EPTClosed Casket Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
I am heavily drunk atm so I shall play after work (i do a 9-? shift) and should have roughly a full day to catch up / participate. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 25 2011 18:03 Radfield wrote: I also disagree with some kind of voting pressure platform. We don't need to "pressure" lurking players, we need to lynch them. It's post or die in this set-up, as anything in between screws us in the endgame. Any player coasting Day 1, or setting "traps" etc is playing sub-optimally, as this is not a normal game. You actually do need to pressure lurkers untop of lynching them. See if they don't talk and you kill them whoever pushes their death we learn nothing of really if there is a coroner role. However, if we have the joy of seeing them talk, then find out what they are later via some form of coroner role, we learn lots of info's. Hell just getting them talking gives us info on their possible alignment / alignment of others. All discussion in a setup like this is good, and you want those "lurkers" input on shit too. On June 25 2011 20:21 Radfield wrote: "Shaped up" seems a little strong considering it was his first post.... Disagreement is fine. However, my intention is to try to avoid a no-lynch for Day 1. The likelyhood of being able to muster 10 votes on an active red player is next to zero for Day 1, as any case will be slim, and there will be 3 other reds directing suspicion in other ways. However, I'll admit that I forgot this was a Night 0 start, so that makes a Day 1 mafia lynch more likely. However, it's true that I don't think a no-lynch is all that bad in this set-up, Particularly a Day 1 no-lynch. With no-flip, we learn less each lynch than normal. Also, we very likely have a ton of blue roles, and with only 1 KP to worry about, time is on our side. A no-lynch Day 1 likely just gives us an extra lynch later on in the game. To be clear: I am not advocating a no-lynch, simply pointing out that in this set-up of all set-ups, a no-lynch is not terrible. /confirm Man I feel like this is already the "Lets harass radfield" post. But again you post some gems of total wuhhhhhhh A no lynch is not "terrible" but it is also not good. For every No lynch we as a town achieve, their is less information we can analyze. Who was strongly associated with who, who pushed what, who was flip floppy, etc..... Someone dying gives us a ton of information. People who made a commitment to one side. Keep in mind in a setup with no flip, mafia are going to slip up far more often. There is no longer a huge risk if they support eachother more than normal, or an issue if one outs theirself early on. The only way we can hold anyone accountable is based on their opinions in thread. The best way to do this is via the lynch. People have to take a stand somewhere. A no lynch means no one has a strong stance on anything aside from "i think everyone is fine" In this game someone always has a suspicion. We act on those and argue, we don't sit back and let mafia pick us off one by one while we stick our hands over our ears and scream to drown people out. On June 26 2011 02:20 ilovejonn wrote: I'd have to agree with Radfield here. He is not advocating a no-lynch Day 1, it's just that no-lynch is very situational and it could be in favor of town, but it could also favor scum. If we can't actually reach an agreement as town with focus to lynch someone, then I don't see why no-lynch is a bad idea at all. Yes, if we hit scum that's great, but we can also hit a blue role or a townie, and with no-flip we can't really analyze those who pushed for the lynch unless a Coroner comes out to confirm the death of the player. Sure, it gives scum a free hit at night, but I'd rather the town gather their act together and have the game slower paced so we have more time to analyze things instead having 2 dead townies per cycle. However, I think during the beginning phases of the game we should just go with a lynch. When we do have more information mid and late game, where we think the person being put up for lynch is very likely townie, then we should apply the no-lynch then. Again, no-lynch is definitely situational and can favor both town and scum. On the matter of lynching lurkers/inactives, I am in agreement that lurkers will be a problem late game and we should get rid of them, but I'd also like to see with this player roster will there actually be any lurkers before we do make a decision on who to lynch. I'd prefer strongly we look for whoever seems the most scummy from their posts first and place that as a priority before lynching lurkers. In the case we really don't have any potential suspects them I am all for lynching lurkers. Claims. Don't take any claim to be true, blah blah, no-flip, common knowledge. I agree if there is a DT claiming a check we lynch the DT first. Then if a Coroner exists in this game (which I think it should since this is no-flip), confirm whether or not the person is actually DT before we advocate the lynch on the checked target. However, this also means DT's should not needlessly claim unless in a dire situation or you've nailed mafia goon. We don't need you to claim if you've found anything but scum period. Just emphasizing how little you have said here aside from going "I agree with radfield and now repost shit already said" On June 26 2011 05:03 GGQ wrote: It's been brushed over, but I just want to stress real quick that a 'no lynch' is not nearly as damaging to town when it's no flip and scum has only 1kp. Obviously we can't get in the habit of doing it, but we shouldn't be treating it as taboo. Also, on a personal note, let's make sure we are all engaging with the game right away rather than waiting until we are at 9 players left and wondering if it's lylo. -_- No lynch is always damaging. Even more so in this setup. In this situation a no lynch gives you less information by drastic amounts than in a regular game. Mafia are the only ones who benefit from a no lynch unless we are down to the mylo stage. I repeat, the mylo stage is the only case that no lynch is even acceptable. I currently have 3 players linked to the hip, man and im only on page 6 sick shit. On June 26 2011 07:45 GGQ wrote: -1 point for questioning the value of discussion without bringing up another topic -1 point for insulting other posters -1 point for outright refusing to contribute. 'I'm not here to give answers' ... ??? Yeah you kind of are, unless you don't want town to win. lawl? This post screams random accusation on someone who was being rude yet right. The discussion of No lynch is too predominant and lets people sheep without a valid opinion behind it. Fishball looks far better in this situation than you do ggq. On June 26 2011 10:55 chaoser wrote: Sup guys, finally found some free time to post. Let's see here, first of all Radfield's plan is pretty legit in my eyes and makes sense. While I was playing RoL's first experimental, my teammate and I just lurked our way through the game, saying only as much as was needed, sometimes even nothing for 24 hour stretches. I definitely feel like, in no-flip games, even more so than others that policy lynching lurkers is key. Now there's still a difference between lurker and inactive but in this group of people I think the lurkers will stick out like a sore thumb. I completely agree with the vigi of people who vote and then leave. At this point I'd say I agree with most Radfield's points and the rest are just minor semantic details. As such, I think having a medic on him for Night 0 would be pretty good. At the same time, I want to ask Scamp what he saw in Radfield's plan that suggested to him that it was pushing a no-lynch policy. You kinda posted a one liner and then never came back to respond to it so I was wondering if you could clarify. nom nom nom another radfield lover nom nom nom. No lynch is bad, period. I have said it, others have said it, and this is the first post of yours I have stumbled across. First one sheeping up to radfield no less! Also policy lynching in this setup is dumb as fuck. Mafia have no issue being active in a setup that does not punish them for it. Inactives or lurkers are far more likely to be disillusioned townies in this setup. In a game of veteran players as well you can never trust the idea of a policy lynch on players who could purposely be doing it to see who attacks them. This isn't newbie game 101, this is closed casket. On June 27 2011 18:53 Radfield wrote: I think it's very possible we have a Serial Killer. Any town KP would be directed at lurking players, not at an active player in the thread. I highly doubt anyone will claim either kill. Hi Chez. Did you kill GM last night? I agree 100%, but there is still plenty of time Day 1. I disagree. If I was a town vig I'd have shot into people being active as there is more information on them. People like you seem to prefer the idea of lynching lurkers so why would any vig want to shoot them. Their job with your ideals is to kill mafia within the actives. Sheesh. On June 27 2011 21:43 deconduo wrote: Unless I see them step up their posting significantly, I would suggest Fishball/Caller for today. No use keeping them around to crap up the thread. Alternatively, if someone highly scummy shows up we can lynch them. I can see your issue on caller, fishball has actually been fairly solid -_- he says alot with very little whereas people like radfield say almost nothing with a lot. FoS for looking at the wrong people. On June 27 2011 23:30 deconduo wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/postmessage.php -Super defensive -Resorting to (bad) personal attacks -Still hasn't contributed. Has Fishball stepped up his posting? Nope. ##Vote Fishball Find me a post of yours that shows real contribution or you are as guilty as he is. Personal attack? He compared your play this game to a game you were red, IE he FoS'd you. You missed the point and attacked him without answering it. FoS again. Since ggq was killed. ILJ has vanished but was super pro radfield's dumb shit, Decon has been shifty as hell, Chaoser pulled an ILJ and radfield has been throwing down bad idea after bad idea. As such I am opting to vote mr raddy off the island unless he stops being dumb. ##vote radfield | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 27 2011 23:57 Radfield wrote: Amber, our votes should not begin going down until the end of the first 24 hours, at that gives us some time to discuss. The second 24 hours is when we should begin putting down our votes. Fishball is active, which is more than many other players so far. Caller will either start contributing or not. As long as he is active for now, he gets some grace. I will make a real post tonight, but lets ease off on the early day 1 votes/wagons. Votes force suspicion you tard. By waiting for the last 24 hours you are denying us a full day of getting clear input on suspects from people. Seriously? Are you always this pro scum? | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 28 2011 02:31 Caller wrote: bc we can wait until day 3 to kill radfield i shot (or saved) him last night but apparently it didnt go off or something really curious why my sodomy was so devastating, though Well, anyone taking your elephant sized dick in the ass is going to be devastating. RAGING HOLE INCOMING  | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
Hell i was inactive during the night but damn, is this shit really going unnoticed by everyone? | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 28 2011 06:24 chaoser wrote: Hey guys, found some more free time so I'll post up my thoughts on some stuff. One, I remember in one game LSB's rank list was a hindrance to how I, as a mafia, picked our kills. Also, it gave the town a clear and easy visual tool to see how the game flow was going (top players getting killed off, middle of the pack, etc.) In Sleeper Cell Mafia, the fact that Ace lived till like day 7+his crazy claim+his actions all added up together to mark him as scum (even though no one lynched him on it). Plexa in another game lasted till the very end, leading the town to three wrong lynches and no one called him out on it. Tier 1 BloodyC0bbler Radfield Tier 2 RebirthOfLeGenD Caller Fishball Jackal58 Chaoser ilovejonn deconduo Hesmyrr Amber[LighT] LSB Tier 3 Chezinu sandroba Scamp Kurumi Over time hopefully this will be helpful somewhat. At this point Caller is the most useless. He's been trolling the thread pretty much and since there's no PMs and no flips it's not like he can be doing stuff in the background as town. Can you be a bit more serious Caller? .... Seriously? You are posting lists of ranked players? I used this exact same idea when I was mafia with FW in mafia 28 to make it look like I was solidly contributing while using it as cover. Factor in you have ranked chezinu who is out of all the players below tier 1 most deserving of a slot in it is laughable. You rank caller and fishball tier 2 when both at the top of their game are as good as I am if not better. I didn't think anyone would make such a terrible post today. ##unvote ##vote chaoser Also radfield I may disagree with you strongly on your stances, but accusing you was and will be in the future the only way to get responses out of you that are required to determine your alignment. I am sorry if this annoys you but it is part of my style. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 28 2011 09:47 Radfield wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 25 2011 18:03 Radfield wrote: I also disagree with some kind of voting pressure platform. We don't need to "pressure" lurking players, we need to lynch them. It's post or die in this set-up, as anything in between screws us in the endgame. Any player coasting Day 1, or setting "traps" etc is playing sub-optimally, as this is not a normal game. BC wrote: You actually do need to pressure lurkers untop of lynching them. See if they don't talk and you kill them whoever pushes their death we learn nothing of really if there is a coroner role. However, if we have the joy of seeing them talk, then find out what they are later via some form of coroner role, we learn lots of info's. Hell just getting them talking gives us info on their possible alignment / alignment of others. All discussion in a setup like this is good, and you want those "lurkers" input on shit too. I'm not even really sure what you're saying here, other than the obvious(talking>not talking). The fact is, the entire idea of voting for 'pressure' is a bad one. Somehow this idea has picked up steam since last I played, that you can just 'pressure' people and get them to talk. Then once they talk you move onto some other player and 'pressure' them. I am advocating that if someone is lurking, you vote to kill them. Obviously you use common sense and adjust if they're convincing, but someone is going to stop lurking once you pressure them regardless. There is zero reason to lurk before getting pressured, so popping out once you get pressured is no reason to keep moving down the chain of lurkers(which is what happens). What I'm really getting at, is that any 'pressure' applied better be with the intent to kill, as any other type of pressuring is extremely weak. No mafia are going to defend their buddies when there is a pressure-train going around the block. The rest of your post is mostly no lynch chatter. Lets not talk about this anymore. I've made my position clear, and if you want more clarification then so be it. It's very unlikely that a no-lynch situation will arise today anyways. + Show Spoiler + On June 28 2011 02:18 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Votes force suspicion you tard. By waiting for the last 24 hours you are denying us a full day of getting clear input on suspects from people. Seriously? Are you always this pro scum? You misunderstand my post. I'm advocating that we spend the first 24 hours doing exactly that: getting clear input on suspects from players. What I'm saying is that if we are going to pick 2 suspects to lynch, we should be picking them AFTER the discussion, not before. We need to settle down the thread. Decon and Fishball, you both need to end your argument, as arguing gets us nowhere. The rest of you stop throwing around random one-line vote posts. We need focus and clarity on Day 1, as anything else furthers mafia objectives. With majority lynch a bad thread is particularly insidious. Chez, you're playing sane, so who are we lynching today, and who's dying tonight? LSB and Chaoser need to make a few more posts. On the bright side, ILJ is the only one not posting. You and I simply disagree. I pressure vote everyone I think is scummy or useless to get a read on them. The way they answer dictates how I proceed with it. My issue surrounding what you were suggesting with the 24 hour period if that if no one is forcing activity in some way that garners responses in a way that makes them harder to fake the tells are going to be very hard to read. Factor in proving your analysis is very hard in this setup you need the best information you can get. Sitting back and letting people talk this way or that without being overly committal until the last day is hard to accurately read as sheeping because far easier. I will agree that the pressure system of voting has taken off the last while, although I honestly believe most people use it incorrectly. Perhaps this is merely my view of it. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 28 2011 12:33 LSB wrote: BC, the ranking system I used is a bit different. Tier 1 are medic protects, people that tend to die really early. Two seems like a good number to put there. Radfield dies early, and as for you, well you do got the rep that draws hits. Tier 3 are players who usually would not draw mafia hits and are good DT checks as they are the ones most likely to survive to the end. Normally they are newer players, however someone like Caller would normally be Tier Three cause so many people want him dead. Tier 2 is everyone else Now, this is not a defense of Chaoser, but I'm just oftly proud of (most) of my creations. Although it is easy to put together, As for Chaoser's true intent, well, I don't think calling out caller is anything original either My rep draws vigi's. However a list like this is pointless in a game of veteran players. All of us have the experience to do plays that newer players would never do as they would deem them too risky. For instance. Say radfield lives till day 4. Lets say for arguments sake he never gets a medic protect or gets shot by anyone. Just because he lived that long does not make him red. Mafia can easily use the "hes only red or sk if he lives long" to not shoot him as town will opt to lynch him later. With a player list like the one this game has we should be basing all lynches, and vig hits based off in thread performance. Not past reputations, not past actions. If you act like a dumb fuck and appear scummy you will get shot or lynched. If you are obviously playing counter town same shit. A tiered list with no real discussion of purpose or intent does nothing but provide a list. You can be happy with them all you want, but a random list is useless. So is saying "these people should get medics, these ones dts, these ones whatever. Why? Because it gives mafia an idea of where to shoot to avoid clashing with blues. Game should be taken by each individual action, not a damn "this guy is awesome, so lets save him and hope he wins us this durr game" | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 28 2011 12:58 LSB wrote: @BC I agree with you. Now, back to the important stuff About Deconduo and Fishball Deconduo believes that Fishball should die, and would like nothing better to stand over his dead body. Fishball believes Deconduo is mafia (correct me if I'm wrong on this), and therefore wouldn't be able to vig shot him, but rather would use a mafia hit. What's an easy way to deal with this problem? Easy! Stick them in a cage and see who comes out alive. Just let deconduo shoot Fishball tonight. Oh, and can I please ask vigs to not hit people? Thx *If Fishball survives, well, deconduo has some explaing to do *If we find two bodies tomorrow morning, deconduo is a bit better off in his story *If all we find tomorrow is Fishball dead, one body. Well, back to square one. There! Clean and simple solution that doesn't waste a lynch ..........Wow, I just, wow. Either of the other flipping gives us dick all without their role alignment. All we have to work on is their actions and act accordingly. Saying "no vigi's shoot" does not mean either is fucking mafia. Mafia goes "lulz watch this" shoots one. We rage and lynch the other like dumbfucks because 1 has to be red -_- How about we start analyzing. How about we start harassing people being dumb as hell. How about rather than letting blues act out claims we can never fucking confirm, or reds from having free reign we do some real work? | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 28 2011 13:11 LSB wrote: Uhh... Just saying... I'm not trying to say anything about either's alignment, it's a test to vertify whether or not deconduo's claim holds up. Certainly if we wake up tomorrow and Fishball and Caller are both killed, deconduo seems a bit more believable. If tomorrow only one person is killed, well something fishy went on and deconduo is a bit less believable. As for analyzing I'm getting a null read on Fishy, and deconduo I'm bothered by his confidance in his KP. No one's role is provable, all roleclaims are taken with a grain of salt. Decon doesn't have to ever be a vig. For all we know hes a mason talking to a vig, etc.... Waiting to see what happens is a bad approach and we should be analyzing and making opinions based on whats posted here. Going "well so and so claimed x and this happened means they are lying or not" is wrong. Mafia could hide kp, they could hit a vet, hit med prot player, maybe town has a rber? maybe they made two kills last night and as a penalty don't get to shoot tonight, etc.... Speculation is not helpful and is pure wifom ground. We should not be making it easy for anyone to dodge any form of pressure or commitment to something, or giving mafia easy access to shooting people. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 28 2011 13:15 Caller wrote: bc stop trying to humor the mafia and just come out with your list of whos mafia and whos not i know you have the list List? I have a spreadsheet. Why the hell would I ever use a list when a spreadsheet or word doc is the only efficient way to collect information. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
Anyone who does not commit to any suspect and random wastes a vote into a no lynch situation today should get shot. This has been a public service message by the BloodyC0bbler corporation. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 29 2011 00:20 LSB wrote: For the record if the deadline was tonight, I would be voting Chaoser for lurking. Of course, the deadline isn't tonight, so no need to hurry the decision. Now to look at Kurumi. Intresting analysis. But why does "trolling" make someone mafia? If trolling makes someone mafia, shouldn't Caller also be in that list? Now to add my own two cents. (Please correct me if I'm wrong) I haven't played with Kurumi yet, but a quick overview over his posting history shows that he normally isn't this aggressive. In addition, I don't believe he has played as mafia yet here, and the first time as mafia is always difficult. Could the aggressiveness be a sign of defensiveness? Or did I skim over his posts in XL too much? + Show Spoiler [Spam] + Ooh that's a clever flowchart, doesn't seem that fun but it helps uhh the deadline is midnight tonight -_- | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 29 2011 15:47 VisceraEyes wrote: BC continues to actively lurk. Palmar not only tried to invite hammer, but is insulting and pompous...see SNMMII. My feelings on Amber remain unchanged. Amber, for the record, I didn't cherry-pick that post of all the vast variety of quality content posts you provided...that was simply the one post with actual substance I could find...aside from "##Vote VE *bamf*" You DID mention lists in one or two posts, which I was tempted to put up there too, but they didn't say anything about anyone in the game...just an empty post to fill the void and avoid modkill. *yawn* lurk actively? How about you stop flailing wildly about. I have been far more active than most. Sit back and enjoy the ride. You were analyzed based on the person you replaced, and since then you have lashed out and done whatever to survive. Does it surprise you I would still view you as scummy? Luckily for you however we have a list of people who forced the no lynch issue. How about we go back and see if there was anyone who said it was bad like On June 28 2011 10:27 ilovejonn wrote: Back from work. First of, I'd like to say no-lynch is not fully pro-mafia. When I said it should only be used mid or late game, people have stated that it might be a good idea in MYLO or whatever, which is what I wanted to say but just did not know the term for. How about you add in the fact the guy started bringing up the No-lynch topic after we should have moved on to analyzing, says that he doesnt like no lynch cept for mylo situations, then fucking lets no lynch happen, funky shiz yo. when actively calling people out dude, keep in mind that when you attack the people obviously contributing to analyzing scum suspects it looks bad on you. Factor in my town play is extremely obvious as well as aggressive you are going to be in a world of hurt when I am done with you. Everyone involved in causing the no lynch at this time are primary suspects for analysis. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 29 2011 16:35 VisceraEyes wrote: BC, I'm not concerned about the 'world of hurt' you're going to bring on me. First of all, I called you out SPECIFICALLY to prove that you're ACTIVELY lurking. You never once analyzed me. Not. Once. You never even posted after I'd been replaced in until near the deadline. And you're right...your town play IS obvious. Obviously NOT how you're playing this game. Also, I've voted for 3 people. Palmar, Amber and for like 2 secs LSB, which was IMMEDIATELY retracted as I never felt he was scummy and I admitted that. That's not flailing about. Yes, I DID plead for my life. If you DARE call that scummy, OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooo guy. You don't find me scummy at all. And chances are, if you were town, you wouldn't find me scummy then either. You've got a long road ahead of you if you plan to A) put me in a world of hurt, B) Analyze everyone who didn't vote for me and C) try and push ILJ for lynch tomorrow as you'll SURELY kill me tonight. I don't envy you, sir. So do what you have to do. I'm but a small fish in a big pond here. But not quite as scummy a fish as you'd hoped. Kisses! honestly dude? If i didnt think you were scum I'd have unvoted. Random attacks, no solid analysis, filling in the shoes of the scummiest looking day 1 player. Yep seems like your there. You say I never analyzed you? I didn't have to, I analyzed Chaoser. You are Chaoser for all purposes of this game as whatever he said you are now liable for. Use your head when you speak, it might stop you from lying. As for my town play? Go read pyp3. I am aggressive, I analyze, and at the same time that game due to those qualities I was the "most scummy person in game" the same qualities I am demonstrating now. Now you go back, sit in your little chair and realize that the big boys are playing and your slightly out of your league. Sorry mate, but when you join a game of vets you have to realize we play for real. Posting for the sake of posting means nothing if your posts have 0 quality to them. As for what I can do? You have never seen my capabilities, don't be surprised when I do all that and more. Now, if you want to attack me thats all fine and good, but do it properly otherwise you are as I said, "flailing" | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On June 29 2011 23:05 Caller wrote: Why Kurumi isn’t scummy Kurumi is a self-admitted not good at mafia player. That means he is more prone to making the typical scumslips that mafia would make. Either that or he would totally clam up like he did in PYP. Yet Kurumi hasn’t slipped up: if anything, he’s acting just as troll here as he is normally. He’s playing VERY aggressively, calling people out, not even pretending to be contributing, and etc. Mafia DON’T do this. Especially not good ones. And since he hasn’t slipped up in like 10000 posts, I think he’s either a normal townie, or a suicide bomber. Why BC is fishy: BC always has all the mafia by day 2. Unfortunately, he also usually dies by Day 2. BC hasn’t contributed much-well, he has contributed, but not in the sense that I’m talking about. He’s just acting… so damn fishy. I can’t pin anything on him because there’s nothing to pin him on, but he’s just acting so damn fishy that my gut says to keep an eye on him. more to come when I feel like it RoL just scumslipped Rofl? Caller don't skew shit. The most reds i have ever had by day 2 is 2 of like a 6 man team. I also usually live into day 4-5 more often than not. You literally have no idea what my town play is like. I will let people go back and look at my game history and realize i'm not full of shit. If the only thing you have to make me seem "scummy" is my "meta" then chances are i'm not red. For shame caller, you know better. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
As a general note I am slightly taken aback at how only RoL is defending himself from this. Coulda sworn there was a general agreement that you lynch the dt before you lynch the accused. However, seeing how the trend was going I realized that ace gave me my role for a reason. I am the lie detector Once per day/night cycle starting day 1 I am able to select one single post, or I can specify a specific segment of a post. Upon doing this I will be informed if the player is telling the truth or lying. I only claim this for a few reasons at the moment. It confirms Fishball as cop. It confirms RoL as mafia. I chose this post for the day 2. On June 30 2011 16:39 Fishball wrote: When I check a player, the results either comes back as "Innocent" for Town aligned players, or "Guilty" for Mafia. This returned True I opted to choose the most specific line in his entire post about his role in terms of confirming or denying his claim. As the check returned true about the description of his role this leads me to believe he is in fact telling the truth. As no red would actually know how the cop mechanic works for sure, nor would any other role. As such I believe it confirms him. as for day 1 I chose On June 29 2011 22:08 Caller wrote: I used my one bullet to shoot GMarshal This was true I chose this bit of callers vig claim post for a few reasons. 1, he said he did it night 1 when he did it night 0, and on the offchance he was a godfather he could lie about his role to fool mine. As such I opted to analyze the segment that would legitimize his claim, or nail him as a liar. As it returned truth, caller is in fact a role that has 1 kp ability. This says nothing of his alignment, but whatever role he has was limited to 1 kp. Now, based on the results of my role, I am voting RoL as Fishball's claim is legit. ##vote rebirthoflegend | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
| ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 03:05 Caller wrote: Sure, feel free to lynch me tomorrow if you feel that way. I'm still shooting BC for lying. If BC dies tomorrow, it will prove that BC is lying. And if BC lied, he's mafia. And if he's mafia, I can't be mafia. Do the logic. Rofl. Only way I am going to die is if mafia shoot me. Protects the confirmed blues which I am fine with. Also caller, if you have learned anything about me when I am mafia, I am much ballsier than most. Creating this situation is something I could easily do just to confirm you or me. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 01:50 Caller wrote: tldr: No reason for me to do any of the things I did if I were 3rd party short of suiciding myself, so unless I'm a fucking Village Idiot there's no way I'd do this. RoL is lying about being hit. On top of Fishball's guilty this means he is mafia. Lynch all liars and all that. You say lynch all liars. Then say On July 01 2011 02:56 Caller wrote: shit fuck guys my bad, Fishball and BC are both mafia. I totally lied about my abilities. I have TWO shots, not one. I was waiting for somebody to bumble into the trap I had laid, but I didn't expect BC to do it. I'm going to prove it by shooting BC tonight. I love when people say they hate lying, lynch liars, then lie. Don't you caller? | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 03:40 Caller wrote: Explain your reasoning for that, please. I've already shown that regardless if BC is telling the truth or lying, I'm clear. No you haven't. You support lynch all liars, then apparently have continued to lie all game? I have proven you as a liar via my role. You just believe I am red and are trying to get me killed. Claiming this "hit" of yours in thread however would now give all night anti town kp roles a place to shoot. If you are town like you claim I will die and no one else and you will be proven a liar. If I do die as well as someone else, it proves I lied, but it does not clear you as a vig as with such a small setup town would not have two vigi's (1 being decon 1 being you) as that would be more town kp in a single night than mafia. In which case you would be proven red or sk. So you claim I am lying, I now claim you are lying. As such only one of us can be right, but regardless of if I die it proves you are not town, whereas me living proves that I am in fact truthful(barring mafia stacking with you"kill") | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 04:24 Caller wrote: did you not read BC telling the truth: I had 1 KP and it was used up. Therefore I cannot kill BC, therefore, I am not mafia. Either the mafia will kill him, or he will not die. If I were mafia, I would have infinite KP, as I had already said. BC lying: He is mafia, mafia cannot shoot other mafia, I shoot him with my 2nd (and last bullet), he dies, therefore I am not mafia. As a general note, caller is lying in this statement. Mafia can shoot their own members, so me dying would reveal nothing on callers alignment. If two shots happen, he is likely sk, if 1 shot happens and its not on me, he is a 1 shot vig as I claimed. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 04:31 Caller wrote: EBWOP: Let's say mafia can shoot their own members. First of all, they can't. Second of all, if they do, you admit that you are mafia. Then, sure, I may no longer be 100% confirmed, but what kind of mafia will bus not one but TWO of their members? Especially when they were in the middle of an otherwise impossible to break scheme that would allow them to run town around in circles? Really? You want to go there? Ace, can you come confirm in thread as you did to me in a pm all of 5 minutes ago that Mafia can indeed shoot their own? Or may I post the pm? As for you saying I am red, I am proving you a liar at the moment. You say what Mafia would bus two of their own in this scheme when either of the players in question could be third party, town, mafia. We could have all 3 on this board. You don't account for many situations and skew the facts to confirm yourself. Without any flip of my role you are not proven at all. Without your flip you are not proven. You have claimed killing ggq, gmarshal, claimed 3 different roles, and are now claiming i am lying about my blue claim. However my ability caught your one truthful claim in amongst all your lies. Just accept that and move on. Nothing confirms either of us but death and a flip. Or perhaps a cop could check you next. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 04:52 Caller wrote: like i said i no longer care about whether or not im confirmed. But I've already shown logically and soundly that BC and Fishball are scum. You don't have to believe me whether or not I'm innocent or not. But are you seriously defending that BC and Fishball are not mafia? I wish I had more bullets, then. Man are you going to feel bad when I flip town. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 04:54 Kurumi wrote: BloodyCobbler suddenly bears a role which actually flips after death! YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Eh? I am referring to end game yo. I'm mocking caller in advance. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 01 2011 05:02 Kurumi wrote: So let's assume Caller is 3rd Party: BC is lying about his role and Fishball is his bro. Let's assume Caller is Mafia Jerkcircle,BC,Caller and Fishball are remaining mafia. You missed the situation where I could just be an asshole townie. Just saying | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 10 2011 10:58 citi.zen wrote: To shift topics a bit. From our vantage point, me and Sandroba could not figure out why BC would lie, since we knew he was town. So I was pretty sure at one point that the whole thing was a misunderstanding of this exchange: The tested statement really has two parts: one was true; one not so much, but could be interpreted as such, ex - one bullet that night. At any rate if Ace only provided a single true/false statement he may well have referred to the shooting of GM. I think BC could and should have made the case for his innocence, especially with FB confirming him as town. As I said in my initial post: don't freeze based on what you know happened (in this case, that you lied about the role). Start with the premise that you are clean, then look for ways to explain the world to fit that premise. Edit: as a red, I was terrified at the prospect BC was telling the truth. You could simply ask for everyone to write "I am not red" in a post and essentially you'd have another DT. Talk about taunting the mafia! BC made an interesting claim and clearly his reads of Caller and FB as town were correct. He just got... overly fancy. Playing "straight" and backing up FB and Caller in the thread would have created a very hard to stop force. My reasoning for it was this. I was 100% sure on fishball, and I was fairly certain caller was a vig or if not a third party role. What I had wanted to happen was the kind of cluster fuck that did in turn happen. However, when I then told caller "i could just be being an asshole" I was seriously hoping that he would realize I had in fact lied and was using the entire claim as cover. I wanted to set up a situation that 2-3 of the group of us would survive the night. In the case two of us survived (would have been most likely myself or caller) my "claim" would have become legit in terms of thread. I was then going to use this to get radfield lynched, and then let mafia waste a shot on a "confirmed blue". It was a huge gamble and played entirely on Callers ability to realize what I was doing. I talked to caller after I died and he basically said "i thought you were lying but I know you as red pull off insanely ballsy shit so couldn't take the chance" and shot me for that reason primarily. Had what I wanted to happen however worked out, last few reds would have been steamrolled. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On July 11 2011 05:49 citi.zen wrote: Like I said, good reads but the gamble didn't seem necessary. You bring up another interesting point that was lost on most players: there was no way Caller would be red at that point in the game. At most he could be 3rd party, but not red. We knew it and were thrilled to get him lynched in short order, before anybody asked questions (anybody other than Chez, that is). The game maybe wasn't necessary, but It was a hope to set myself up as a target for a mafia hit before caller. Also, as horrible as it sounds, almost everyone was trolling at the point I fake claimed and honestly the only way to really get discussion going I figured was to do something insanely outlandish. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
I skyped sand almost the moment I died and called him out lol. I just honestly thought caller had caught on to my scheme and was onboard with it. | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Dtq68.jpg)
