sure.
I am not at all surprised that Bard was the one chosen for the slowkill--he's the only one other than Nikolai (who I'm not even sure scum could have targeted last night) who was basically cleared from being scum, by virtue of the docfather role. (I'd say I'm basically cleared too but Hargreaves still trying to build the case on me yesterday indicates that I'm not clear to absolutely everyone, though I'll certainly go through that argument one final time if I must), and scum killing a non-confirmed townie at this point would have been really stupid and handed town the win. So, moving on!
NATHAN GREAVES is almost CERTAINLY SCUM, and from where I'm standing almost CERTAINLY the person who revived our good friend Gershom/Moses/Jesus/Yahweh/Whatever. Yes, if I'm correct, scum revived town. Keep in mind that, Nathan knew that Nikolai was a rolecop, if an unreliable one. Though this revival took place before Hargreaves took it upon himself to investigate Nathan, he knew that one rolecop existed, who could easily out the revivalist should he have revived a scum role. Moreover, reviving Bike largely cleared Nathan for the next couple of days--just long enough to get us into potential LYLO, and had Nikolai not been a self-reviver, almost certainly have won the game for scum (I assume). A gambit that paid off, if just for a little bit. UNLESS ANYONE ELSE (specifically, Kolmgorov and to an extent Mei Fan Transy) HAS A GOOD REASON NOT TO, ##FOS:Nathan Greaves that will become a vote to lynch when the time is right.
Hargreaves, now. Hargreaves in 85% (Not Xanth here, just kind of estimating that statistic >_>) of all scenarios can't be scum--I have no reason whatsoever to doubt his rolecoppin' abilities (since they have been 100% accurate from what I can tell). Assume he's lying to us just now, and instead of self reviver got back the result that Nikolai was a reviver--if he got that back and was scum, Nikolai would have been killed pretty dang quickly. If he got that back and was town (which I don't believe since there's no reason to lie at this juncture as town), all the more reason to keep him alive. Now, if Hargreaves got back self-reviver, as he's claimed? As town, Hargreaves' explanation makes complete sense, especially since he was right and this revelation coming out now really did help town. As scum? Well, two scenarios there: One, Hargreaves knew that he'd only self revive on a regular kill--all the more reason to slowkill him. Two (the much, much more likely one), Hargreaves only knew that he'd self revive, and had no reassurance that a slowkill would keep a dead dog down, as it were.
We come to that problematic 15%. If Hargreaves only knew he'd self-revive, and didn't know the circumstances of that self revival... then that gives scum a really good reason not to slowkill. Why waste a kill and make things easier for town? It may also give Hargreaves a dang good motive for voting Ethan Hayles to get lynched instead of Kolmgorov, ESPECIALLY considering Kolmgorov's lurking was looking like it was going to get him modkilled (and almost assuredly not revived) at several points during this game.
Do I buy into this scenario? Well... (at this point I've begun writing after reading what's happened) given Mei Fang's investigation coming back scum on Hargreaves? Given both of the pair were the ones who dropped the hammer pretty quickly together (less than 10 minutes within eachother)? Given Hargreaves was trying to build a case against a nigh-confirmed townie earlier? Kinda.
I want to do a re-read of Andrews (and go over Xanth's scumpair theorizing again), since he's the only one who could possibly be scum if Hargreaves ain't, and Bard's assertion's aside I'm not 100% on the whole Hargreaves thing. I'm certainly sold on Greaves being scum, but I also don't like the killing power being potentially in scum's hands (if Hargreaves IS scum we have no reason to trust his "I can only kill the person with the second most votes" malarky). However, I've got more pressing priorities at the moment, soooo yeah.
I'm very comfortable dropping Greaves like so much gravy, and depending on how looking back at Andrews goes I might be good with dropping Hargreaves as well. HG certainly looks a lot scummier in retrospect but we're at LYLO and I want to be sure.