|
On March 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 05:55 Abenson wrote:
I will vote for L simply because he is temp-banned and not much help as of now.
##vote L This is your one post, and you’re just going to leave it at that? Are you fucking serious?
My sentiments precisely.
On March 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 06:30 nemY wrote:
Can someone summarize what's gone on so far? What I can make of it so far is: L's been banned. we're adopting a "no nuke" policy, if someone breaks the policy we nuke them 2x, don't use fake nukes (if you have them), and ~OpZ~ is being an idiot? Are you fucking serious? If he hasn’t had time to read the thread, then he shouldn’t make posts that says he’ll read the thread, then make another post asking people to summarize the thread for him. That’s just ridiculous.
I'm with you here on this well. Asking someone to summarize the thread for him is truly ridiculous. A player signs up knowing that they need to put in effort to play the game, whether as town or mafia. It's truly unfathomable. Plus, asking someone to summarize seems like you want to absolve yourself of some responsibility in the future. I'm keeping my eye on you.
On March 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 11:57 ~OpZ~ wrote:
Okay...I'm going to say this again. We don't need an exact definite decision against nukes. I think our biggest worry will be people about to be lynched firing off their nukes anyway. That's the kind of stunt I would pull. Wait. So you claim so much that the ToD is like some fucking ceiling of death 1 foot over our heads, and how we should lynch people and try not to do any major counter nukings, random nukes, etc. Then you fucking say you would fucking fire off a random nuke if you’re about to be lynched? Are you even reading what you’re saying? If you’re truly town, you wouldn’t fire off a nuke, even if you’re about to be lynched. On top of that, since it’s a majority ends the vote or 48 hours, it’s not even guaranteed that you’d be lynched when you fire this nuke. Do you see the problem with this at all?
Yeah. First of all, we probably have some room with the number of nukes allowed to go off before everyone dies. But to declare that you would fire a nuke just because you're close to being lynched isn't pro-town behavior. You're being selfish in firing a nuke just because you're about to be removed from the game, rather than playing to help the town win.
|
Holy fucking wall of text, elemenope.
Iaaan, I've mentioned before that the problem with nuking the aggressor is that if he has more nukes he can always nuke you back. That would make two dead townies and 1 dead mafia barring any outside intervention. Thus I think the town should have a role in coordinating anti-nukes, should the situation absolutely demand it. Obviously I don't think people should be posting how many they have; just that they can call for help if they need it.
Here's some math: Mafia only have 1KP; town only has 1 lynch. At a rate of 2 dead per day (1 lynch, 1 mafia kill) there would have to be at least 8 mafia in the game for things to get dangerous on Day 3 and for a town loss on Night 4 so long as everyone is playing terribly. But that would be over 1/3 of the game being mafia, which seems like a horribly retarded setup. Assuming we have a lower number of mafia it just seems more reasonable to have an ironclad rule that those who nuke without permission should be lynched, since it discourages mafia from trading lives that are bad for the town.
|
On March 24 2010 12:32 Elemenope wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 05:55 Abenson wrote:
I will vote for L simply because he is temp-banned and not much help as of now.
##vote L This is your one post, and you’re just going to leave it at that? Are you fucking serious?
I change my vote to Abenson
People CANNOT be allowed to get away with inactivity, especially if the one thing they do post is to vote kill someone.
|
Vote Abenson just to make clear.
|
On March 24 2010 12:39 Ace wrote:
In danger of being modkilled/replaced - Phrujabz
When does this time expire? 24 hours after the game started? (which is like 2 minutes from now) 24 hours after the post warning him? Some other time?
|
On March 24 2010 13:10 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 12:39 Ace wrote:
In danger of being modkilled/replaced - Phrujabz
When does this time expire? 24 hours after the game started? (which is like 2 minutes from now) 24 hours after the post warning him? Some other time?
Rules seem pretty clear to me:
On March 21 2010 09:52 Ace wrote:
[*]You must participate. If you do not post at least once every 24 hours, and/or miss 2 votes you will be replaced or if necessary mod-killed.
|
Actually since Phrujabz should be replaced/modkilled now, I'm moving my vote to the next most inactive as I stated earlier:
##vote: Abenson
|
On March 24 2010 13:10 Qatol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 12:39 Ace wrote:
In danger of being modkilled/replaced - Phrujabz
When does this time expire? 24 hours after the game started? (which is like 2 minutes from now) 24 hours after the post warning him? Some other time?
yea hes supposed to be gone now. I wasnt around for a while so I sent him a PM giving him 6 hours (5 hours, 40 minutes from now) to post or hes gone.
|
If he does come back in 5hr 40 or however long from now I think we ought to lynch him.
|
It depends on what he has to say. Unfortunately, even if we set aside L's ban for now, there's 9 others in addition to that guy with 5 posts or less. If he posts something marginally more useful than Abenson's single useless post, I'll go with Abenson for now.
|
why should we lynch him right away when he comes back? it's not like being inactive is a confirmation of being mafia. if he does come back, we give him a bit to post so we can analyze him. there are better targets for lynches already.
|
On March 24 2010 13:56 johnnyspazz wrote:
why should we lynch him right away when he comes back? it's not like being inactive is a confirmation of being mafia. if he does come back, we give him a bit to post so we can analyze him. there are better targets for lynches already.
Like?
|
|
|
imo abenson is worse than phrujbaz because all he has done is given a vote by what you call "bandwagoning" and phrujbaz hasn't gotten a chance to even voice his opinions
why vote to lynch someone that's probably going to get modkilled? you'll just end up wasting a lynch
|
|
|
Phrujabz is being replaced by Bill Murray.
Remember Day 1 ends March 25th, 12AM ET as of now.
|
On March 24 2010 19:01 Ace wrote:
Phrujabz is being replaced by Bill Murray.
Remember Day 1 ends March 25th, 12AM ET as of now.
oh shi-
|
Damn it, Phrujbaz, you took all the fun out of the game 
@Zona and ~OpZ~ voting to lynch Phrujbaz when he was most likely going to get killed due to inactivity? What exactly was going through your guys' heads?
On March 24 2010 11:57 ~OpZ~ wrote:
Okay...I'm going to say this again. We don't need an exact definite decision against nukes. I think our biggest worry will be people about to be lynched firing off their nukes anyway. That's the kind of stunt I would pull.
No, we need an exact definite decision against nukes. Instantly lynching the person that launched them is a good one at this point of the game, since it doesn't leave room for him to retaliate to counter-nukes, should he have more than one. I know that you don't want to get lynched and there are votes for you, but flaunting your arsenal in the manner that you are, isn't going to help you. Even if you launch nuke(s) we can shoot them down, don't worry.
##Vote ~OpZ~
|
On March 24 2010 20:32 Nikon wrote:
@Zona and ~OpZ~ voting to lynch Phrujbaz when he was most likely going to get killed due to inactivity? What exactly was going through your guys' heads?
A vote doesn't necessarily mean I definitely want someone lynched. It can also be used as a wakeup call to whoever's being voted for, or a way of pointing out to others behavior I think is unhelpful. In any case, if you read thoroughly, I already stated multiple times why I voted and how I would change my vote if he was killed or replaced.
|
I change my ##vote to Bill Murray because I don't trust him with a nuclear arsenal
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
