In my blind rage against Ace not letting me shoot dud missiles at myself I did not.
World at War Mafia - Page 3
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
L
Canada4732 Posts
In my blind rage against Ace not letting me shoot dud missiles at myself I did not. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 10:32 Zona wrote: I disagree here, and very much so. First of all, your assumption that this anti-nuker has no further anti-nukes is based on thin air. But beyond that, my biggest objection to your reasoning is that each extra anti-nuke in late game can potentially stop a full mafia kill. As an illustration, here's an extremely contrived example. Let's say we've come to a situation where there's 5 town members and 3 mafia left, and the mafia have 2 nukes. The mafia obviously know who the town members are, and they could launch their 2 nukes, kill two town members, and grab their win, as they now have equal numbers as the town members and can prevent lynches. Each anti-nuke the town has can prevent a whole kill from the mafia in this kind of late game situation. On the other hand, you are suggesting that we ask this person, who might have 1 or more anti-nukes remaining, to step forward and identify themselves, and risk being nightkilled by the mafia, in return for a small amount of information which doesn't even guarantee the alignment of any other player. I want to emphasize something. In many mafia games the mafia only wins when their number is equal or more than the town. But in this game, if the mafia have more nukes remaining than the town has anti-nukes, for each nuke they have extra, they can have one fewer member than the town and still win. Of course the mafia isn't sure about how many anti-nukes the town has remaining, but that doesn't mean we should risk our anti-nukers needlessly. To reiterate: The power of a mafia nuke is not the same as the power of a town nuke, when anti-nukes are gone. The mafia nuke is guaranteed to reduce the number of town members. The town nuke may or may not reduce the number of mafia members. Uh, your end scenario there assumes both that the mafia don't have the fear of anti-nukes AND have the ability to stop retaliatory nukes and that there isn't a nuclear winter ending. I was thinking of that scenario far earlier when we were talking about RoL, and it just doesn't pan out to a victory for either side. Moreover, you forget the "worse" than anti-nuke potential that Ace listed in the starting post. What could it be? If mafia throws a nuke and that "stronger than anti-nuke" ability triggers, what then? Yeah, we are asking someone to step forward, because someone just stopped a town controlled hit onto a player that IS pretty fucking suspicious. Why is this news? I don't even make the assumption that the guy doesn't have any anti-nukes left. i say its probable, but even if he has one left, its still better for him to come out prior to RoL throwing a hit so that we can think about where RoL should direct his shot. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
Stupid logic through and through. Think I'd really be that obvious, as to make Japan's argument in third person? Given your past history, yes. I pointed out that there may be very good reasons for the person who fired the anti-nuke to remain under cover, whether they be town aligned or mafia aligned. Therefore, your call for the anti-nuke person to reveal themselves is redundant, ill-conceived, and spam. Do you know what redundant and spam mean? Because while you might disagree with the idea and call it ill-conceived, it is in no way either of the other two. Which leads me to believe that you're trying to play yourself up as a big shot or something without knowing what the words you're typing actually mean. Which is pretty hilarious in and of itself. If you read prior, you'd know that I didn't see that Japan was mentioned in Ace's post, so I already DID retract the statements above. Your defence, however, ignoring that point and trying to attack me on other grounds for no reason is highly suspect. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 11:03 Ace wrote: If you have a night action you may send it in now. (RoL isn't using his role powers based on that last post) I assumed he had to PM you to use it? Ask him via PM. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 11:06 tree.hugger wrote: Open ended, intentionally vague arguments are really really persuasive. Attacking my vocabulary is another great way to gain points. Count it! I would never play myself up to be a big shot. That's your domain. I suggested we lynch you on Day 1, as per the normal strategy of lynching inactive players. Beyond this, I was aware of your singular ability to disrupt the functional working of the town. I have already made clear that these were my reasons for voting to lynch you. When you returned, you defended yourself, by lashing out at me - perfectly reasonable. In the meantime, of course, you have succeeded in your perpetual quest to derail the town's efforts and confound everyone involved. Here's specifically what I object to. Your grandstanding, and pretending that you have any motive for lynching me beyond a defense against my accusations against you. You don't. Admit it. I'll be voting for you, bar anything unexpected, (like my living to tomorrow, for example) because your disruption of common sense in this game has been pernicious, in actively asking a potentially valuable potential town member to compromise their safety. When did you retract your argument? You were still advocating it a page ago. But at the very least, it's nice you admitted to being wrong about something. 1) Wasn't vague. I looked through your past games. You make substantial errors in reasoning repeatedly. As for behaviorally: You played in mafia 16 and 18. You were town in both of these games. You did very, very little posting in both of them. In 16 you seem to have made an effort at posting. Your few posts were fairly large, but included a lot of town building consensus language and you generally looked at issues instead of starting fights. Your posts aren't 100% accurate reasoning, but at least you make an effort. A substantial effort. Even when you disagree with people, maybe one or two posts has potentially inflammatory content. In 18 you hold off. You make nearly zero content posts and are generally happy to lounge around and do nothing. You're probably one of the top 3 lurkers in that game. This game you've been incredibly offensive from the start. I'm not the only one that realizes that trying to off me for 'inactivity' when its a 2 day ban is kinda silly. The idea behind inactivity hits is to get people posting and to try to pre-emptively take out a lurker. Its pretty obvious that I'm not going to say nothing all game long, so why would you hold onto the inactivity logic? Fishball is a ball of rage, so I understand why he's butthurt about me raping his logic last game. Versatile is permanently on a PMS bender and loves to pile the hate on me, so I can understand why she'd be eager to try and thumb her nose at me. For everyone else? They have explaining to do and that vote list comprises a significant mafia pool in my eyes because I'm not mafia. If i was mafia and saw that I could potentially bus one of the best town players out of the game, would I? LOL FUCK YES I WOULD. THATS WHY I BUS ACE PRETTY MUCH EVERY GAME. Hence why I think mafia are probably somewhat concentrated in that list. Granted that you're on that list, yeah, I'd kill you, because I'd probably want to kill the majority of people on that list. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 11:25 Abenson wrote: Now the most important matter: To save or not to save As you've probably know, I'm all for lynching/killing JSpazz. The most important part is that we, as a town, should collectively decide whether to save JSpazz or not. We collectively were pretty cool with Caller dying, so how's this going to be any different :3. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 11:29 Abenson wrote: Well I just thought that giving Jspazz a chance to talk could perhaps give us some evidence/information :O I'm cool with him talking, as I'd love for townies who know they're about to be confirmed to toss out information. I just don't see how a town consensus is going to change anything when we have some random hobos shooting down nukes without town consent. The most interesting thing would probably be reading the result to see if a different country was responsible for shooting the missile down. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
Here's where you've bothered me in the past L, as well as this game. I recognize that in many games, including XX, you've been town aligned, and I've recognized your earnest attempts to aid the town. But in actuality, you posses a certainty in your writing which is highly convincing to some people, (including myself, on occasion) but also does not take into account the chance that you're wrong. You make gambits where you pretend to sacrifice yourself in order to get someone to be killed. We all know those are ploys, but they keep working, and you keep employing these disingenuous strategies You uh, don't read my writing if you think I often push with the assumption that I must be correct. I push with the assumption that even if I'm wrong that the right move has been made. In XX for instance, I didn't give a shit who died besides Me, Cobbler, nemY or MM because I knew if we survived the night that we would win. Killing BM was part of an overarching plan to rape the abenson list which wasn't wrong: 3 of 4 mafia were on there and I had a bomb sitting on their godfather. Not only that, but at the start of the game I called that 2-3 of me/malongo/incog/bc/foolishness would be mafia. I was right. So yeah, mafia is a guessing game; No one's going to guess 100% correct, especially with a buncha jerks in the background trying to make you guess wrong. The important part, however, is getting it right enough of the time. I'm not tearing townies down. I'm saying that people who voted for me have no real excuses. Maybe Opz does because he knew abenson was legit, maybe fishball and versatile are playing like emotional douchebags (which is expected of them), but for you? For the rest of the people on that list? Your defence is "i wanted to punish inactivity" but that simply doesn't hold. You also have no reason to rage against me unlike those mentioned above. So why the claws and fangs; I certainly didn't take them out against you. I just suggested you as a candidate based on the evidence in front of us. I have an unrebutted and substantial piece of evidence that makes you pro-mafia in my mind. Why would I back down from that until you can rebut it? Why would backing down be pro-town? No one else has suggested another candidate of equal magnitude besides Caller and I'm pretty sure I was all for having his face turn into a nuclear foam. So to sum up; You're around 4 inches short of average. Feel free to grow a bit before claiming you hit puberty... kid. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 11:40 Zona wrote: Is there a point to continue to drag out the day with a fake nuke? You really antsy to get your night hits in or something? Daytime is town time. After my nuke fake is confirmed we can reliably use me in future days without things going all crazy-like and needing someone else to fill the role. I think that alone is big news. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 12:01 d3_crescentia wrote: I don't what this is just going to be another repeat of Red Army mafia -_- Nah. I'd suggest that I'm anti-nuked and that tree.hugger is nuked by someone who would preferably have a single nuke and no other abilities. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 12:11 Versatile wrote: Please take responsibility if it lands. You and tree.hugger both. do not waste our anti-nukes on L. let him die. please lord, i do not want to read that letter again. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 12:14 Versatile wrote: responsibility for? don't worry, i'll bring you some apple pie in hell Sounds sexy. But seriously, take responsibility. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 12:24 tree.hugger wrote: Here's what I have to say: - If L is not mafia, he might be saved. - If L is mafia, he will definitely be saved. - There is no way this nuke will be as successful as I wish it could be. But at least it might make L a little more friendly and constructive. Or out of the game. Either would be nice. - Opz is definitely another great candidate for being mafia. If L flips green, then he's probably not. If L flips red (and again, I think the odds are that we will not see this happen) then he's more probably mafia. - If you're town aligned, and pondering saving L, don't do it, and let's see what happens. - If you nuke me, I will nuke you back. Let the justness of my action be decided in a vote tomorrow, or in a mafia hit tonight. *** Back to basketball. I'll be back a little later. Here's what I have to say: The town has a 100% lynch policy on people that nuke others, so kill this kid first, Versatile second. If I don't die, I guess just him would be okay. tree.hugger saying he'll counter nuke people that fire nukes at him given the reasoning posted in the last 8 pages or so is nearly 100% indication that he is indeed mafia. Townies would not nuke in response to the town acting on its own rules. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 12:28 Versatile wrote: why are you telling people to nuke me? take it back. You told people not to anti-nuke me. If I die, you'll see my role and you should die as responsibility right there. That said, the only person I think should be nuked is tree.hugger. Nuking players get nuked. This is the exact type of stupidity that I wanted to avoid by going through with the threat to nuke RoL. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
The kid nuked me because I was honest about not having any nukes and he realized I completely eviscerated his arguments. Given my propensity for driving busses, he figured he'd have died tomorrow regardless and took his shot now. A complete joke of a player. Someone with a nuke should hit him right now, and someone with an anti-nuke should save me. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 13:11 tree.hugger wrote: Note reason #1. Also—I mean—I offered to be nice to L and treat him like an adult, and he chose different path. So yes, about half of it was because he was getting on my nerves. Amendment to the post above. Third reason: As I've said multiple times throughout the thread, when L is posting, important town discussions literally get shut down, and L moved the discussion to whatever inane thing he thinks is important. L really doesn't help the town much at all. Also, about my pledge to vote for myself, if L flips green, I'll vote for myself as soon as possible. If the votes don't exist, then I'll move my vote, but I think it's more sincere if I kick off my own bandwagon. 1)You can't talk about something else? 2)You were trying to treat me like an adult while throwing insults out literally every line, calling my posts spam, redundant, calling me a kid, etc? I specifically relegated all of my bile towards you into a small TL;DR section so that my arguments would be direct and objective. Your pledge is similarly redundant in the REAL sense of the word; the town's response to rogue nukes is to kill the person nuking. You should be nuked immediately. | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On March 26 2010 13:17 tree.hugger wrote: Your ego knows no bounds does it? Ever considered a job writing cheap crime thrillers? What ego? Nuking nukers was the plan that was agreed upon and that we were going to move on before someone saved caller and had RoL's nuke delay stopped. What's the point of this post other than to piss me off? You argue against vague replies earlier, yet this isn't the only one you make against me. I'm going to 100% ignore posts from you from this point forward unless you actually deal with one of the central points in my arguments against you (and that's highly unlikely given how poor your analysis and self-justification has been thusfar). Our back and forth is becoming thread clogging. | ||
| ||