|
On December 01 2010 02:24 deconduo wrote:
Someone has a spirit inside them waiting to come out. (1)
Ability activated upon death.
Somebody fell in love.
Somebody has been born anew with the power of love. (2, maybe 3)
Lovers
A child is playing in the yard. (4)
Innocent Child
A man with a black hood stands in an alley.
The man in the black hood found his axe. (5)
Executioner/Mason
Someone just got a pharmacology degree from Liquidia University.
Another student got his Pharmocology degree. (6,7)
Pharmacists/Nerfed Medics
A man begs in the street. (8)
Hobo?
Two men with a third eye, one tells the truth and the other lies (9,10)
Sane/Insane detective
10 role clues given so far. That leaves 2 more if only town clues are given, 5 more otherwise.
The mason thing actually makes sense. Remember that Coagulation revealed his role when he said:
On November 30 2010 07:15 Coagulation wrote:
My role relies 100% on me running a town circle. DocH did this on purpose I swear..
|
Ok, so, I mean, who do we want to lynch? Is the choice pretty much Fishball or Aidnai?
|
Vatican City State1650 Posts
So. I was given express permission to post this (i.e. it's not a roleclaim) by DrH.
I was given PM notification that my first vote was invalidated and I have to switch my vote.
There are 2 possibilities:
1. There's some hidden mechanic in the game that nullifies a random vote each day (not likely)
2. or there is a blue/red role that can invalidate a vote
I'm leaning towards #2. Given the power of such a role, and given that it was done to reduce the number of votes in the co-leader to be lynched, I think it is likely that it is a mafia role.
So for now, I'm forced to switch, so I'm changing my vote to the default:
##Vote: Coagulation
But I consider Fishball to be highly, highly suspect.
*Note: I know that reds can now use this information as an excuse to change their votes later on. But if we can catch 1 mafia in day 1, I think it is all worth it.
|
Vatican City State1650 Posts
Also note the vote list going around:
orgo votes fishball
annul votes fishball
Coag votes fishball
Fish votes RoL
ghrur votes RoL
SR votes coag
jcarl votes coag
RoL votes aidnai
Not voted:
barundar
Aidnai
deconduo
pandain
kingjames01
Node
SouthRawrea
Glasse/Aeres
My name is listed as the first name to vote, and the first name for Fishball. But I was actually the second vote for Fishball.
Thus, consider this: the vote-nullifier looked at this list, and took off the first name that voted for Fishball - again pointing to his possibility as a red.
|
Huh? Coag is still on the list.
|
On December 01 2010 04:48 orgolove wrote:
So. I was given express permission to post this (i.e. it's not a roleclaim) by DrH.
I was given PM notification that my first vote was invalidated and I have to switch my vote.
There are 2 possibilities:
1. There's some hidden mechanic in the game that nullifies a random vote each day (not likely)
2. or there is a blue/red role that can invalidate a vote
I'm leaning towards #2. Given the power of such a role, and given that it was done to reduce the number of votes in the co-leader to be lynched, I think it is likely that it is a mafia role.
So for now, I'm forced to switch, so I'm changing my vote to the default:
##Vote: Coagulation
But I consider Fishball to be highly, highly suspect.
*Note: I know that reds can now use this information as an excuse to change their votes later on. But if we can catch 1 mafia in day 1, I think it is all worth it.
A vote-invalidator? Sounds like the Booger role that Coagulation had in Insane, except the targeted voter can choose someone else to vote instead of being negated entirely. This'll make it difficult to reach a majority vote.
I'm interested, Orgolove: why do you say that Coagulation is the "default"?
|
Nevermind, I missed your first post above.
|
Vatican City State1650 Posts
On December 01 2010 04:58 Aeres wrote:
I'm interested, Orgolove: why do you say that Coagulation is the "default"?
Because he's a spammer and pretty unlikely to be helpful to town given his past predispositions, whether he's a blue or a red. -_-
|
On December 01 2010 05:01 orgolove wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 04:58 Aeres wrote:
I'm interested, Orgolove: why do you say that Coagulation is the "default"? Because he's a spammer and pretty unlikely to be helpful to town given his past predispositions, whether he's a blue or a red. -_-
Coagulation may be blunt and sometimes hostile, but he's not an idiot. I don't think a policy lynch on Coag is the wisest move to make... but we'll see.
|
##Vote Ghrur
Ghrur basically hasn't been contributing at all, yet mantains the illusion of such a thing. Very mafia tell imo. Furthormore tells everyone to contribute and scum hunt yet doesn't do it himself, contradiction.
His posts:
On November 30 2010 07:39 ghrur wrote:
I'm assuming PMs are allowed right?
rules
On November 30 2010 07:53 ghrur wrote:Op, so PMs aren't allowed.  Darn. WELL... that kinda throws a wrench in my plans.
Okay?
On November 30 2010 08:39 ghrur wrote:
I'd suggest we just pressure people through voting and discuss our opinions on who looks suspicious or not. Also, having a plan for town to organize around is NEVER bad. I mean, if we can get a town circle, all the better right? Let's see, so far those who haven't posted:
Barundar
RoL
Jcarlsoniv
annul
Pandain (wut?)
Well, might as well be bold.
##Vote RebirthofLegend
This I don't like. First of all, note he voted RoL because he hasn't posted. Yet even though he's posted alot now, he hasn't changed. That is VERY suspicious in my eyes. Furthormore, he does what mafia like to do, which is "contributing without really contributing." He tells everyone to say who they think is scum, and doesn't do it himself. Mafia love to do this,have town be the heads of each lynch, while staying in the shadows themselves. Makes it much easier to put blame on someone later.
On November 30 2010 09:59 ghrur wrote:Why would we want to do that? Dr. H is basically giving us unlimited time to get a GOOD lynch in, and you want to rush it? Why? I think we can hit a mafia day 1 giving our low player pool if we really try.  Cmon Decond, I KNOW you have mafia sniping skills. ^_^
Again, pushes for decon to help without helping himself. Going further, lays accusations on a player for a very weak reason. Mafia does this ALOT. They try to always make players seem suspicious for any single post. Decon says we should rush to day 2? Ghrur lays suspicion on him. This post does nothing except suggest decon is mafia, without even doing that.
On November 30 2010 11:42 ghrur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 10:17 deconduo wrote:On November 30 2010 09:59 ghrur wrote:Why would we want to do that? Dr. H is basically giving us unlimited time to get a GOOD lynch in, and you want to rush it? Why? I think we can hit a mafia day 1 giving our low player pool if we really try. Cmon Decond, I KNOW you have mafia sniping skills. ^_^ I was mostly kidding <3 Seems more like we switched alignments. >_>
What? Ghrur explain this.
|
Vatican City State1650 Posts
Note that I'm not arguing for a policy lynch on coagulation here - I think it's pretty clear that he's a blue.
Instead of focusing on him, I'd concentrate more on the existence of a vote-switcher and Fishball.
|
hehe orgo why no comment?
|
On December 01 2010 05:31 Pandain wrote:hehe orgo why no comment?
...On what?
|
On December 01 2010 04:48 orgolove wrote:
So. I was given express permission to post this (i.e. it's not a roleclaim) by DrH.
I was given PM notification that my first vote was invalidated and I have to switch my vote.
There are 2 possibilities:
1. There's some hidden mechanic in the game that nullifies a random vote each day (not likely)
2. or there is a blue/red role that can invalidate a vote
I'm leaning towards #2. Given the power of such a role, and given that it was done to reduce the number of votes in the co-leader to be lynched, I think it is likely that it is a mafia role.
So for now, I'm forced to switch, so I'm changing my vote to the default:
##Vote: Coagulation
But I consider Fishball to be highly, highly suspect.
*Note: I know that reds can now use this information as an excuse to change their votes later on. But if we can catch 1 mafia in day 1, I think it is all worth it.
On December 01 2010 04:50 orgolove wrote:
My name is listed as the first name to vote, and the first name for Fishball. But I was actually the second vote for Fishball.
Thus, consider this: the vote-nullifier looked at this list, and took off the first name that voted for Fishball - again pointing to his possibility as a red.
On December 01 2010 05:06 orgolove wrote:
Note that I'm not arguing for a policy lynch on coagulation here - I think it's pretty clear that he's a blue.
Instead of focusing on him, I'd concentrate more on the existence of a vote-switcher and Fishball.
I think it is very interesting that you are suggesting that a Vote Nullifier role exists in this game. DrH has not hinted at such a role yet. However, there are still possibly 2 roles that have not been described.
This could be a ruse to change your vote and cast suspicion. Under that assumption, you seem to be encouraging the lynch on Fishball without having to 'get your hands dirty.'
##Vote orgolove
On December 01 2010 05:01 orgolove wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 04:58 Aeres wrote:
I'm interested, Orgolove: why do you say that Coagulation is the "default"? Because he's a spammer and pretty unlikely to be helpful to town given his past predispositions, whether he's a blue or a red. -_-
As an aside, it really bothers me how much people pick on Coagulation. Everyone is entitled to play mafia in a safe environment. Although Coagulation has made some dubious plays and has been called down for it numerous times, he is still here. He's faced automatic lynches, pseudo-'random' votes and personal attacks. This is not the only example of such an occurrence but it is the latest that I've seen.
The Mafia games are read by prospective players as well and viewing such hostile attacks against a specific player is not inviting.
|
uh
orgolove could just be changing his vote as a way to get more people onto fishball and off of ROL... i mean without a "vote changer" role existing.
|
and lol KJ, good to see you and i finally agree that hostile attacks have no place in mafia games
|
I'm highly doubtful that Fishball is mafia, to be honest. It's too easy for mafia to remove a vote from him and instantly claim that only mafia would do such a thing. I realize it's a really WIFOM-y argument, but I think a wagon started forming on him way too early and way too easily.
I'm not sold on aidnai or anybody else yet, but I'm not about to try and get Fishball lynched.
|
On December 01 2010 06:04 annul wrote:
and lol KJ, good to see you and i finally agree that hostile attacks have no place in mafia games
sigh, this again. Attacking someone's arguments is perfectly acceptable. Pointing out logical fallacies is not a character assault and shouldn't be taken as such.
In a competitive game, like Mafia, it is sometimes necessary to try and unnerve someone so they make mistakes. I don't condone that type of behaviour in real life though.
However, this is not the forum to discuss this issue. Your game is still going on and if you're going to continue to try and 'get in the last word', then you're going to make a mistake and then try to blame me after. Save it for the post-game discussion.
Anyway, I'm just pointing out that if Coagulation or anyone else makes a mistake, it's fine to point it out, after the fact. However, players are using POTENTIAL mistakes BEFORE they are made as an excuse to lynch.
Honestly, if you can't find a better reason to lynch someone, there's probably a good reason.
|
see that is the problem, you do not need to "unnerve" anyone into anything. this is a competitive game yes, but use your competition to win people over on argumentation, not insults, etc. all i am saying is that if you agree with that, finally, then good, we can continue without problems
but i do find it very funny, the above post of yours. timely, indeed.
at least you dont condone it IRL, that is good.
PS not trying to "get the last word" - only commend you for your sudden change of heart in playstyle
|
there is a big difference between "that argument is bad because X" and "you make bad arguments"
big big difference
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
