Thread: Ape Escape Mafia: End Game (8/19/12) Mafia Win

Originally Posted by Nytie

It's embarrassing how much time I spent playing that game...

Originally Posted by Lithuania

I have played it too. It's addictive. XD

I loved these games so much when I was a kid. I still do. So upset the most recent one was terrible. I want more :P

I have only played the second one. XD I was disappointed I wasn't one of the Freaky Monkey 5.

I honestly think that gws had used the random vote as an excuse to pile on the votes.

Originally Posted by Parma

I honestly think that gws had used the random vote as an excuse to pile on the votes.

Yeah, I'm more suspicious of Gengar than Joltik right now. I only voted Joltik to save my own skin.

I voted Joltik in the end to save myself as well.

1. @Belarus.;
2. @Hitomi;
3. @Mijzelffan;
4. @Paperhorse;
5. @The Puppetmaster;
6. @Joltik;
7. @HilbertCressLover;
8. @NfiNity;
9. @Feralize;
10. @Lithuania;
11. @Smasher 101;
12. @DrumBeats;
13. @GengarWithSunglasses;
14. @Parma;
15. @Buoy;
16. @Nytie;
17. @Baron Dante;
18. @Zenax;
19. @SageGaga;
20. @Luminosity;
21. @TheShuckpluff;
22. @Fresa;
23. @Ryuutakeshi;

The phase will be extended a little tomorrow because of my work. It should occur around 5 pm EST. That should be the usual update time.

@Neonsands- you need to use the mention tags rather than the ; for the mentions to work.

Okay, so no lynch. And I still suspect GWS.

Why suspect me? All I did was use a random (and bad) method, it's not like it's suspicious. A mafioso would just go for any person not of their faction (unless trying to earn the town's trust). That's terrible logic to me.

Originally Posted by GengarWithSunglasses

Why suspect me? All I did was use a random (and bad) method, it's not like it's suspicious. A mafioso would just go for any person not of their faction (unless trying to earn the town's trust). That's terrible logic to me.

That statement is so full of contradictions it's not even funny.

Using a random and bad method is what's suspicious. 'Randomly' voting someone who already has a vote is suspicious. Your horrible defense is suspicious.

And...that second-to-last sentence... ಠ_ಠ

GWS, the art of STRATEGY suggest mafia should actually go for people they feel are threats, not just some random person that's opposing their faction.

Originally Posted by GengarWithSunglasses

Why suspect me? All I did was use a random (and bad) method, it's not like it's suspicious. A mafioso would just go for any person not of their faction (unless trying to earn the town's trust). That's terrible logic to me.

It actually was kinda suspicious. Especially since you knew it was bad. And no, they usually don't... They usually go after those who they know have roles that can become a threat to them... O_O

Originally Posted by Belarus.

Originally Posted by GengarWithSunglasses

Why suspect me? All I did was use a random (and bad) method, it's not like it's suspicious. A mafioso would just go for any person not of their faction (unless trying to earn the town's trust). That's terrible logic to me.

That statement is so full of contradictions it's not even funny.

Using a random and bad method is what's suspicious. 'Randomly' voting someone who already has a vote is suspicious. Your horrible defense is suspicious.
And...that second-to-last sentence... ಠ_ಠ

OBJECTION!
However, I did use the random method and don't see any way randomness can be suspicious. Not every human is a liar my friend, and coincidences do happen (play an Ace Attorney game and you'll see some of the many examples, a real life example is when a man crashed his car (a Porsche sports car) and when it was towed away to be repaired the engine slipped out and broke both of an engineer's legs, then another man bought the engine and used it in his car for a race and died in that race while another man who used the driveshaft of the Porsche died as well. Then when the Porsche was repaired, the garage it was in was destroyed by fire. Later the car was being displayed, then it fell and somebody broke his/her hip. When it was on a trailer, the car slipped loose and fell and smashed the front part of a shop, then the car randomly broke into 11 pieces while it was on steel supports. People called it a cursed car, but it wasn't a cursed car, just a big coincidence. You guys are making a big deal over nothing. Sure the person I voted for already had a vote, that doesn't make it not random. Your logic is clearly flawed. It was day 1 in fact.
TAKE THAT!
NfiNity and Lithuania voted for the same person as well. You said nothing to them. Do I sense an alliance? Based on friendship perhaps? If anyone should be scummy with this logic, is me and either Lithuania or NfiNity, whoever voted second. Ryuu's logic is clearly flawed, they were acting themselves... So was I! *Slams Desk* The prosecution has clearly made insufficient claims and should rethink their accusation through better. You see randomness is unpredictable. It was a bad time to use it, but you can't deny true randomness, besides, aside from reverse-psychology why else would I vote Joltik? I couldn't think straight either because I was sick and had to felt like throwing up. Don't take that as emotional appeal, that's just my testimony of what happened.

ಠ_ಠ

First off, I honestly didn't need that summary and I don't care about Phoenix Wright. That's a flipping video game.

You said you randomly chose someone to vote. Who just so happened to already have a vote. You were starting a bandwagon on her.

I am fucking tired of hearing how we always base things on friendship. Fucking tired. We do not have an alliance this game, spasiba very much. Aside from that, that's a different case. It was not disguised as a 'random' vote.

Humans are never truly random...They always have these little things that make them biased... So, yes, I can deny your 'randomness'.

I have to take that as emotion appeal, considering how many damn times you use it and how often these types of things 'happen' to you.

Thank you GWS. We really needed to know all that.

That being said, you're not doing anything to prove us wrong.