|
On July 26 2011 11:48 Mig wrote:
Isolated on a singular topic which had nothing to do with finding scum. You lead the town in a discussion that took up 10 pages 8 hours and accomplished nothing. Saying discussion never hurts town is blatantly false. There is a big difference between a good discussion on suspects and the 10 page argument you had.
Really? Everyone involved or concerned was busy herp derping around instead they argued constructively on how to use a particular role. At the end of that discussion we were all at a standstill. Then randomly a bunch of people who weren't even part of it, quickly jump in and say "bc is scum for refusing to comply to a check" however they don't comment on that topic, don't voice opinion instant bandwagon.
Do you not realize you just got schooled? In that entire process we had 1 vote cast and suddenly hours after the discussion, and even after the discussion was even really taken place as no one was talking anymore, randoms come in to make a bandwagon? Fascinating isn't it?
Anything that forces people to commit to an issue gives valuable behavioural analysis. Discussion of who is scummy etcc is all fine and dandy but these are the situations that make analysis easier. Anyone with a particular agenda will push it, scum will get heated and potentially slip up, etc...
With how fast people try and will most likely still try to bandwagon me with absolutely no analysis of their own just shows how much mafia / third party want me dead. Townies will either find me a stubborn green or a potential scum. However considering that within 15 minutes we have votes from you, nisani, redff and supersoft. Awesome ain't it? that within 15 minutes 4 randoms all come to the same conclusion of who to vote for when everyone involved in the discussion throughout that 8 hours couldn't? Well done my friend, keep stepping on those eggshells.
|
On July 26 2011 11:54 Mig wrote:
And BC I fully understand your reasoning behind your arguments. I don't care that much about them. What I care about is why it wasn't obvious to you after a few pages that the discussion was just going in circles. So instead of ending it so the town could discuss more productive things you continued the pointless argument. As far as I am concerned you took away 8 hours that the town could have been using to actually look at potential suspects.
because the more you argue the more likely someone if they are scum will slip up? That is a fairly common tactic used to lure people out. Also factor in people were actually seeing merit in some of my points near the end when no one saw merit in them originally. Also, no one raised a better subject. People wanted to tunnel kita or jackal, but it all stemmed at that point from how to use a dt's check. That was unproductive as well. It was actually a topic in which mafia could easily blend in, instead a topic that is not easy to blend in was pushed and people had to voice actual opinions on it.
Look at the people pushing to lynch me? Redff used arguments I HAVE ALREADY REFUTED as his logical grounds for lynching. Yet he still wrote a giant block of text of shite i've already debunked. Awesome.
You are also pushing that I die based on an assumption our dt is legit. So was red, wait, how would you actually know hes a town aligned dt? extra information that you have eh? nice to know.
How about inform the town how you know the actual alignment of SS and then we progress forward. Before you deny your claim of it.
On July 26 2011 10:17 Mig wrote:
C) Pushed hard for our dt, that killed a scum, to not use his checks. We obviously shouldn't blindly follow the checks but there is very little downside to at least having him check people. Even if we don't act on them, it can serve as an amazing breadcrumb. If supersoft dies and flips town we would know all his checks were true. Incredibly anti town to not at the very least have SS use his checks.
##vote BloodyC0bbler
As for who SS should check, BC should 100% not be checked. If he is mafia he is 99% the GF. So the next best candidate for a check is kita.
|
On July 26 2011 12:02 Mig wrote:
I won't deny your point about red/nisani. Their arguments and reasons they used to vote for you are not good. However I make no apologies for my reasons for voting for you. In my experience when playing against extremely good mafia players one of the main tactics they use is to lead the town away from productive scum hunting. I mean you are really think 10 pages of you/syllo/sandroba/curu arguing game mechanics helped the town? Did you learn much about their possible alignments from it?
It appears to me that the last 3 pages where people began actually voting and giving their reasons has given us 50x the information that your 8 hour argument did.
I lead them away from productive scum hunting? There was none. Stop bullshiting. You also completely ignored the fact post restrictions were brought up by me, you also failed to mention how next to no one was even discussing the potential possibility of SS being non town, you fail to mention how other members showed similar issues near the end of the argument. Those people may still believe its better to use the dt but you get the point. Positive discussion was generated that you are now trying to downplay. Also the most recent 3 pages gave information on you, red, nisani and SS. The 8 hour discussion gave information on everyone who participated. Perhaps you should learn to read every post rather than skimming and concentrating only where you participate. All the last few pages have done is throw dirt at 4 people.
|
On July 26 2011 12:07 Mig wrote:
If you want to lynch me because I said our dt instead of the dt go ahead lol.
I am actually throwing a FoS at you for using it. It is actually a common mistake for people who have extra information to infer it in a manner such as you did. As it is more natural to type "our dt" if you know his alignment.
|
On July 26 2011 12:16 Mig wrote:What information did you gather about the alignments of the people you argued with? I would like to hear it. The discussion we are having now is productive. Arguing actual cases against people makes them take sides, generates connections and forces people to come up with actual reasoning and analysis behind their cases. Anyone regardless of alignment can argue game mechanics. I read all 10 pages of the discussion and I took very little of value away from it. Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:09 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
I am actually throwing a FoS at you for using it. It is actually a common mistake for people who have extra information to infer it in a manner such as you did. As it is more natural to type "our dt" if you know his alignment. It is also a common mistake for people who don't know alignments but are simply biased about what alignment they think the person is to make. But if you want to make a case against me based on me using the word "our" instead of "the" instead of actually analyzing whether I am mafia from my motivations and posts go ahead.
You can want to hear many things. Until I decide to make a case against them or not you won't get it. This isn't some magical pm game where I can bounce ideas off someone and it not leave that environment. Any thought put in the thread can be potentially used to screw someone unjustly later. So until I find someone scummy enough to pursue my thoughts will stay with me.
As for common mistake? Its human nature to use words that infer information you do or don't have. You opted for one that suggested insight to someones role. I am sure you will be more careful in the future.
|
On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him.
Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them?
I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names.
|
On July 26 2011 12:50 Amber[LighT] wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him. Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them? I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names. Are you serious? What more against Jackal do you need?
Him defending himself to be honest. I'm kinda tired of seeing others do it for him.
|
On July 26 2011 13:01 Mig wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them?
I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names. I am not asking you to give me your town reads or slight scum reads. I asked how anyone was supposed to know you were town. When you spend all of your time A) defending yourself and B) talking game mechanics it seems like you are playing a very self oriented game. You have taken a stand on no one. And apparently there isn't a single person in the game you feel is suspicious enough to warrant an analysis. Yet despite these things you claimed it was very obvious that you were town. I could have placed my vote on you and then disappeared. I am discussing with you because I am gathering information to hopefully make the best decision possible. Right now I don't see anything that makes me want to put my vote onto someone else. I will agree it is shady that no one else is commenting though. Amber/kita/etc surely someone else out there must have an opinion.
I say its obvious as my town play is very unique and fairly obvious. Go compare it to almost every game I've been town. I am not here to explain my role to people. It is obvious. I am not being obtuse, I am not shutting down conversation. I am embracing it and being fairly open. As i said to curu either. If you intend to push someone to their death you better be damn sure of your convictions. If town misslynches its on the first few people who really pushed it on that misslynch. I am not about to sit here and go "so and so is scummy for lurking" when almost everyone is doing it.
Also, very self oriented game? I have done nothing but try and push what I view is the best course of action. And rather than just push it, I explain it. Yep sounds very mafia like.
|
On July 26 2011 13:21 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:54 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 12:50 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him. Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them? I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names. Are you serious? What more against Jackal do you need? Him defending himself to be honest. I'm kinda tired of seeing others do it for him. How does Jackal defend himself from his role PM though? That's what I don't get. Unless there's another reason to be voting for him, or you really think he faked parts of it. Care to explain your stance on him a little bit for me?
How about he posts? instead of lurk insanely hard he could be doing anything productive.
As for the stance, it seems very odd to call out a player (he called out ON) for lying based on his role pm. His stance was one of "he is lying my pm says he is disguised as town" which would infer red. That entire claim got ON killed. He flipped town. Jackal then vanished into unknown land. Someone got shot over this entire situation yet the people who ask questions or FoS the guy responsible are getting questioned more heavily than the person responsible. TL towns are awesome.
|
On July 26 2011 13:28 redFF wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 06:14 supersoft wrote:On July 26 2011 06:05 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 06:03 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:56 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:51 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:44 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:40 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:33 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:27 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
[quote]
How contradictory. You think that having SS use his rolecheck is rewarding him (not town, just him) for roleclaiming, but then say we should wait for another DT to check supersoft to confirm him as town or not. Here's how that fails:
-Framers
-Fake DT claim to take out Day DT
-Continual Role block after today on SS
-Having to have an actual DT claim to confirm him
So, you don't want to reward roleclaimers, but then want another DT to claim to confirm a known DT, who's alignment is unknown? That makes no sense at all.
The best thing to do, is to use his check, and have him announce his result to town. The catch is we don't act just based on his check. We can check a lynch candidate if we want, but that gets dangerous if he's scum, though another 1-1 trade wouldn't be that bad. The other thing we do is check someone suspicious, who isn't necessarily getting lynched today and having him announce his check, and just leave it until we can confirm him. Then if he gets popped, we know all his checks and results, and if we can act on them, and if he gets confirmed another way, well we know all his results too.
I'd actually suggest checking you or DB, and then leaving it for now.
As well, why would we check people asking to be checked, and why would anyone be dumb enough to ask for a DT check on them without already being suspicious anyways? If they're asking to be checked, they're town or a covered role. Town wouldn't want to waste a DT check on themselves, as compared to suspicious people. Use the tool to hunt mafia, not to confirm town. An innocent check doesn't prove innocence, but the only way we're getting a red check back at this point is millers or a day-framer. Day 1 has the least chance of anything interfering with the check, and is the best time to use it. I'd rather have 1 check in, than have none and SS gets shot tonight. Check the bolded part. In almost every case of someone asking or begging for a dt check they are town or covered role. Most people do this to confirm themselves and thus starting a blue circle that can rofl stomp mafia. It is very common practice for people to want to be cleared as to move through a game with 0 harassment from anyone. No mafia would willingly throw himself up for a dt check as it would screw him in the end. You say no townie would want it used on them, but that would again, leave you a pool of 0 people to check. you are then down to the idea of "we want you checked you let yourself get checked or lynched" which is a horrible way to play. Seriously, you all are talking about role use being the huge factor in catching people. I now say, everyone go back read pick your power 3 and realize playing lets analyze roles, or someones role means they are legit, etc.... and realize roles do not say shit about the players alignment. Who cares if SS's check is an alignment check if you don't know his alignment. Have a watcher/tracker check him. If he visits anyone at night at this point in time he is mafia. have a dt check him. Dt's could breadcrumb results, or the like. Seriously, before a plan is proposed you sort it out, you make it ideal, you account for multiple situations. So far the only situation proposed by you lot is SS is likely town for shooting a red. Likely town does not mean town. What? So, instead of using a check, and just leaving it, until we have a second DT out themselves or breadcrumb and die, you're saying never use the check? Did I understand that correctly? Please tell me how what you're trying to say is optimal play. How is not having a check better than having one? The only situation proposed by you, is that we don't use the check at all. That's asking a claimed and outed DT to not check people or reveal his checks, until another DT checks him. In what world does that make sense? Ask yourself how you would play this out in a normal game. If a DT claimed, would you ask him to not check anyone until another DT checked him and claimed it? That sounds really dumb to me. In a normal game, on day 1, if someone claimed dt and said x was red, I would kill the dt first. Every time. In a setup where mafia, third parties, or town can be a dt, I will never trust the claimant ever on day 1. Nor should anyone else. Ok, so where's the part where we're trusting him by having him use a check on an agreed upon target? That's what I'm wondering about. You're saying that by letting him check, we're implicitly trusting him to be town, but that is not the case. We can let him sit in unconfirmed limbo for now, but why not use his check? It doesn't hurt us to use his check, the same way that killing the DT actually tells us whether the check is true or not. By giving him a check we give legitmacy over time to his supposed alignment. Say he is mafia, he checks kita, kita flips town, he gives us a town. That makes him look better as he complied to the check. Say both kita and SS are red, he says kita is town it still gives both a look of legitmacy. One for complying for the check. Its subtle and its insidious. Someone who is not confirmed you do not let slowly insinuate they are. Had you guys outlined you planned on trusting his check with a grain of salt I would be less worried than i am now. Of course we'd take it with a grain of salt, I'm taking everything in this game with a grain of salt, because if I trusted everything I read, I'd be pretty silly. That's also why I'm saying we can also check people who aren't major lynch targets yet, and then just ignore the results until someone else confirms SS, he gets shot by mafia, or we even flip him ourselves with a vig. Now I am seeing the first person with some sense -_-. Wiggles, go back and originally read the use of his role and you will see NO ONE advocated what you did just now. You will see it otherwise and should realize my discontent. What you just proposed is more cautious than everything else in relation to using his role to this point. hey bc, wanna check? Bc ignored this post. Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 06:42 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 06:38 Curu wrote:
You don't know if he suffered his penalty or not Wiggles. It might just be he's roleblocked for tonight, who knows.
BC, would you submit to having supersoft check you? Nope. As much as being confirmed town benefits town as a whole, it gets me shot by third party / mafia or some asshole townie who thinks they are being a hero. Instead I will risk getting shot anyway, but the likelyhood of a third party shot or red goes down whereas the option of a townie shooting me is higher. Any med with half a brain will realize I have been trying to make people think and not be stupid and might protect me. Then posts this. K so if he inspects you you will be confirmed town, but increases the chance to be shot at by scum/blacks. Then you say that you would like medic protection, surely if you are confirmed town you are more likely to get medic protection? Quote supersoft so you can be alignment checked. If you keep ignoring this issue then i will get you lynched.
Then be prepared to be killed in retribution. I will flip town, I have no need to be checked to know this, and anyone with a damn brain could see my alignment as well. Factor in a dt who isn't confirmed town's check isn't actually useful in clearing anyone. Would it make you feel better? possibly, but thats not very smart of you.
|
Also the post was ignored because Quoting it would put me one step closer to that check you want so bad. I did comment in other posts my stance on the situation. Don't have to quote someone to answer their question.
|
As just a general thought to all the people voting me. What is the general rule of thumb when someone is being voted for and only 1 person ever sticks up for them aside from the defendant? Usually bussed townie.
Don't worry though, when I did and flip town, vigi's will have a list of people to sort out. Stress to all vigi's. EVERYONE who votes for me is on your shooting list. The mafia will use this as their chance to drop one of the few players that actually scares them shitless as such don't waste the opportunity.
As for who should take a hit out of you before the others. Dropbear/redff/jackal all stand out extremely high on lists.
|
On July 26 2011 23:38 Palmar wrote:
Just stop arguing with BC guys, it's been 12-13 pages already, despite his protestations we are going to use the check, which is why we're basically just playing a waiting game for supersoft to come back now.
Syllo, this isn't a normal game, this is the real thing.
This is one of the core reasons that using his check is asinine. No one is actually looking for a solid lynch target without said check. An unconfirmed dt with unconfirmed results dictating how the town should proceed. This shows that in those 13 pages that you barely commented on that you know how to fit in. I expect better out of you palmar.
|
On July 27 2011 01:13 Curu wrote:
BC do you think we should no lynch today? You're discouraging people from building cases unless they are 100% sure, but no one can be 100% sure on Day 1.
I notice your vote is on Jackal, do you mind giving your reasons?
I notice your vote is still on me and your reasons for doing so where meh? Care to explain your reasons in detail using arguments that haven't been used before / already defeated?
How about instead of asking the person who's spent the entire thread defending their stance almost singularly against almost everyone to put up your lynch target. How about you realize that all you did as a group was confirm me as non mafia. Name me a game where day 1 where 1 person defended himself almost completely solo they flipped red. Then name me 2 in the offchance you find one. Does it not confuse you that a player much like myself would get pretty well 0 help in all this? Mafia wouldn't want to lose me if I was on their team. No third party would stick their head out like I am.
As for discouraging cases until they are 100% sure? Look at today and what its gotten us. I have someone voting for me based on arguments shot down / used an opening post rule that decon already debunked in thread as his original lynch vote. How does that make you feel? People jumped a bandwagon, made up bullshit and vanished. Jackal claimed his job kept him from playing, made a few posts and voted for me. He never answered really any questions and has vanished again. Maybe I should play the I work card? Or maybe I should play the "ima lurk card" and get away with shit too.
Surprisingly in the position of being killed by a group of morons I am not inclined to help you. This will say nothing about my alignment as you will say only a mafia would resign to death and not help. However it is merely pride. If you want to kill one of your best resources purely because you're bad, I don't intend on helping you. I will comment that through this entire situation the people you guys are waiting for
IE supersoft with that check has gone strangely silent again. Curious that the dt you wanted to use so badly isn't even around to give you the result eh?
Stop tunneling and start thinking.
|
On July 27 2011 01:37 kitaman27 wrote:
Voting for BC because
1) I enjoy watching him die
2) He refuses to submit to an alignment check
Others should be forced to quote SS. There are a surprisingly few people who are willing to submit to it.
Lawl best reasoning evar.
|
On July 27 2011 01:46 Curu wrote:
You were the first to vote for Jackal BC. On a policy (lynch liars). You're up for lynch yourself now on a policy (lynch people refusing to get checked). You say that starting a bandwagon on you is stupid because none of us are sure you are scum, but you started the bandwagon on Jackal as well.
So do you feel strongly enough about lynching Jackal that you'll be a Vig hit or next lynch if he flips green? Because you think he lied about his role PM. That's your conviction for starting the wagon on him?
And to answer your own question, no one defended redFF in your own game and he turned out scum.
Re read the game. You will find that two mafia currently dead spent time attempting to redirect the lynch and push other points. He was being defended you just didn't see it. As for general stance. I clarified earlier that I would support a better lynch. I also voted based on something I feel is a lie. Ie its a policy lynch.
You can lynch me all you want for not submiting to an unconfirmed dt check, and when I flip you will not only facepalm but be held accountable for my lynch. It will be actually priceless to see your reaction then.
|
On July 27 2011 01:51 syllogism wrote:
BC will you rather die than submit to the check? I'm finding it increasingly difficult not to vote for you as every post contains, in my opinion, bizarre logic that is not compatible with pro-town play and you must know it. You'll rather martyr than submit to a check by a player that is almost certainly not mafia? The only thing that's giving me second thoughts is that I just can't see your scum play being this bad and there indeed is almost no resistance to your lynch
Let me ask you this. He was around last night to get the required quotes from kita and for a fact I know eiii the co host was online around this time. However, the results of the check on kita you wanted so badly were never returned. Also I have no issue submitting to a check, just not by a source that will mean next to dick all.
Seriously your saying hes almost certaintly not red? Perhaps your right, but that doesn't mean hes town. Why would you trust so much in a dt role that you don't know the alignment of. None of the checks are actually trustworthy. So say I submit, he says i'm town. Next logical step is what? Say "ok guess bc is town" or would it be "we have like 5 hours left in day, might as well lynch him anyway".
Instead, I flip town, everyone who votes for me is suspect and vigi's can clear them out. There are definitely mafia and third party on my vote and as such town will net themselves easy kills. me for 2-3 anti town is a good trade.
As for bizarre logic? My play is fairly standard me, just as how I operate. Anyone who has played multiple games with me knows my style as red and green are completely different so re reading any previous game I was town would have been the similarities.
|
On July 27 2011 01:57 Palmar wrote:
I don't even...
So every game you play BC, do you always wait for every unconfirmed DT to be checked by another DT? Who was confirmed by what means? Supersoft KILLED SCUM, that's good enough for me and should be good enough for you.
I'm just going to vote for you until you let him check you.
Well thats good then cause I will die.
As for unconfirmed dt to be checked by another? No. However this is a gamesetup where there are roles like dt, medic, vig, etc... that could be on all three teams. You say he killed a scum? Guess what, the consensus was YM was town, or at least town oriented and he died to Tim Roth. Supersoft didn't then claim it wasn't him and kill the person responsible. No, Drop bear risked a penalty to his own role (which is telling about his role), to force Supersoft into the open. If he had claimed he had taken that shot, he'd be getting lynched right now. Instead his only option to save himself was literally do what the town wants. So he revenge shot and we got a red killed.
He didn't do this himself, he was forced into it. He doesn't get credit for a dead red. If anyone in the situation did it would be drop bear. His play since then is kinda bleh but risking a penalty that would net a dead red seems odd play from a red.
Do you see the issue? here
On July 27 2011 01:59 Palmar wrote:
By the way, just for reference, Fishball claimed cop in CCM, and he was in no way confirmed, but in that game BC was willing to lie, because he was convinced that Fishball was telling the truth. He was willing to falsely confirm a cop claim he believed, because that's how much he trusted Fishball's claim.
I just have no idea how this does even fly, and the constant threats that anyone who votes for you will be held accountable. I'll be the first person to be held accountable for you, I want you checked, or dead.
You are right, I did do that. Perhaps if you played with fishball you would realize why. He has a meta whenever he has a gun. Its kill BC. First move he always does is kill me if he can. If he can't he will opt to do the next best thing, which is work with me. He posted check results clearing me? Why the hell wouldn't i try to make his claim legit, I knew it was. He pinned two alignments correctly and thus was the confirmation. That game was also a setup where mafia had near 0 chance of having a dt, as well as fishball would not have claimed dt at that point in time if he didnt think it was neccesary. Mafia fishball would have let town keep herp derping rather than try to organize it.
As for me dying. Sadly you don't get to be held accountable. You didn't start the bandwagon. Curu did, and then 4 people voted on within 15 minutes of eachother. All hours after the discussion finished, 3 of which used terrible and flawed reasoning. Mig gets a pass for at least debating. Redff/nisani/SS all dive in, dont post solid reasons and dive out. Yet no one comments on this?
Everyone should go back and read posts accusing me, and realize I am actually talking to you. Rather than pushing someone into my place im pushing accountability onto people who put me in mine. This is far more productive at this point in time than trying to force a bandwagon change in the last 5 hours.
Also keep in mind as you all said I wasted time with the argument yesterday, notice that once i stopped arguing you are no closer to doing any real work finding a lynch target. So the only point of time that the day has shown any progress or any situation posting has been heavy I was involved. Almost everyone else seems content to lurk.
|
On July 27 2011 02:06 syllogism wrote:
If you are town, it shouldn't even matter to you what supersoft's alignment is, if submitting to the check is the only thing that can save you from the lynch. Aside the unlikely scenario of there being a day framer (I consider this very unlikely as players tend to make roles that can be useful to town), there's really no downside for BC the townie, especially if we can keep people from blindly trusting Supersoft's checks in future. If there's no framer and supersoft lies, we can vigi or lynch him next.
Why would I submit to a check that I don't agree with just to save myself? If you guys won't see logic or at least take a step back and look at things from my perspective then there is no point. Also, as you don't know the nature of my role, you don't know if there is a downside or not. You are also basing this entire scenario off your magical dt being here? Guess what, he doesn't appear to be.
|
On July 27 2011 02:15 Kurumi wrote:
Bc sorry but I must vote on You ...
Your role sounds horribly evil lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
