LogFAQs > #876124871

You're dumbing it down because it's not "lots of people suspected you but you didn't get votes"

It's "not enough people suspected you but here's why they should have."

The latter can be pinned on town not finding the evidence. It's hard to give you a lot of credit for when no one really brought it forward. That's like you left the murder weapon on top of the cupboard at the scene of the crime and the cops somehow didn't find it. You weakly pressed for IGCD all day, but then when push comes to shove you followed his vote and didn't really present a strong argument why you went Kanzaris over Ulti. In the absence of a strong argument, opposing the guy you suspected makes a lot more sense. That's not the only thing I saw, but it would be a really strong starting point that no one really capitalized on.

On the flip side of why you can't just base it on suspicion, people suspected Kanzaris but there actually wasn't a lot of substance behind it. Those kinds of suspicions are less on a direct misplay on Kanz's part and more a general "you need to diplomacy a bit better."

Also I think you're overstating how different a game becomes in playing vs observing. Have you never replaced into a game before? It isn't that different! The only difference is you can actually vocalize the suspicions. Which comes down to how convincing you can be vs how convincing they can be-- but if you have post evidence it gets harder and harder for the defender to win that.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!