On March 24 2011 11:31 annul wrote:
hi, elect me for mayor
i am a townie with no abilities apparently (???), so give me something to do pl0x.
First Post! Whoop dee do not much to see here, he’s running because he’s town and wants something to do.
On March 24 2011 12:10 annul wrote:
why would the reds and blacks need to give up their entire team to counter a blue claim?
This is in response to Bum’s plan to have a police claim. Note that Bum has not claimed yet he is merely suggesting a plan. Bum states that in order for someone to refute the police claim they would have to expose their entire team and Annul doesn’t understand why. At this point I have no problem with this post, it’s a legitimate question and Bum’s plan is only 20 posts old.
On March 24 2011 12:17 annul wrote:
here is why you should vote for me
we all have bad games. i have bad games. everyone has bad games.
that said, if i am having a GOOD game, i completely fucking rape the opposition.
there is probably just as much a chance that a mayor has a good game as a bad one, so let's give me the chance to have a good game this time and proceed to roll the fuck on the reds and blacks. i am just coming off of a good game and i feel the wheels still turning.
Here’s why we should vote for him, because he’s good when he has a good game. Well that’s generally true for most of us, we’re good when we have a good game
. At this point he hasn’t got me convinced at all. His two good games have come as mafia not town.
On March 24 2011 12:23 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 12:19 bumatlarge wrote:On March 24 2011 12:17 annul wrote:
here is why you should vote for me
we all have bad games. i have bad games. everyone has bad games.
that said, if i am having a GOOD game, i completely fucking rape the opposition.
there is probably just as much a chance that a mayor has a good game as a bad one, so let's give me the chance to have a good game this time and proceed to roll the fuck on the reds and blacks. i am just coming off of a good game and i feel the wheels still turning.
And what if you are having a good game as scum? Then you will fucking rape the opposition? I'm not liking the my odds
its ceteris parabis (from your POV) either way.
80% chance (it's 100% since i am a green, but from your POV) to mackmain on them hos? i mean as mayor its one of the most criticized positions in the game, so if i am a red it will really be obvious and you can take me down. but youll see i am not a red very easily, especially since i am in item game and we can confirm me + 3 others quickly in the game
Um Annul I’d like to point out that if you have a good game as scum it’s almost impossible to catch you, Haunted ring a bell anyone? So no, that refutes your first point. Secondly you claim it’ll be easy to find you town because you’re in the item game. Interesting claim, I’d love to hear more.
On March 24 2011 12:25 annul wrote:
in fact think about this: i presume mayor cant die to night kills while bodyguards are still up right? isnt it smartest to elect an item game player then? this way, the red and blacks in item game wont night 1 KP on the other item game players (since blacks cant die at night, and while reds can, it's a 1/6 chance to harm more than hurt)?
This is a good point. Electing a town item player would help ensure town victory. I’d be all aboard for electing an item game player if they could give me a good reasoning of why they’re town or how they’re going to lynch or other good mayorly stuff like that. However at this time Annul hasn’t done that.
On March 24 2011 12:27 annul wrote:
we have to expect night 1 kills to be at least 1 item game player. black will shoot an item game player to better their chances to win the pot, and reds actually would be smart to not shoot the item game player, since they CANT night kill the blacks, and they need the most days as possible to get town to lynch the black in the item game player. so if we want black to not have a very good chance to win item game, give mayor to an item game player.
of course it's 1/6 to give it to the black, but the benefit (no night kill) is irrel to them anyway since they are all bulletproof
This is speculation but I don’t feel it’s unfounded. The logic is there and it makes sense. But tell me Annul;
why should we elect you other than the fact you’re an item player. He’s made his point about the item game but he hasn’t proved himself. For all we know he could be a red trying to get some protection so he doesn’t get killed by the blacks to quickly.
On March 24 2011 13:02 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 12:53 bumatlarge wrote:
3) We have access to more then a circle. I won't disclose anymore until it's clear I am going to win.
you lie.
you only are given your alignment, not a role in PM until day 1 begins.
grats on being caught in a lie. mayor needs to be killing bumatlarge with his kill.
Ahha! Bum is lying because claimed to have access to more than a circle. Now this does seem like an odd claim to make and I’d appreciate Bum expounding on it. However it’s not conclusive that Bum is lying. We don’t know what was in Bum’s PM so there could have been a passage about other abilities as a
group not necessarily the individual but the group. Either way, it’s not conclusive that Bum is lying and it’s certainly not enough to lynch him for. On the other hand I would appreciate and explanation from Bum as it is the one hole in his story I’ve found.
On March 24 2011 13:23 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 13:12 bumatlarge wrote:
And annul, if I am not blue, then a real blue can come out and counter claim me. If there is a reason why he would not, then enlighten me. My alignment PM gave me more then my alignment. That is all I will say until I am mayor.
could be that maybe the blues have powers with potential to get more than 1 red/black over the course of a game, that sacrificing one of their 4 to take out one of the 10 is a bad move to make? there are lots of reasons why none of the FOUR blues would step out against one of the ten possible red/blacks.
also, your claim that alignment PMs contained more than just the alignment means that the mods have misled us already, which they should not be doing. ;\
is town's win condition to eliminate all red/black? OK Bum asks a very good question. Annul answers that the blues may have a power which they don’t want to reveal yet. Wait a second, didn’t he just yell at Bum for talking about what blue powers exist? He’s saying that the blues may have this power. That’s fine let’s say they do. However by his own argument they shouldn’t know about it yet thus removing their block of counter claiming Bum. This is the first logical disconnect we see; Annul is saying that the blues may have this power, however he’s also saying there’s no way for them to know about it. If they don’t know about it then how would they know not to claim in order to protect it?
On March 25 2011 04:32 annul wrote:
here is the problem with bum's plan
if you are a red, you want to take down the blacks. you know that a blue's interests are split between killing red and black. not ONLY red. if you are a red, the only night harm you have is from the blacks (other than vig etc). so you have an incentive to wait.
if bum is a red, then a real blue knows that the blue team (as empowered greens, essentially) has 4 players to take down 10. A ONE FOR ONE TRADE IS A BAD TRADE FOR A BLUE IN A GAME WITH 10 "SCUM" AND 20 NONSCUM. bum knows this. the black team cant know if bum is red or blue here (if he isnt black) and the red team cant know if bum is black or blue (if he isnt red). the existence of the second scum team makes this entire logic very different than it would otherwise be. the fact one scum team is bulletproof also fucks with the logic.
it is not so ironclad that a lack of a CC means bum is a blue. that is all i am arguing. i am also arguing that bum got an alignment PM and not a role PM, so his claim that there is "more to the cops except a PM circle" is very very very suspicious. further, this could be a play to draw medic help knowing he is a red/black and he might as well just steal a medic. who knows. many ways that bum can not be honest here.
all of the above can be added to the fact that i have proven earlier the logic behind giving mayor to an item game player. item game players are already going to be the first kill targets at night. we need to have the chance to give us as good a chance to win item game as the black team has.
tl;dr not counterclaiming bum, but the fact no CC exists doesnt mean he is a blue, and in fact it makes logical sense for there to not be a CC. also, vote an item game player mayor, even if not me. but vote me <3
This seems to be the crux of Annul’s argument and what forced the thread past 50 pages. He doesn’t trust Bum because he doesn’t think the blue team would go for a 1/1 trade. He rampantly speculates about the killing habits of the red and blue teams as well as discusses potential anti town abilities. All this however is basically moot. He’s making assumptions that the blue team would not come out a kill Bum with a CC. Well while he was busy speculating red/black powers he forgot that the town has powers to. If someone came out and CC’d Bum it wouldn’t be a 1/1 trade because we could medic protect the outed blue. We wouldn’t even have to kill anyone until we had confirmation, we could wait and DT check Bum or the accuser so we were absolutely sure. Town is not helpless this game, remember we are all technically “Blue” it’s just that four of us can PM.
Annul also revisits his “Bum lied” argument. Remember this was already proved to be a case of bad logic. He also reiterates his “let’s elect an item player.” The logic is sound but the execution is getting more flawed by the post.
On March 25 2011 07:12 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 04:56 chaoser wrote:
annul, you're thinking of it as 10 v 20 when really it's 6 v 4 v 20. Either side is going to be thinking of it's own interests and so red and black really have no desire to overstep their roles and try to take one for the team and fake claim and let it benefit the other team (red/black).
it is 6 v 4 v 20, but the 4 is going to be focus firing the 20 (since they know that if more of the reds are alive, more chance for town to lynch THEM than the blacks, since town still needs to get rid of ALL of them, and red poses no danger to black at night). so in that sense, it is going to be 10 v 20 in most situations. to the 4, there is no difference between the 20 and the 6. it's 4 v 26 to them. and to the red, it's 6 v 24, since the 6 CANNOT kill the 4 at night anyway.
This is more rampant speculation about killing habits of the anti town teams. To be honest I don’t see the point of this. As town we need to kill all enemies, black or red. Who the blacks and reds are shooting at doesn’t really matter to me as long as we’re killing them. He also assumes that somehow the blacks and reds will be able to tell themselves apart but I didn’t spot anything like that in the OP.
On March 25 2011 07:14 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 05:00 Tackster wrote:
Annul
- hasn't posted policy on d1 lynch
- poor listing of abilities
- claimed by several not to have good scumhunting
rofl
1. my policy is "any item game player is better than current slate of candidates." given that, of course i am going to try to get the mayorship. my policy for determining lynch? kill who i think is black.
2. what abilities? nobody has any abilities yet.
3. [citation needed]
Ok fair enough, he thinks an item player should be elected, we get that. The second two points however are addressing his skills as a player. He doesn’t understand the first one and doesn’t believe the second one. At this point after going through his posts I can tell you he has done a poor job of listing his abilities as a scum hunter and Tack is right, several people had called into question his skills.
On March 25 2011 07:23 annul wrote:
in all seriousness
can ANYONE directly refute my logic i posted earlier about why giving the mayorship to an item game player is 200% better (for the long term) than otherwise?
mayor's day 1 lynch ability is irrelevant. it really is. the BODYGUARDS are the most important aspect of the mayorship. since blacks are already night immune, giving mayor to a black player is going to be no net loss (other than the fact their day 1 kill obviously wont be one of their own). but give mayor to a green player IN ITEM GAME means a significantly better chance that town wins the item game, since now we have a chance that 1 green gets just as much night protection as the black player has.
No you’re right, giving a
Townie from the item game mayorship would be ideal. However he’s again completely focusing on black players and he actually believes that
” giving mayor to a black player is going to be no net loss”. This right here is enough to lynch him imo. This is so blatantly anti town. Not only that, he’s completely forgotten how bad it would be if the mafia got the mayorship. This post is quite frankly appalling. He’s fine with anti town people having free reign over the first lynch and giving them body guards.
On March 25 2011 07:27 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 07:26 chaoser wrote:1. my policy is "any item game player is better than current slate of candidates." given that, of course i am going to try to get the mayorship. my policy for determining lynch? kill who i think is black.
@annul
Why only say kill who you think is black and not who you think is red or black
because black players can only die in the daytime, so in the item game, i want to take a swing at someone when i control the kill, so the town doesnt get misled and start voting to lynch people not in item game
He’s tunneling really hard core on this item game and he doesn’t even know what the items are yet.
On March 25 2011 07:32 annul wrote:
"obvious you were blue"
or
"obvious you set yourself up to appear as if you were blue"
he may or may not be blue. do not assume he automagically is.
This is fair; perhaps Bum was intentionally breadcrumbing as blue so he could “slip” later on… what’s the problem with that? Oh yeah the blues know who they are and could kill that with a simple CC which I’ve already shown wouldn’t hurt the blue team. Although I have to give him +1 for the use of automagically.
On March 25 2011 07:59 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 07:35 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On March 25 2011 07:27 annul wrote:On March 25 2011 07:26 chaoser wrote:1. my policy is "any item game player is better than current slate of candidates." given that, of course i am going to try to get the mayorship. my policy for determining lynch? kill who i think is black.
@annul
Why only say kill who you think is black and not who you think is red or black
because black players can only die in the daytime, so in the item game, i want to take a swing at someone when i control the kill, so the town doesnt get misled and start voting to lynch people not in item game
So why not aim for reds either? It shouldn't make a difference to kill red/black if all you want to do is get people looking at the item game players. You would only worry about hitting blacks more than reds if you were expecting KP to kill the red, which could only come from a black, or vigi-shot. If you killed the black, they have no reason to really kill players in the item game, outside of if they wanted to help mafia/town. So this is either bad logic, or a mafia-slip.
are you retarded?
the ONLY WAY we win the item game is to use a DAY kill (mayor kill or normal lynch) on the black player in item game (assuming no nonstandard abilities). therefore, of course i am going to try to find the black player in item game if i am elected mayor.
Whoa ad hominems are coming out. He’s neigh obsessed with this item game and killing the lone black player in it (even to the point of ignoring the mafia).
On March 25 2011 08:03 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 07:58 GMarshal wrote:
Wait, is this the sound of discussion dying out I hear? This is plainly unnaceptable, first of all FoS on all the players who have yet to post! I will be after your hides day 1, so be ready for it! Also even if it seems like Bum is the best vote I still want to see who people think he should lynch, for example annul seems to be very much against bum, do you people think this is because he is scum? or is he just a misguided townie?
it is because i caught him lying earlier.
he started his campaign with "the police force is more than just a PM circle, and that is all i can tell you."
only alignment PMs were sent. no role PMs were sent. how would he know of any abilities?
i mean i am looking at my alignment PM right now and pretty much all it says is "you're green; be patient." - implying more to come later. maybe this is different for me than everyone else because i am in item game and i have no normal abilities anyway, but i doubt it.
Remember everyone, the police force doesn’t know what powers they have therefore Bum must be lying but the reason the police force isn’t CCing Bum is because they have some kickass ability they don’t want to reveal… logical disconnect detected.
On March 25 2011 08:08 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 08:05 Rean wrote:
and how do we know that with you we're not voting said black player to be our mayor? that'd be awful now wouldn't it?
nominating the black player in item game doesn't LOSE us as much as we would GAIN by nominating a green in item game, if that makes sense. black already has nighttime immunity, which is what we are trying to get to green by nominating a green in item game.
the bad situation would be to nominate the red in item game, actually.
but since i am green and not red nor black, there isn't this problem <3
“Hey guys I’m fine with handing the first lynch and giving double night protection to someone who’s not town.” Glad you realize that nominating a red would be bad but remember way back up at the top of this post, you never really established yourself as protown. We’re just supposed to take your word… but not Bums?
On March 25 2011 08:18 annul wrote:
"since there's a 1:3 shot to get a red/black"
there's a 1:3 shot to get a red/black in the entire game as well.
"having a confirmed blue mayor is better than giving it to someone in the item game with a 33% chance of that someone being red/black"
1. i disagree with this premise on its face;
2. bum is NOT CONFIRMED. the lack of a counterclaim does not "confirm" him as a blue.
it is much better to have a protected player in item game to get a 4/6 better chance at SIX abilities than to protect someone who MIGHT be a blue and who might have ONE ability worth saving. i am thinking long term (as in, day 5 and beyond) and you are stuck in day 1. think big. this will be a very long game.
I think this is the post where Annul starts repeating himself. Mathematically it’s true that the item game and regular game are equal in terms of picking an anti town player so his argument just plain fails here. Also we’ve already gone over this, Bum is as good as confirmed because of the lack of counter claim (I already explained why a counter claim would work and not hurt the town). It would be nice to have a protected player in the item game but as I posted somewhere, it’s easy for the town to win the item, we just DT check until we find a green then protect that green and kill the reds. The red/blacks can’t kill people in the item game fast enough, the town is almost guaranteed (as guaranteed as Bum is blue I dare say
) to finding a townie to protect.
On March 25 2011 08:22 annul wrote:
also,
"- 66% shot of giving it to scum, and having said scum protected against blacks (if he turns out red)"
no. its 33% to give to scum; 16.6% chance to give to the black player which changes NOTHING in terms of his ability to win item game. the worst-case scenario is to give mayor to the red in item game, since that means black's optimal strat (to night kill the red) cant work. therefore, since it's really only a 1/6 chance of making a bad decision (mayor to red in item game), 1/6 chance to not really affect anything (relative to item game), and 4/6 to completely negate black's inherent advantage and possibly win us SIX (!!!!!!!!) new abilities to use as a team... why are you resisting against this?
Your tunneling is killing you here. You’re fine letting a black win the mayorship because “it doesn’t affect the item game.” This is quite frankly retarded. The black player now has triple night life practically, and also can decide the first lynch. Not only is electing a black bad (which you fail to see) but electing a red would be catastrophic. Which you admit is bad but isn’t enough to deter you. Well my friend, it’s enough to deter me.
On March 25 2011 08:26 annul wrote:
"The lack of a counter-claim DOES confirm him as blue. If things stay that way 'till the end of day one, then he is blue."
imagine this scenario:
1. hatter
2. multi-shot vig
3. mass medic
4. jack
would any of these 4 give themselves up in a trade 1:1 to take out ONE scum? of course not. each strong empowered player needs to use their abilities to take out MULTIPLE scum. in this game, for all intents and purposes, it's 10 scum vs 20 nonscum. that is 33% scum when standard play is 20% scum. 1:1 trades are no good here.
oh but wait… they don’t know their powers yet right?
On March 25 2011 08:46 annul wrote:
now that i have several people conceding my MATH is sound, can we all agree that an item game player should get the mayorship? therefore, can we stop sucking bum off?
if we can agree to this, now those of us IN ITEM GAME should be able to campaign without interference. if you think i am scum and want me to not get the mayorship, or if you think im just a bad who will waste the job, okay fine, dont vote for me. but at least frame it in that way.
NONONO the TOWN already has said we want someone confirmed. We don’t give two shits about math because no one in the item game is confirmed (and we can debate whether Bum is confirmed or not till the cows come home but the majority of the town is in agreement here and I’ve already outlined why a CC would be good for the blues if Bum is lyning).
On March 25 2011 08:56 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 08:53 deconduo wrote:On March 25 2011 08:44 annul wrote:
what?
are you just trolling or do you seriously think that its 50% chance for a "good" outcome in the actual game?
No, that wasn't a serious analysis. I was merely pointing out that I too can pull figures from my ass and say the maths are sound if they add up.
By electing a town mayor from the item game you do increase the chance of town winning it. That is obvious, but your other arguments are terrible.
-Electing mafia as mayor essentially is an autoloss in that case
-Electing a black is bad too. People are less inclined to lynch a mayor unless there is a lot more evidence against them, so it will increase his survivability.
Finally, and this is the big bit, we give up having a
100% clear mayor with a circle behind him.
argue directly against my math, then. don't try to skirt off with some flawed argument by analogy. tell me exactly how my math is wrong, not that it is possible to come up with wrong math. its quite possible. my math, however, is not wrong.
"electing a red mayor in item game is an auto loss." it would be very bad, yes, but not an auto-loss. but that is a 1/6 chance to happen. giving mayor to the black would be bad but only insofar as its bad for green to not have it. black gains nothing, relative to item game powers, with mayorship.
Your math doesn’t matter when it comes to confirmation. Electing a scum mayor is bad, glad we agree. Electing a black mayor is bad
BUT OH MY GOD CAN WE DROP THE RETARDED ITEM GAME You act like it’s the only thing that matters. News flash coming up, it would be REALLY bad were a black to get the mayor. I don’t give a damn if it changes nothing IN THE GOD DAMN ITEM GAME. I’m concerned about the rest of the town and if all you care about is the item game than I’m all for lynching you right now.
On March 25 2011 09:05 annul wrote:
i fully intended to say "kill the black."
if i am elected mayor, it would be suboptimal to kill the red in item game. i posted my math immediately when you challenged me originally, but YOU conveniently ignored that, too.
if anything, it is you who looks quite suspicious at the moment.
“It would be suboptimal to kill a red.” Yet another post I’d be willing to lynch you for
On March 25 2011 09:09 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 09:01 GMarshal wrote:
Ok, let me break it down for you then.
Lets take our premise, bum is one of 4 things 1.) Insane Townie, 2.) A Blue, 3.) Third Party 4.) Mafia
lets make Mafia and Third party one category as third party is pretty much like the mafia, except less interested in the mayorship, and lets eliminate one, becuase if thats the case I lose all respect for bum forever.
So bum is either 1.) a Blue 2.) Lying scum
with you up until this point.
Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 09:01 GMarshal wrote:
Lets assume he is Blue, then thats great we just elected a mayor with a blue circle and with who knows what powers, we gained an advantage, even assuming the precense of a role blocker its still a pretty good deal.
Lets assume he is red, then a blue WILL counterclaim (this is optimal play) we lynch one to figure out the alignment of the other, worst case, we lynch the blue and get a red tommorow, best case we have a confirmed blue for medic protects.
If a red counterclaims then we get the same scenario as above.
So essentialy we have a claimed mouthpeice for the blues, which we might have to sacrifice to kill scum if there is a counter claim.
Do you see it now? Its just logic...
if he is a blue, it is good that we elected a blue mayor, yes. but it would be BETTER if we elect a green in item game mayor. sure, if we cant get that, a blue mayor is a good thing. but with a 4/6 chance to get the green mayor in item game (and a 1/1 chance if you elect me!) then the chance to win SIX items is worth much much more to us than a blue mayor.
if he is a red, the blue will not necessarily counterclaim, again, for reasons ive stated multiple times in the thread. just for you, ill do it a 17th time: sacrificing a blue for ONE scum is a horrible trade when its 10 scum 20 nonscum; furthermore, the blues may have abilities worth much more in the long term than one scum death.
Already addressed all of this. Yes Bum is confirmed. No a CC would not hurt the blues. Yes it would be slightly better to have a green item mayor but damn son someone from that item game needs to step up quick and prove themselves more town than Bum to get my vote.
On March 25 2011 09:13 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 09:09 Jackal58 wrote:On March 25 2011 09:05 annul wrote:
i fully intended to say "kill the black."
if i am elected mayor, it would be suboptimal to kill the red in item game. i posted my math immediately when you challenged me originally, but YOU conveniently ignored that, too.
if anything, it is you who looks quite suspicious at the moment.
I have a great desire to kill scum. Their color doesn't really matter to me atm.
Your fixation is somewhat fascinating.
blacks can only die to lynch/mayor kill
reds can die to those PLUS black's KP.
therefore, we should try to find the black since we have to be the ones to pull the trigger on him.
This is a fair point. Yes if we had a red a black it would be better to lynch the black. However we should try and find ALL anti town players regardless of faction because we have to kill them all anyway. We shouldn’t tunnel on one color (which is what you’re doing).
On March 25 2011 09:27 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 09:13 CubEdIn wrote:
@ annul:
Let's come to a conclusion here.
It is good to pick a blue mayor.
It is BETTER to pick a green mayor from item game.
It is most horrible to pick a red mayor from item game.
It is "just bad" to pick a black mayor from item game.
So, you know, we have "better" against "horrible". Unless someone counter-claims, we have the blue. I don't want another game that ends in mass murder. So I'd rather NOT take the chance of picking that red, even if the odds are slim.
this is true, but understand that without giving mayor to a green in item game, we are conceding item game outright.
get over yourself, I think we just
might scrape out a win if we don’t win the item game, items are undoubtedly nice but I doubt they’re so OP that it’s auto lose for town if we don’t win the item game.
On March 25 2011 09:39 annul wrote:
ive responded to that earlier but perhaps it was indirect.
its strategic for the reds to not kill anybody in item game until the black player is dead. however, it's also strategic for the reds to not kill greens in item game once the black is dead (beyond 1 or 2 people in some situations). once its town + town + red, the red is not going to be killing towns (it forces the medic, which will make it smart for red to just go after non-IG players to get full use of KP). but if the black is alive, then this changes.
both the red and the green want to kill the black in item game in the daytime ASAP.
it is true once the black dies, all IG players are [relatively] safe.
your scenario presumes a medic. why wouldnt medic be on bum tonight if a green IG mayor is elected? red is not going to hit IG players (its actually a net loss for them), only the black will be doing this.
you know an awful lot about scum killing tactics don’t you. This post would probably warrant a FoS if it was by itself without the rest of your posts.
On March 25 2011 09:40 annul wrote:
"I don't remember who said it but a couple of pages back said "I want to lynch scum regardless of color." That's the attitude we need, town needs to kill reds as well. "
the fact that you say this, in light of the conversation we are CURRENTLY having, removes all of your credibility.
This quote was directed at me, I’m not even sure what it’s supposed to mean, I was just remarking on how I didn’t like your fixation with blacks. At that point I was definitely not voting for you because of your sever tunneling.
On March 25 2011 09:46 annul wrote:
but before this happens, EVERY SINGLE PLAYER in this game should take a good look at who is actively opposing me. if/when i flip green, you have at least a handful of scum on your hands.
i say this not to attempt to persuade people i am green or even that anyone in particular is scum. just remember who is fighting this tooth and nail.
So basically the whole town is scum then no?
On March 25 2011 09:46 annul wrote:
oh my fucking god tackster
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
ONE BLUE IS WORTH MORE TO THE TOWN THAN SACRIFICING HIMSELF TO GET RID OF ONE SCUM.
But he wouldn’t be sacrificing himself. For all the thinking you did on the math you should probably stop and consider possible town roles as well.
On March 25 2011 09:49 annul wrote:
hahahahahahah
ive only been arguing this entire time that bum is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT confirmed.
can he be blue? sure. is he CONFIRMED? of course not.
for all practical purposes he is
On March 25 2011 09:55 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 09:53 Tackster wrote:
i KNOW i shouldn't go on but i think we may be close to a breakthrough here...
Annul: Why isn't he confirmed? Give me a situation in which he isn't blue when:
There are no ccs
The blue players aren't afk
Just answer that question PLEASE
Stop answering it by telling me he IS blue and he is NOT confirmed and he COULD be blue.
Just tell me the situation in which he isn't blue given the constraints we're assuming
4 hatters on blue. 4 medics on blue. 2 hatters 2 medics. whatever.
pick one of many scenarios where the life of a blue is worth more than the life of ONE scum in a game with ten of them.
but they wouldn’t die…
On March 25 2011 10:01 annul wrote:
ho
ly
fuck
ing
shit.
do you just simply refuse to recognize the potential for blues to be worth more than 1 scum death? notice how not a SINGLE PLAYER has argued against that point, despite bringing it up repeatedly. please, decon. counter that point directly. please. dont straw man, dont ad hominem. tell me, is it not possible that a blue's life is worth more than that of ONE scum?
You’re sounding worshipful of blues which is heavily discouraged… also who said anything about dying?
On March 25 2011 10:15 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 12:53 bumatlarge wrote:
3) We have access to more then a circle. I won't disclose anymore until it's clear I am going to win.
remember this? how does he know he has access to more than just a circle, if only alignment PMs went out? that is what started my attack on him to begin with. notice how he only came out AFTER trying to push this meme regarding counterclaims?
oh yeah remember this? Remember that you have similarly bad logic associated with it?
On March 25 2011 10:23 annul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 10:20 GMarshal wrote:
So, if you had the lynch right now annul who would die?
not sure. probably walrus.
out of the blue we get Walrus. Wow… not sure what to say. I think this is a pretty dumb lynch, if you’re lynching him for lurking then there are a dozen better suspects. Also he’s in your precious item game, you don’t want to risk killing a townie and thus lowering our chance of winning it?
On March 25 2011 10:23 annul wrote:
but i havent actually analyzed anyone in IG yet
oh haha here’s the reasoning. He’ll just pick walrus because he felt like it… great trait to have as mayor.
On March 25 2011 10:27 annul wrote:
thats how coag plays every game regardless of color, nothing new there.
you take an opportunity to defend Coag who I feel has been pretty scummy so far. Nothing compared to you but scummy nonetheless.
On March 25 2011 10:50 annul wrote:
despite tack's inability to comprehend arguments (different from "disagreeing with an argument he comprehends")?
ridiculous ad hominem, the same could be said for yourself.
On March 25 2011 11:10 annul wrote:
okay
every claim i had about item game? i retract it
this item is horrible. winning 5 other items this bad wont do us shit.
oh… wow… you just wasted 100 posts and you realized oops, it’s not that good. This is probably the stupidest thing I’ve ever witnessed.
EPT
