|
On November 04 2010 08:53 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
if any other detective found a mafia DON'T COME FORWARD UNTIL TOMORROW
we only have 1 lynch tonight. if a DT hasn't checked Pandain (i doubt it), it must be done tonight. time to analyse coagulations posts :D
can't we have 2? i think we should use those double lynch to our advantage and maybe take care of a suspect + a lurker?
|
On November 04 2010 08:56 infinitestory wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 08:56 Glasse wrote:On November 04 2010 08:53 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
if any other detective found a mafia DON'T COME FORWARD UNTIL TOMORROW
we only have 1 lynch tonight. if a DT hasn't checked Pandain (i doubt it), it must be done tonight. time to analyse coagulations posts :D can't we have 2? i think we should use those double lynch to our advantage and maybe take care of a suspect + a lurker? we vote on double lynch, but it'll be used during the NEXT day cycle
oh is that how it works? then i guess we should vote yes so we can use everything we can :S
we can always not lynch a second person anyway right?
|
On November 04 2010 09:00 KtheZ wrote:
I say we double lynch coag and pandain.
I say you are a lurker that came out of nowhere and should explain yourself? Not that I disagree, but i'm curious. I know why on coag, but i have not been paying much attention to pandain for a lot of pages
|
On November 04 2010 09:02 infinitestory wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 09:02 Glasse wrote:On November 04 2010 09:00 KtheZ wrote:
I say we double lynch coag and pandain. I say you are a lurker that came out of nowhere and should explain yourself? Not that I disagree, but i'm curious. I know why on coag, but i have not been paying much attention to pandain for a lot of pages kthez made a large post about two posts above the one you quoted
how the fuck did i manage to miss that?
|
On November 04 2010 09:07 L wrote:
Given my prior assessment it seems like I was right. Most mafia are just trying to keep under the radar.
This is true. I was looking through profiles and players with fewest posts are :
veldril, kenpachi, kthez and rebirthoflegend(i think he was subbed in, so that could be why)
I'm pretty sure there has to be 1 red in those 4 lurkers
On November 04 2010 09:04 KtheZ wrote:
Well I just made a post on why pandain, but please, ask me questions rather than tell me to explain myself; I dont really know what "explaining myself" involves saying.
sorry i didnt see it  , i kind of agree now though.
|
On November 04 2010 09:11 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I'm positive Veldril is Town. He brought up lynching Divinek out of the blue.
If we lynch an inactive it should be RoL or Kenpachi
I'm also really uncomfortable about how few posts infundibulum has
THATS THE NAME, i looked earlier and couldn't remember who my 5th was lol
well thats infundibulum (wtf kind of name is that )
|
On November 04 2010 09:18 Nemesis wrote:
Oops it seems that my post didn't go through
Should we use double lynch next day phase then?
Well here's how i see it :
If we use double lynch every days from now on we will use it on day 4-5-6. Game could be over by then, or very close to it.
Taking the chance of lynching 2 suspicious players can harm the town, but it can also be very helpful. < this is why we have to vote.
I personally think using all our tools is a good idea.
|
On November 04 2010 09:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Alright, here's an assignment. We're gonna analyse all the posts about Pandain to see who else defended him suspiciously. We're all gonna do a certain amount of the posts in this thread. Each person will do a different page. There are 6 pages of Pandain posts. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/search.php?q="pandain"&t=c&f=31&u=&gb=dateI'll take the third page, because I like the number 3 and its around the middle of the game when he is campaigning. Someone call each page, go post by post and post any interesting findings that might lead to other mafia. Now we get aggressive. Line em up and knock em down.
ill take page 1!
|
Alright, analysis of people that defended pandain suspiciously on page 1:
Coag had 2 posts where he was trying to make people vote for pandain because he's transparent and can't manipulate people so if he was mafia it would be obvious.
Didnt quote the 2 posts, not really important... nothing was super suspicious, to me at least.
|
On November 04 2010 11:14 Coagulation wrote:
NO I LIED! IM ACTUALLY A SUPER DT AND KNOW EVERYONES ALIGNMENT
STOP VOTING ME
I CHECKED MYSELF
IM NOT MAFIA
oh ok then
|
ugh, i've been against drh since day 1 cuz he can't back up his role confirm. It's mostly a placeholder vote anyway.
I fail to see how my role claim makes me red still... I'll say the same argument i brought up before : why would i waste such an opportunity to cause trouble if i was red? i just don't get it...
As for ideas, since the first part of the radio message seems to be related to a role, it could be either be from mod or from whoever else is broadcasting with me. I wish i knew who it was though. This is why i want pms 
|
On November 04 2010 23:34 CubEdIn wrote:
I'm not saying you're red based on your role claim.
I'm saying you might be red due to the fact that you haven't (and still aren't) giving us full information about your role and the exact mechanics behind it. Maybe it's something we can exploit.
Also due to your voting pattern.
Heck, you might have some sort of wacky handicap of having to vote for your team mate, and you could both be reds!
As I said, it's a very long shot, but I cannot convince myself that you're blue given the circumstances, and the way that you claimed, and the fact that there are enticing comments in the radio posts.
Well as of my last post about my role you do have all the info about it. You even know the character limit
Who do you want me to vote for to prove i cant only vote for teamate?
|
On November 04 2010 23:50 Glasse wrote:
Who do you want me to vote for to prove i cant only vote for teamate?
ugh, re reading that made me realize some people will go OMG HE SAID HE HAS TEAM MATES
no. i went with cubedin's words.
|
On November 05 2010 00:46 CubEdIn wrote:
Again, I'm not asking you to do anything, including changing your vote.
I was just saying it looks odd.
Oh, wait, there is one thing:
Can you not say anything at all in the Loony Radio thing?
I'm asking both if it is possible and if you are willing to. It might tell us more about the mechanics.
k, i won't send anything next night
|
On November 05 2010 01:25 CubEdIn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2010 01:01 Glasse wrote:On November 05 2010 00:46 CubEdIn wrote:
Again, I'm not asking you to do anything, including changing your vote.
I was just saying it looks odd.
Oh, wait, there is one thing:
Can you not say anything at all in the Loony Radio thing?
I'm asking both if it is possible and if you are willing to. It might tell us more about the mechanics. k, i won't send anything next night That would be interesting, but make sure you don't get modkilled or anything for not playing your role. 
I was planning on sending a pm saying "not broadcasting anything tonight" so he knows i didnt just forget
|
On November 05 2010 02:30 CubEdIn wrote:No I meant, just re-read your role so it doesn't say something like "You have to" instead of "you can". Or you could just ask Artanis. I got a lot of ideas going on at the moment, but 90% of them revolve around whether or not Coagulation flips red.
it says you may, so i guess that answers that
|
day is ending tonight right? i can't remember :3
|
So i didn't read everything about the discussion, who is confirmed mafia if coag is red? was it pandain? cubedin?
|
On November 06 2010 12:03 youngminii wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2010 11:56 Nemesis wrote:On November 06 2010 11:48 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
coagulation isn't good enough to play mind games Yes, but you are forgetting that his mafia buddies could be telling him what to say. How many times have you been scum and your scum buddies have dictated every single thing you say? Not many, most times they would let you do what you want.
I've never been scum myself but i feel that if they know someone sucks ass they could tell him to not talk much and tell him what to answer to posts against him?
|
On November 07 2010 08:32 infinitestory wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2010 08:30 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Well we could lynch Pandain and another person not on your checks to check your own sanity. We had a plan to lynch Padain anyway so it almost works out that we can confirm your sanity, and it's a safeguard to understand that you aren't lying, after all. Let's try not to lynch someone who's more likely town than mafia at the moment.
I really hate lurkers, i feel like there HAS to be a mafia hiding in them
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
