On December 16 2011 02:10 flamewheel wrote:
Skip it.
Skip it.
I wouldn't feel good about that, speed it up so L can be the first game of the year!!
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On December 16 2011 02:10 flamewheel wrote: Skip it. I wouldn't feel good about that, speed it up so L can be the first game of the year!! | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On December 16 2011 04:01 Incognito wrote: Show nested quote + On December 16 2011 01:51 flamewheel wrote: This was coming a long time ago. It perfectly matches up with my schedule. And it's time for 50. I mean, c'mon. You lies. You said you couldn't play in Ver's game because you were going on vacation! Traitor! *the plot thickens* I might need to hire myself as private detective to monitor this drama! ..and of course... ..spread it to the world!! | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
"Oh flamewheel, I bought you this" ![]() | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 04 2012 08:23 flamewheel wrote: Going to tinker with a setup tonight and all that jazz. /include bombs, hippies and something only caller would think of. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 04 2012 21:00 prplhz wrote: Is this going to have 50 players because it's game 50? No. The game is going to last for fifty days and fifty nights, Lynching and nightactions will require you to solve a riddle every time to unlock it. If you don't win in time it ends in a draw. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 08 2012 04:08 GiygaS wrote: Show nested quote + 10 of 10 Mafia remaining ? of ? Goons remaining ? of 1 Godfathers remaining ? of 1 Roleblockers remaining ? of 1 Framers remaining Also, through my powerful deducing abilities, I have determined that there are not ? goons, but 7! ? of 1 means it can be either 0 or 1 so there is the possibility of beeing 10 goons. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
![]() risk.nuke for mayor I'm not the best townie here so you might be asking yourself why am I running for mayor, I came here to win and I think the best thing to do as a townie is to try and win the election. For those who have read my history you know I am passionate player. A few times in my last games I have found myself losing my mood. I can promise you that will not happen in this game. I don't like to be angry. I like to be helpfull, it makes me feel better and when I feel better I perform better. I will fight for a friendly town in order to keep the peace. So that logic and reason may reign the lynches, not tunneling, omgus and bandwagons or other scumtricks or anti-town shenanigans. I am reliable. I have the time to play, I wont disappear and I won't make excuses. I will be here so you can often have my thoughts on anything. I am persistant, I won't just sheep but I will stick to my beliefs and argue for them aslong as I have them. So If you want to elect a serious person, a person who you will always know where he is at, a person who will give this his best. Then vote for risk.nuke!! always townie, never not townie!! | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 13 2012 16:36 Nisani201 wrote: risk.nuke - doesn't talk about how he will mayor powers Mayor powers? Beeing the mayor isn't beeing god. The mayor powers are 3 votes: Okey I'll tell you how I'm going to use 3 votes. I'll vote 3 times for the one I think is scum. Day 1 lynch: I'll lynch the person I think is scum. When I have decided on a person I am leaning on I will post that in the thread an keep you updated. If I become the sheriff I will use incarcerate to the best of my abillitys. It's a 3 shot jailer who can't target same person twice. I'll use it conservatively and intelligently. On January 13 2012 18:02 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: That is not at all what I said. I don't loose interest. In fact, I actually use the fact that I don't loose interest as a one of my merits. I said I won't loose my calm and start raging or call names which is quite different from loosing my interest.Risk.nuke does the same thing as kita and says he isn’t the best townie, he also says he’s lost interest a few times but swears he won’t do it this game. Famous last words… No offense risk but this isn’t very compelling. On January 13 2012 20:59 rgTheSchworz wrote: /confirm Ok, I have been looking for clues in the first 6 pages,I'll post stuff as I go, day 1 it's hard to get a good case going against anyone,but this is to note: Show nested quote + I'm not the best townie here so you might be asking yourself why am I running for mayor, I came here to win and I think the best thing to do as a townie is to try and win the election By Risk.nuke Things that strike me: This guy wants to win, but recognizes he is far from the best townie.What do we do, as townies? Think logically, not run for mayor cause we have a BIG ego.And this is basically what he is doing. The amount of GREEN in his post made me lean towards mafia instead of a blue role, cause he wants to slip under the radar. Conclusion:I think he wants DT immunity, and shows some scumminess. A decent choice for a day 1 lynch. Else he is a bad townie with a big ego, but ,,always townie, never not townie,, doesnt fully convince me and I think he's feeling a bit guilty. Wordbender. A person who takes what someone says and push it alittle bit further. There are several reasons why I don't like this behavior. First of all it's imo just an acceptable lie. What you do is you're trying to change the appearance of something to make it fit your agenda or theory. Why are anyone doing this. FoS. I said I not the best townie but I am not bad. If I thought I would be a bad choice for mayor I wouldn't run. Beeing good at scumhunting in the end comes down to 3 pillars imo. Effort, Logic, Experience. I may not have the most experience but I have played a few games and I know most of the ropes. And even though I may be slightly behind some other candidates in experience I have a vast supply of logic and effort. Anyone can scumhunt, it's just the the veterans love to pretend that it's their secret superpower. "A decent choice for a day 1 lynch. Else he is a bad townie with a big ego" Beeing a bad townie is a terrible reason to lynch someone for. It's just an excuse to make it seem as lynching a bad townie is okey. Double FoS. always townie, never not townie is a pun on the fact that I have played 5-6 games on team liquid and I have always been townie (Veteran in one game) | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 14 2012 00:59 rgTheSchworz wrote: Biggest reason is that I think you're red.Lynching scum is good.Lynching bad townies is middle-to-bad. Lynching townies who really think well is bad. Lynching blues is terribad. Really,I have a big mouth and am not afraid to admit it. So i start pointing fingers. So far i see that you have returned my accusation against me.I could counter-argue that you make me a wordbender when I quoted your post word for word. I can't make anything out of a mayoral campaign that says''Vote me.I am bad at playing scum, I am very good at getting scum lynched''.That is generic. We want a mayor that comes up with sensible,spot-on accusations, not Vagueness. Like others also said, there is bound to be scum trying for mayor.That combined with your post which showsreturned accusations, like you would need to defend by attacking another.Do you feel guilty? Who are you and what is your mafia history? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 14 2012 03:39 VisceraEyes wrote: BC, I consider your claim to be scummy for this reason: you're essentially leveraging your role to win you this election. Discuss. I agree the motive is no doubt to win the election, I don't think it's scummy though. It just seems too cooky and there are motives for town aswell as scum to win the election. I think town has more to win on his move then scum. He also seemed to already have taken a lead in the election and judging from his post efforts I feel confident that if he were scum he could had won the election without resorting to this. And if he could have won the election without it it just feels like a bad scummove to put himself in this much spotlight. Even if he is the scum mason he will have an impossibly hard time to achive any scum agendas with his pm abillity. I will watch him closely for signs that he doesn't play as he preach and I don't think I will be the only one. It's just to much trouble to actually benefit the scum so I will choose to assume his claim is legit. It makes much more sense seeing how much this could potentially strenghten the town. Compared to what a risky long-shot high effort/low reward move it would be from scum. You will have my vote. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Risk.Nuke- He disappeared off the face of the earth after a few posts. - CC First of all. "A few posts", is this your sub-appeal to tell everyone to spam up the thread? Because it really sounds as if my post "numbers" aren't enough for you. Secondly, I'd hardly call not beeing present for a few hours a friday evening qualifies for disapearing of the face of the earth. As regard to my candidacy I thought about withdrawing it but I didn't really want too and also it just seems like a waste of space to announce you're withdrawing when not a soul is supporting you anyway. So thats where my candidacy is right now. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
I agree it's really about time to get the candidate numbers down, and start discussing. People needed to have voted by now so we could have had a decent idea of where people were standing, L I think you just might be alittle late to the race to run for mayor now. 4 On page 39 its stated that roles who get elected cannot be roleblocked; All of the current candidates for mayor are crumbing or have claimed roles that don't benefit from this. This issue is brought up a grand total of ONCE in the 12 pages since then and not discussed any further. - L Abot this. What do you want to do, elect a dt? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 01:18 Mattchew wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 01:16 risk.nuke wrote: Wasn't actually ment to post yet so ebwop and here is the follow-up part. I agree it's really about time to get the candidate numbers down, and start discussing. People needed to have voted by now so we could have had a decent idea of where people were standing, L I think you just might be alittle late to the race to run for mayor now. 4 On page 39 its stated that roles who get elected cannot be roleblocked; All of the current candidates for mayor are crumbing or have claimed roles that don't benefit from this. This issue is brought up a grand total of ONCE in the 12 pages since then and not discussed any further. - L Abot this. What do you want to do, elect a dt?What? you want to out a dt? are you crazy? I have no experience with anything like this before so if you wouldn't mind feel free to explain it warrants an "are you crazy?". It might be crystalclear to you, sorry but it's not to me. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
He made some bad posts and then disappears, agree. It's odd, but some people have to do stuff on the weekend. He's def a candidate though - Jay I just realised this. Look at my posthistory and tell me if you would describe it as "I made some bad posts". SCUM for softdefending me without seeing my filter. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 02:29 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 02:17 risk.nuke wrote: He made some bad posts and then disappears, agree. It's odd, but some people have to do stuff on the weekend. He's def a candidate though - Jay I just realised this. Look at my posthistory and tell me if you would describe it as "I made some bad posts". SCUM for softdefending me without seeing my filter. I don't know, if I should respond to that. L had a point and called me out for a reason. I like to clarify things then. And it is important to do so. But your accusation is clearly OMGUS. I didn't even really accuse you and said you might be busy during the weekend. Who are you to tell me that I didn't look into your filter and that I don't keep a spreadsheet? That's just not right. Also, notice how I said bad, not scummy. So a) you're campaign "always a townie" was just. well, bad. I didn't like it, it felt generic, it was badly formated and it lacked a solid gameplan. b) calling out rgSchworz because he didn't like your campaign either in a very agressive and condescending way. again, not even really scummy. just bad. All in all yeah, I think you are one candidate to look out for. After this post even more. Although, and I repeat myself here, I don't even think you're scummy, but you seem scummy, because your posts lack quality. What omgus are you speaking of? Try to get into my head as I am getting into his head. He is doing a typical scum-move, softdefend the townie, In itself it's not a scummy move. Scum loves to do this but townies do this to and that is not what I am reacting on. Here is the thing. Jay refered to my posts as bad. Which to anyone who looks at them could see they are clearly not bad. They are few but there isn't a single irrelevant/bad post in there. So why would anyone call them bad? Well they wouldn't. So why would Jay defend me without reading my filter. Well because he is scum and therefor know I am town and unluckily assumed that the reason I was looked at was a bad post. He was beeing uncarefull and made a scumslip. And Jay haven't accused me so how can It be omgus. Look at the mass contradictions in his followup post. "I wasn't accusing you, but this is omgus" and "I don't think you're scum but you're scummy" <--- WHAT? He is also bringing up rgSchwors which makes no sense unless perhaps feels it's more pro-town to ignore attacks on you. I was just arguing/discussion with rhSchwors when he attacked my candidacy which is the natural thing to do. He's just trying hard to make me look bad. On January 15 2012 02:32 Mattchew wrote: yay for risk.nuke and jayjay tunneling one another because they disagree mattchew, he might be tunneling the me, but I am clearly not tunneling him with one post. Why on earth did you make a post like that for because it's purpose seemed to be to minimize, lessen and prevent discussion of this. Which seems incredibly biased. If I'm elected I'll lynch Jay, I support BC for the election stronger then before because of jay's efforts against him. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 03:39 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 03:35 risk.nuke wrote: On January 15 2012 02:29 Jayjay54 wrote: On January 15 2012 02:17 risk.nuke wrote: He made some bad posts and then disappears, agree. It's odd, but some people have to do stuff on the weekend. He's def a candidate though - Jay I just realised this. Look at my posthistory and tell me if you would describe it as "I made some bad posts". SCUM for softdefending me without seeing my filter. I don't know, if I should respond to that. L had a point and called me out for a reason. I like to clarify things then. And it is important to do so. But your accusation is clearly OMGUS. I didn't even really accuse you and said you might be busy during the weekend. Who are you to tell me that I didn't look into your filter and that I don't keep a spreadsheet? That's just not right. Also, notice how I said bad, not scummy. So a) you're campaign "always a townie" was just. well, bad. I didn't like it, it felt generic, it was badly formated and it lacked a solid gameplan. b) calling out rgSchworz because he didn't like your campaign either in a very agressive and condescending way. again, not even really scummy. just bad. All in all yeah, I think you are one candidate to look out for. After this post even more. Although, and I repeat myself here, I don't even think you're scummy, but you seem scummy, because your posts lack quality. What omgus are you speaking of? Try to get into my head as I am getting into his head. He is doing a typical scum-move, softdefend the townie, In itself it's not a scummy move. Scum loves to do this but townies do this to and that is not what I am reacting on. Here is the thing. Jay refered to my posts as bad. Which to anyone who looks at them could see they are clearly not bad. They are few but there isn't a single irrelevant/bad post in there. So why would anyone call them bad? Well they wouldn't. So why would Jay defend me without reading my filter. Well because he is scum and therefor know I am town and unluckily assumed that the reason I was looked at was a bad post. He was beeing uncarefull and made a scumslip. And Jay haven't accused me so how can It be omgus. Look at the mass contradictions in his followup post. "I wasn't accusing you, but this is omgus" and "I don't think you're scum but you're scummy" <--- WHAT? He is also bringing up rgSchwors which makes no sense unless perhaps feels it's more pro-town to ignore attacks on you. I was just arguing/discussion with rhSchwors when he attacked my candidacy which is the natural thing to do. He's just trying hard to make me look bad. On January 15 2012 02:32 Mattchew wrote: yay for risk.nuke and jayjay tunneling one another because they disagree mattchew, he might be tunneling the me, but I am clearly not tunneling him with one post. Why on earth did you make a post like that for because it's purpose seemed to be to minimize, lessen and prevent discussion of this. Which seems incredibly biased. If I'm elected I'll lynch Jay, I support BC for the election stronger then before because of jay's efforts against him. I most certainly accused you. "He's def a candidate though" is what you call defending? Maybe you weren't as good of a lawyer. And saying I'm scum is pretty much tunneling. And just because I think your posts are bad? Of course, you think they're good, but there may be differen opinions. Finally, please format your posts a little better. The formating of that post is fine, another attempts to make me look bad on irrelevant matters and it is a scummove because townies need to be unbiased and openminded, that is why tunneling is bad to begin with. Jay you are scum, you know it, I know it. But for you to help me convince my fellow town of this please let's discuss what matters. You may begin with pointing out which of my posts were bad. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 03:59 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 03:46 risk.nuke wrote: On January 15 2012 03:39 Jayjay54 wrote: On January 15 2012 03:35 risk.nuke wrote: On January 15 2012 02:29 Jayjay54 wrote: On January 15 2012 02:17 risk.nuke wrote: He made some bad posts and then disappears, agree. It's odd, but some people have to do stuff on the weekend. He's def a candidate though - Jay I just realised this. Look at my posthistory and tell me if you would describe it as "I made some bad posts". SCUM for softdefending me without seeing my filter. I don't know, if I should respond to that. L had a point and called me out for a reason. I like to clarify things then. And it is important to do so. But your accusation is clearly OMGUS. I didn't even really accuse you and said you might be busy during the weekend. Who are you to tell me that I didn't look into your filter and that I don't keep a spreadsheet? That's just not right. Also, notice how I said bad, not scummy. So a) you're campaign "always a townie" was just. well, bad. I didn't like it, it felt generic, it was badly formated and it lacked a solid gameplan. b) calling out rgSchworz because he didn't like your campaign either in a very agressive and condescending way. again, not even really scummy. just bad. All in all yeah, I think you are one candidate to look out for. After this post even more. Although, and I repeat myself here, I don't even think you're scummy, but you seem scummy, because your posts lack quality. What omgus are you speaking of? Try to get into my head as I am getting into his head. He is doing a typical scum-move, softdefend the townie, In itself it's not a scummy move. Scum loves to do this but townies do this to and that is not what I am reacting on. Here is the thing. Jay refered to my posts as bad. Which to anyone who looks at them could see they are clearly not bad. They are few but there isn't a single irrelevant/bad post in there. So why would anyone call them bad? Well they wouldn't. So why would Jay defend me without reading my filter. Well because he is scum and therefor know I am town and unluckily assumed that the reason I was looked at was a bad post. He was beeing uncarefull and made a scumslip. And Jay haven't accused me so how can It be omgus. Look at the mass contradictions in his followup post. "I wasn't accusing you, but this is omgus" and "I don't think you're scum but you're scummy" <--- WHAT? He is also bringing up rgSchwors which makes no sense unless perhaps feels it's more pro-town to ignore attacks on you. I was just arguing/discussion with rhSchwors when he attacked my candidacy which is the natural thing to do. He's just trying hard to make me look bad. On January 15 2012 02:32 Mattchew wrote: yay for risk.nuke and jayjay tunneling one another because they disagree mattchew, he might be tunneling the me, but I am clearly not tunneling him with one post. Why on earth did you make a post like that for because it's purpose seemed to be to minimize, lessen and prevent discussion of this. Which seems incredibly biased. If I'm elected I'll lynch Jay, I support BC for the election stronger then before because of jay's efforts against him. I most certainly accused you. "He's def a candidate though" is what you call defending? Maybe you weren't as good of a lawyer. And saying I'm scum is pretty much tunneling. And just because I think your posts are bad? Of course, you think they're good, but there may be differen opinions. Finally, please format your posts a little better. The formating of that post is fine, another attempts to make me look bad on irrelevant matters and it is a scummove because townies need to be unbiased and openminded, that is why tunneling is bad to begin with. Jay you are scum, you know it, I know it. But for you to help me convince my fellow town of this please let's discuss what matters. You may begin with pointing out which of my posts were bad. oh boy. This is my last response to you. Our little feud is getting town nowhere. Here you go with bad posts: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716&user=76576&user=76576 Campaign, generic horrible structured, lack of game plan. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=29#573 Condescending one liner, no content to discuss. random spam oh and most recently: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 02:17 risk.nuke wrote: He made some bad posts and then disappears, agree. It's odd, but some people have to do stuff on the weekend. He's def a candidate though - Jay I just realised this. Look at my posthistory and tell me if you would describe it as "I made some bad posts". SCUM for softdefending me without seeing my filter. Didn't even read a single line. I say you are def a lynch candidate and you respond that I scummishly softdefending? If you quote a single line, please read it properly. It's funny that I'm not even on BCs scum list, even though I made a lot of points against him. That's because I put a lot of effort into a lot of posts which try to help town. other than that formating does actually matter. Because a good post is well structured and not a single wall of text. I'm not trying to make you look bad, your posts do by itself. You fail to add content, you don't read posts properly and your posting style is not good either. so there's that, if you answer, be warned, I won't answer, because I'm done with you, not in a OMGUS way, but a do whatever you want way. BC I'll answer you later on, have to think about it. I asked you to point out my bad posts and you completely avoid the question and instead give a half-assed generic answer. And you softdefended me when you said give me brake I'm probably away for the weekend. What is worse imo is right after you say I'm probably a good lynch without providing reasoning. And you talk about that as if it was perfectly acceptable. This is not a feud, this is me accusing you of beeing scum. That fact that you refer to this as a feud just makes me more sure on the fact that you know I'm townaligned. Add to that the fact that you don't want to talk with me. WHAT? I thought you said I was a good lynchcandidate which means you must atleast claim that you think I am scum. So you think I am scum but you don't want to discuss it? WHAT? Jesus. Either you're dumb or scum and seeing how I just read you're trying to run for mayor on the grounds that you voted for mattchew so very full of yourself. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 05:33 VisceraEyes wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 05:31 risk.nuke wrote: Nothing about this 'don't tell them what you will do', wifom shit matters. If CC is scum they will roleblock VE, if CC is town mafia will still rb VE. risk.nuke is excluding the very real possibility that I'm scum...is this a scumslip? Now I'm done. I deemed it unlikely of you beeing scum. Because you claimed a powerfull town role. And we won't elect you. So it's going to be really obvious in a few days if you lied. So it's too bad scumplay. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 06:17 VisceraEyes wrote: Seriously guys this is all hands on deck. I'm very town and I'm very Jack. I need to be mayor. VOTES ON VE GOGOGO This isn't me trying to leverage my role to win the election - if I wanted to do that I would have done that already and not called BC out on it right after his claim. This is me trying to keep one of our most powerful roles IN THE GAME. I'm not going to do anymore stupid shit if you elect me. Well, You claim you're off and then come storming back trying to run for mayor. Earlier I was wondering at the time you claimed if you were going to try to use it to get elected, I even thought about promoting you myself but ended up thinking it would be to dangerous. I don't like it. No go Vicera. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 06:50 VisceraEyes wrote: L, I'll prove I'm Jack by shooting tonight and Masoning you tomorrow then. That's my plan. This doesn't rule out scum mason. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 15 2012 22:57 rgTheSchworz wrote: Bill, I think you're putting too many players on the Town list.For some of them, I don't even undestand the reason why-WBG, kita and sheth too. Sheth started a Protact vote wagon, and you list protact as scum, shouldnt he be suspected? Also we should focus on 1 or 2 lynch candidates, and pressure them hard, else we let them get away with diverting attention and starting third-party wagons. Right now, those would be Risk.nuke and Macpo. I encourage them to post in the next 6 hours, else they're scum in my eyes.They're from EU too, so they have no excuse. When you pick out 2 people amongst 50 and tell everyone these guys are the ones we should focus on I would love to hear some reasoning why us. You know, rather then we should look for reasoning to kill these 2. + Show Spoiler + aka we should tunnel these guys untill we find something we can lynch them for. Also scumpoints for using the awesome scumterm "we should" rather then "I will". | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Speaking of it bad play that brings us to rg. Distinguishing bad townie play from scum play is very hard and as for now rG might very well just be a bad townie. But I'm watching you. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 16 2012 01:39 rtgICEMAN wrote: anyway risk.nuke may be a perfect lynch candidate but as jayjay said he could just be a bad town player instead of scum.Macpo's posts are also pretty weird and i find him scummy as well. Elaborate or fucking die. I just got lynched in a game where I was townie and I had 20 people chanting he is scum, he is scum. Why I said several times? Can you tell me why I am scum? What will you learn from my death. They stood silently for 20 minutes. Because you're scum one said. Yeah because you're scum the rest continued. The worst damn townplay I have ever seen and a scum paradise to hide in. So elaborate NOW! | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 16 2012 01:49 Toadesstern wrote: Show nested quote + On January 16 2012 01:43 risk.nuke wrote: Look I won't bitch with you two, alot of people seem convinced jayjay is town for very inadequate reasons. Which is scummy in itself because first of all smart townies doesn't let the scum know who they have townreads on. That is just bad town play. Speaking of it bad play that brings us to rg. Distinguishing bad townie play from scum play is very hard and as for now rG might very well just be a bad townie. But I'm watching you. depends. If you want to lynch someone I got a townread on I'm going to tell you to shut the fuck up because I think he's a townie. So no telling people your townreads is obviously not always bad. Furthermore it makes reading BM pretty nice. Depending on where I disagree or agree I'm able to say he's probably town or mafia. Yeah, when a person is about to face lynching thats a different situation but I shouldn't need to explain everything as if you were in kindergarten most people here are adults with a higher then average iq. Saying you have a townread on someone who isn't under suspicion or face the threat of a lynch is superbad townplay. Saying you have a townread on someone under suspicion is also bad play because if they are under suspicion that's great. That means they won't get nightkilled and they are safe untill someone pushes for a lynch, and then you can tell em. Shout it from a mountaincliff or whatever. (Ofcourse there are also variables like sometimes you want everyone to know a person is safe to ensure he gets medic protection etc, we don't need to discuss or mention all of these because we can simply apply logic to most of that.) | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
If you think someone is scum. Don't say I think he is scum. Quote, point out and explain where and what it is that this person have done to make you feel a certain way. If you find the manner of how someone post suspicious. Explain why. Make sure that the reader can follow your train of thoughts and understand how you came to your conclusion. If you think anything at all about someone else and you want to comment on it. Ask yourself before you finnish typing. Have I Quoted? Have I explained my views clearly? Have I pointed out or marked key parts. Hae my train of thoughts been clear? If everyone only did this it would make the scums life alot harder. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 16 2012 09:52 kingjames01 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 16 2012 09:51 Jitsu wrote: On January 16 2012 09:47 kingjames01 wrote: On January 13 2012 16:40 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Vote for BC, vote for accountable and vocal leadership. We should be holding BC accountable for Palmar's lynch. BC has been engaging in discussions with sandroba behind the scenes. Because of this, they have formed some sort of agreement. On January 15 2012 06:05 sandroba wrote: I'll vote BC since we came to a compromise in pms. Gotta roll. ##Vote: BloodyC0bbler I can infer that the choice to lynch Palmar was also a topic of discussion between them. We should scrutinize their relationship so that we can judge for ourselves whether BC or sandroba was the spearhead of this lynch. BloodyC0bbler: be accountable for your lynch. Summarize for us what you and sandroba have been discussing. Why should we have it summarized? Wouldn't posting the logs be better? Since there is discussion of all the Mason's doing it, why not have all the Mason's do it? Why was Mattchew modkilled? Maybe I misunderstood the situation. He broke the rules and took a screenshot of his inbox and posted in the thread. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 17 2012 05:10 VisceraEyes wrote: Yeah risk, please base your thoughts on what's happened in this thread - not on what you perceive to be happening outside this thread. What are your thoughts on Foolishness risk? Initially I didn't like him I felt he was trolling when he starting running Bill Murrays election campaign. That changed pretty fast. He supported mattchews campaign which makes him look good. If I read their logs right, mattchew was the one who said he wanted to run so foolishness didn't start mattchews campagin which should be noted though. Right now I await his return and some further reasoning behind his list. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 17 2012 05:37 Nisani201 wrote: Protactinium Protactinium was heavily against Ciryandor D1. So you might be wondering, would Protactinium bus one of his teammates? That is what this analysis will prove. Protactinium begins by running for mayor on the platform of lynching Ciryandor. But there is no way that Protactinium actually had a case against Ciryandor this early. Especially since, at the time Protactinium wrote that, Ciryandor only had one post in the game. So from this we can deduce that Protact is either bad town, or scum. Now look at his next post. Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 02:47 Protactinium wrote: On January 13 2012 15:22 Ciryandor wrote: On January 13 2012 14:56 Protactinium wrote: On January 13 2012 14:26 Ciryandor wrote: /confirm LOL I won't vote for Kitaman after XLVIII's disaster. He was an absolute derp in that. Waiting for people to put in a serious campaign with a decent policy. This is why I'm waiting for Mr. Wiggles and Cyber_Cheese to provide us with good reasons; and right now, Wiggles has the best campaign of the lot. I of course wonder if Sandroba or Palmar will try to get to the elections again. I'm running for mayor on the platform of lynching Ciryandor. There's no way you seriously think Mr. Wiggles has the best campaign. LOL that's a good reason to get you voted in. Lynching someone for having an opinion. What does this post do? Ciryandor does not attempt to clarify his earlier position or attempt to bring us into mutual understanding. Instead, he mockingly attempts to discredit me by misrepresenting my statement and reframing it in a way that paints him in a favorable light. I never say that I want to lynch him for having an opinion, I called bullshit on his statement that Mr. Wiggles has the best campaign. Seriously, if you really believe what you said, tell us why you thought Mr. Wiggles had the best campaign. Furthermore, Ciryandor initially states that: On January 13 2012 14:26 Ciryandor wrote: /confirm LOL I won't vote for Kitaman after XLVIII's disaster. He was an absolute derp in that. Waiting for people to put in a serious campaign with a decent policy. This is why I'm waiting for Mr. Wiggles and Cyber_Cheese to provide us with good reasons; and right now, Wiggles has the best campaign of the lot. I of course wonder if Sandroba or Palmar will try to get to the elections again. While Ciryandor says that he wants to hear good reasons for Wiggles/Cyber_Cheese running, he makes no attempt to draw out information from Wiggles even though it is clear that they are both online (they are both posting until page 24). Instead, he loosely dismisses my accusations as well as GGQ's, and proceeds to babble nonsense about Foolishness and Bill Murray. Ciryandor is twisting my words. Ciryandor is bullshitting that Wiggles has the best campaign. Ciryandor shows no further interest in extracting information about Wiggles' campaign despite claiming he wanted good reasons. Ciryandor continues to babble on about useless topics (Bill Murray) after giving a strange reaction to my/GGQ's accusations. I've noticed that a lot of players are omitting my campaign for mayor in their lists of people running for mayor. But I'm not trolling. I am seriously running for mayor on the platform of lynching Ciryandor. Instead of asking for reasoning on support for Wiggles' campaign, Protact immediately asserts that Ciryandor is scum. He also asserts that Ciryandor is twisting his words, which is bullshit. In addition, he is trying to discredit Wiggles' campaign, because he knew that Wiggles is town. He doesn't post until 13 pages later (understandable, since we are all in different timezones). During this 13 page period, BC claims mason and the town is abuzz with mason discussion and whatnot. In the post, he attacks BC for "contradicting himself". Afterwards, he demonstrates how BC had a consistent point of view when backing up his opinions...! He attacks BC for "subtly" wanting to shun all mason activity. So you be the judge. Do you think this is subtle? Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 05:54 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 14 2012 05:52 VisceraEyes wrote: BC are you for or against a mass-mason claim? This is now the second time I've asked you. Please respond. I repeat, please respond to my query regarding the mass-mason claim. I am fine with either it, or having town just say "we ignore all pms that arent host pms" Making every mason accountable / making them useless to prevent manipulation seems the best play at the moment. making them all claim however is the optimal play, it may out the group of us, but it also prevents mafia from using their ability without being in the spotlight. Protact calls this mafia bias, but in reality, this is just BC giving his opinion. If you want to talk about subtlety, Protact is subtly hinting that any opinions that go against his are mafia bias. The next part of the analysis: Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 11:46 Protactinium wrote: So what is the scenario for BC being red and pushing his mason claim? BC is in fact red, and can use the mason power (chooses it for himself early in the day). As a town mason would, BC picks a mason target and starts talking to them. Once he gets the town to agree to ban masons, he is off the hook, and doesn't have to worry about PMs anymore. More specifically, he doesn't have to worry about town PMs. Like stated before, mafia BC plays a powerhouse thread control style. By banning PMs, BC doesn't lose out on much (he admits he isn't a heavy PM user), and nerfs Foolishness, sandroba, and my abilities to play a PM centric game (which we are known for). And that's what is the difference between this game and XLII (the game he refers to when he says he dominates with only 1-2 PMs). Foolishness and I are playing in this game, and are real threats. BC wants to shut down PMs before it starts, and he doesn't have to give up much information or lie at all in order to do it. This post does not discuss the scenario in which BC is town. BC already provided good reasons as to why shunning masons is a good idea. With masons this game, there is distrust on both sides. Furthermore, he has not followed up on his campaign promise: "I will question, analyze and call out all those who play in what I view as bad town/mafia like. (I have already done this with foolishness, he knows better)." Ok, so maybe he called out Foolishness yesterday, but where is the scumhunting today? Its non-existent, because BC is too busy derailing the thread with mason discussions instead of scumhunting. What is even more interesting is the timing of his initial claim post. It comes an hourish after my second post against Ciryandor, which conveniently most people except for sandroba and sheth have ignored. In the next post, he takes some quotes from BC and asserts that he is not trying to hunt scum. But this is not true. BC was actively calling out people; Protact just didn't include it in the analysis. + Show Spoiler [superlong bc quotes] + On January 14 2012 02:23 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2012 21:52 Toadesstern wrote: am I the only one who thinks BC's campaign is a little weird? I'm reading page 25 right now and I can't stop thinking about it. It feels off for some reason imo. I can't really put it down to something but although he said he's going to be accountable and vocal it doesn't feel like like townie-BC from the 80 player game. I voted him back than because I thought he's townie in that game and a lot of people said it's too dangerous to vote him because it's an instant-lose if he's scum. He answered a lot he made reasonable posts and everything he posted looked townish while I got the feeling he's trying to pretend to be town this game. Just take the part about foolishness for example. Sure foolishness is weird and someone has to point that out alright but I don't like that part at all: I will question, analyze and call out all those who play in what I view as bad town/mafia like. (I have already done this with foolishness, he knows better). Sounds like "hey guys, see this? I am totally town! I put some effort in this and got pro-town things rolling". Does he really have to point out he's doing good? I'd like people to judge him on what he's doing themselves. Could be nothing at all but as mentioned I got a weird feeling when reading his posts and to me it's nothing like the last game I saw him play. Other than that: Still on page 25, still reading, still don't like palmar's post. However I actually like VE's post a lot but doubt that he's going to be mayor. He's putting some effort into this game and I don't think that that's his mafia-play at all. As you are really the only person to respond to me about my campaign I am delighted to respond and hopefully remove your doubts of me. As you point out my post is "weird". You make note of how I am "pointing out that i am good". Rather I am pointing out I will be active. There is an extreme difference and anyone who has seen responsibility will know what I mean as I pretty well was inactive and posted the bare minimum. As for the "i voted last time because people said hes took dangerous and insta lose if hes scum" you are missing the core bit of that game where I actively argued with people over fear mongering as what someones potential alignment is without a solid reason (no analysis) is not a valid reason to deny votes. This has not happened this game as everyone thus far seems to be running on their own merit as opposed to talking down fellow candidates. As for the current thread. Palmar makes Show nested quote + On January 13 2012 18:34 Palmar wrote: I have no intentions of running for mayor or caring much about the mayor elections. I'm probably going to be voting VisceraEyes, depending on how dumb he will be through the day. statement. The last big game that was run Palmar got mayor and I got sheriff. Palmar hardcore ran that game, and invested a huge amount of his time into the game. For him to outright say "i have no intention of running for mayor" he would have been able to stop and seem like a fine post. But continuing with "or caring much about mayor elections" is where he comes off horribly wrong. He as shown in the past to care heavily about elections and the active pushing for towns to succeed. He then throws his support behind a player based on "how dumb they might be" over a reason like "I believe x is a solid candidate" or "I am voting for x because i believe they have solid scum hunting" etc.... It comes off as very curt and unlike the palmar I have personally played with in the past. Show nested quote + On January 13 2012 18:25 Cyber_Cheese wrote: On January 13 2012 16:43 bumatlarge wrote: On January 13 2012 16:32 Cyber_Cheese wrote: On January 13 2012 14:36 Foolishness wrote: + Show Spoiler [campaign post] + ![]() This is my official campaign post! It is all very simple! No, I am not running for office. My campaign is based around voting for the one and only Bill Murray! Let's face it, there are many people (L) who are going to run on the basis of lynching Bill Murray. Do we want to make such a rash decision this early in the game? Time has shown that such policy lynches are just a distraction from our true purpose of scum hunting. In order to save Bill Murray from such an easy day 1 lynch, I propose we save him by putting him in office. Now before you go on making propositions that I have just smoked a pound of weed, consider the situation our beloved Bill Murray is in. As his first game back, we know for sure he's going to be top notch. This is his chance to prove to the old members that he's changed and proved to the new members that he's a respectable player. Thus we can expect him to bust out his A+ game. He knows that if he nails a few mafia this game he'll have turned from village idiot into village hottie. Who would you rather have in office? Someone like Bill Murray who is probably spending 14 hours a day figuring out who is mafia or someone like kitaman27 or bumatlarge who will just put forth the same normal effort we'd expect from an elected official? Bill Murray is the real deal, and we know he'll be the real deal. Who knows how much effort Cyber_Cheese really wants to put in this game. Definitely not as much as Bill Murray will! A vote for Bill Murray is a vote for the town! Now what if our esteemed actor turns out to be mafia? Don't worry, as a proven scumhunter, I will dedicate enormous amounts of my time to making sure Bill Murray is indeed town. And he has a lot of games under his belt for comparison. Of course I will also be doing my usual scumhunting, so do not fret. But we can be sure that Bill Murray will be posting frequently (hopefully not too much) and will be active in his duties, especially given what I've said above. Is kitaman only going to make 2 posts a day if he gets elected in? Maybe. Will Bill Murray? No of course not. And we all know that the more someone posts the more likely their true colors show. If Bill Murray turns out to be mafia it shouldn't be long before it becomes obvious. If he's not, we got an easily confirmed innocent in office who at the very least will make the entire mafia team facepalm. And a mafia team with their palms on their faces will be unable to type. ![]() You can make the right choice! Vote Bill Murray! + Show Spoiler + Yes I'm 100% serious Bill Murray hasn't even posted yet. Why are you so sure you want him elected? On January 13 2012 15:08 Adam4167 wrote: Ill be waiting for Bill Murray to show up to the thread before I even consider him or his candidacy. So far I'm leaning towards voting for Cheese, as he is one of the few people in this game I have experience with. I am more likely to recognize his scum play if he is scum and, lets face it, he has a flaming pony as his campaign picture. So Cheese, since you opened the game with a vote on Wiggles, and he is now also running for mayor, will you be hanging him upon your election? No, that was a joke based on his always scum reputation. I will lynch the scummiest candidate. On January 13 2012 15:09 bumatlarge wrote: On January 13 2012 15:08 Adam4167 wrote: Ill be waiting for Bill Murray to show up to the thread before I even consider him or his candidacy. So far I'm leaning towards voting for Cheese, as he is one of the few people in this game I have experience with. I am more likely to recognize his scum play if he is scum and, lets face it, he has a flaming pony as his campaign picture. So Cheese, since you opened the game with a vote on Wiggles, and he is now also running for mayor, will you be hanging him upon your election? I have successfully ruled this person out as mafia. I am good at this game. Explain. On January 13 2012 14:07 Mr. Wiggles wrote: A couple notes about the set-up: Elected roles gain detection immunity. This makes it worse for us if mafia get into one of these roles, as we have no way to DT check them. It also means that the GF probably won't run for office, or if he does, he'll drop out early. Between the mayor and the sheriff, the sheriff is the one who actually has power past day 1. So, one thing we can do, is vote in a player that we see as both a strong townie, and as being town in this game, into the mayor role solely for the purposes of protection. This applies to the sheriff too, but there's more responsibility on them as the game goes on due to the jailkeeper mechanic. Also something to note, is that we can't trust vig claims, due to the possibility of mafia jack's, who would be able to shoot and not affect what KP would show up that night coming from the mafia. We should also maybe talk about when to use our double lynches, but I don't think it's a huge deal until when the time comes that we might actually want to use them. We just need to be careful not to waste them. Vote me into office, please. I disagree, the mayor still has a fair amount of power as the game gets closer to LYLO. On January 13 2012 15:29 GGQ wrote: On January 13 2012 13:49 Cyber_Cheese wrote: Oh fail, didn't realise there was elections... ##Unvote I'm going to run for mayor. Lynch all lurkers/liars is standard pre-game chat, and it's mostly useless. Let's skip that. It's all too situational, and we rarely follow through with it. This post is also bad. Rather than calling my posts bad, try adding something to the discussion. Are you running for mayor? If so, details. If not, what do you think of the candidates? Also, bum is directing blues already? planning ahead that much seems scummy... One more thing, if anyone was even considering it, don't run for mayor based on being a blue. It gives the scum too much information on day 1, and it could be scum lying. He's posting with a positive attitude and he didnt squeem at all at the prospect of lynching wiggles. Plus he took your lameness seriously :D I'm not planning ahead THAT much, and running for mayor as blue is perfectly reasonable reasoning. Unless a vanilla townie is very good, there is little reason for him to run over a townie. I find cheese's posting rather scummy so far. He seems rather content with stepping on peoples posts this game with not much regard to his own. I will review his case. I'm reading through and commenting on peoples play, yes. It was to draw out some reasons behind actions and thoughts that I'm trying to understand the motivation behind. On January 13 2012 17:10 Bill Murray wrote: It is not Foolishness's game I don't see how it is a moot point whatsoever I am not going to create a huge wall post, and sound like a high school football coach cyber_cheese is confirmed scum in my eyes. If I'm elected mayor, I'm lynching him He's acting like I haven't posted at all, when my post is right above his. To further his agenda, he's attacking bumatlarge for coaching power roles, when in his own post, he goes on to tell power roles to not run for mayor based on being power roles. Hypocrisy, and scum skimming, are just the icing on the cake, however. I had a scum read on him the minute he tried to get a lynch pushed through on Mr Wiggles, and then took his vote back when he realized it was for mayor. He was trying to get a mislynch pushed through for his scum team in my eyes. If he's town, oh well, he didn't even read any of my posts DIRECTLY ABOVE HIS, and he has not only proven he isn't reading, but already contradicted himself. At the time I was making that post, you hadn't posted. I made a joke about lynching Wiggles. Bum looked like he was ready to focus the elections around power roles. I was discouraging that situation. On January 13 2012 17:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 13 2012 17:10 Bill Murray wrote: It is not Foolishness's game I don't see how it is a moot point whatsoever I am not going to create a huge wall post, and sound like a high school football coach cyber_cheese is confirmed scum in my eyes. If I'm elected mayor, I'm lynching him He's acting like I haven't posted at all, when my post is right above his. To further his agenda, he's attacking bumatlarge for coaching power roles, when in his own post, he goes on to tell power roles to not run for mayor based on being power roles. Hypocrisy, and scum skimming, are just the icing on the cake, however. I had a scum read on him the minute he tried to get a lynch pushed through on Mr Wiggles, and then took his vote back when he realized it was for mayor. He was trying to get a mislynch pushed through for his scum team in my eyes. If he's town, oh well, he didn't even read any of my posts DIRECTLY ABOVE HIS, and he has not only proven he isn't reading, but already contradicted himself. eh? not that I want to start the first huge argument of the thread but. Do you agree that it is possible for someone to change their style? I am willing to give cheese about 20ish-30ish more minutes to respond to you before I make up my mind on him as well, I know my giant post was written as you posted 3 times. If he posts within the next bit of time badly or doesn't I will have him on a shit list. Making up your mind on someone not even a quarter of the way into the first day? Seems legit. On January 13 2012 18:02 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: I was debating what to do with my 3k but I couldn’t think up of anything fast enough so this is it ![]() Anyway, I am running for mayor as well. At the moment, I do not most of the mayor candidates. I don’t like Cyber_Cheese because his reasoning for him being mayor is weak in my opinion. Saying that you should be elected because your scum play is bad isn’t very inspiring. His other argument is that he’ll be active (nice trait for a mayor to have but everybody should be active), also he says he’ll lynch the scummiest mayor candidate which I don’t like because one of the mayor candidates may not be the best choice. Yes, being bad at scumplay isn't inspiring. I haven't shown off my town prowess on this forum yet, so I don't have any epic winning streaks to brag about. Suffice it to say votes on me aren't misplaced. Everyone *should* be active in theory, but things can come up, and I guarentee that won't happen with me Scum will run for mayor, and more than likely they will be scummier than most of town. If we inspect the candidates closely, we can easily discern at least one. wtf is this post? Your post is nothing if not confrontational without saying anything important. You attack someone earlier for not adding things to the discussion of the thread however you fail to do so here. You want to be elected yet your primary posting style at the moment is to make a massive quote post with 1 line explaining your take on a specific quote. In some cases, 1 word. This is not the behaviour indicative of someone the town would want to lead them. To quote you "I haven't shown off my town prowess on this forum yet, so I don't have any epic winning streaks to brag about. Suffice it to say votes on me aren't misplaced" As the way you are playing now all votes on your are misplaced. You are not posting in a manner that is inherently decent. You are not posting frequently with decent contented posts to get a solid read on you. You are not actively attempting to assert a mark on the role that puts you in a spotlight for good reasons. You are in a spotlight because you are insanely shifty in the eyes of many players. EVERYONE should not be voting cybercheese unless he turns his game around now. Even if he is townie and he is insanely good he should know that his posts at the moment are terrible and are not ones that indicate the qualities someone who would be a good leader. As for my take on the other candidates. At the moment I am willing to get behind either meapak, BM, or bumatlarge. of the current people running, each of them has shown they can be active, make intelligent posts, and have clear ones that help get a general read on them. Everyone should be giving their take on who of the current candidates would make the best mayor. This way we can lower the total people "running" by taking the top 3 or 4 choices and voting as opposed to having 7-8 people running. On January 14 2012 05:01 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 04:53 Mattchew wrote: On January 14 2012 04:39 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 14 2012 04:36 Mattchew wrote: On January 14 2012 04:31 BloodyC0bbler wrote: If i am a red mason it means whoever claims i masoned will be town, period. I would never have to mason a scumbuddy as well, im already talking to them. WIFOM Otherwise, Do you think that all masons should claim like you have? Assuming atleast 1 mason would be mafia it could lead to a high percentage day 1 lynch how is that wifom? Why would I as red ever out myself and another mafia in the same day? Especially when if i had used my mason somewhere else i would be counterclaimed and die? It would mean i would have to hold onto my use and have a scumbuddy claim and thus waste my own power to corrupt a townie? It is pure logic, not wifom. As for masons claiming? Things like this are what my claim were supposed to generate. Forcing people to only post in the thread for instance is a huge deal as it removes a scum form of play, etc... It is WIFOM because there is no way of confirming your alignment or that of who you mason regardless of either one of your alignments. Based on what you have said the possible outcomes are You are town and die, the person you mason'd is a null read because you cant know for sure what alignment they are. You are Scum and die, you mason a town -> we think the mason'd is town You are Scum and die, you mason no one or a scum (kind of redundant) claiming to mason said scum team member -> we think mason'd is town If you are town, survive, and the person you mason dies as town, we have a null read on you If you are town, survive, and the person you mason dies as scum, we should have a town read on you If you are scum, survive, and the person you mason dies as town, we have a null read on you If you are scum, survive, and the person you mason dies as scum, we should have a town read on you. If we are to believe what you say and you survive day 1/night 1 as scum mason and you claim a teammate, you become more and more powerful because you can then start masoning townies to further confirm your role. so? I confirm my role not my alignment. I have openly said it never clears the alignment of who I mason. How is this an issue? You knew this going in. I have a confirmable role not alignment. I said that in my first fucking post on this matter. I put myself in a hotseat all to out the potential butt fucking the mafia would give. As for your WIFOM shit, i never once said you can confirm people I mason, you proposed that. You created your own argument on something I never said. Town should base their read on someone based on how they act in thread, not on the knowledge of "a mason mason'd this guy so hes legit/scum yo" You will get a town read on me based on my actions. If i mason a scum, in pms he slips up and he dies and flips red because i outed his slip up I look better than I do now but am no way confirmed. If i do it multiple times maybe. Where did I say that i am confirmable alignment? where did I say the person i mason is confirmable. My role is nothing else is. I still have to prove my alignment via posts just like everyone else. I am merely opting to fubar the mafia while im at it. On January 14 2012 15:53 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 11:46 Protactinium wrote: Ah an interesting roleclaim. However, there is much more to this than people are getting at. The PM debate is an old one. Everyone has their opinion on whether it is town or mafia favored, and even through out-of-game debates, this is a highly controversial topic. If it can' be solved out of game, there's absolutely no way we are going to come up with a consensus in game. BC defends his claim by saying that getting everyone to contribute on this polarizing topic will help us get early reads on players. But if we can't agree on anything out of game, you won't really be able to say that someone saying "PMs good!" or "PMs bad!" will tell us anything about their alignment. Anyone can pretty much say whatever they like since they are under no obligation or pressure to have an opinion one way or the other on this issue. While it is debatable whether PMs are "good" or "bad" for town, it shouldn't be too controversial to say that PMs are elitist. They inherently favor good players who can make use of the extra channel of communication. When you are talking to someone in PMs, always keep in mind what you think the other person wants from you. Are they trying to convince you of a certain point of view? Are they trying to get you to claim? As long as you can keep in mind that the PM initiator may be attempting to manipulate you and don't give away information loosely, PMs really aren't that scary. What exactly has BC been discussing? Primarily, he has divided his attention between defending his claim, responding to attacks on the potnetial that he is red, and asking for "discussion" while pushing a particularly biased point of view. More clearly stated, he proposes a seemingly open-ended question, and answers it himself to make it appear like there was a town consensus behind it. If you look at the thread, the only real contribution to the discussion that DOESN'T come from BC is sandroba's suggestion that all the masons roleclaim. And notice BC's bias when discussing the topic. In almost all his posts, BC paints PMs in a bad light. He only seriously acknowledges that town masons have the potential to catch scum, but in the same post, quickly says that "its harder than you think": On January 14 2012 06:40 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Town masons have the potential to catch scum. Dts have the potential have finding scum. Vigi's have the potential to shooting scum. Jacks could do all 3. Of the group, masons rely on their ability to read people and read posts to get a good view of someone. Catching someone in pms is not as easy as everyone thinks it is and historically towns have town far more retarded things there than good. But lets look at a section of what BC has to say a bout PMs in his guide "TL Town Breakdown/Analysis": On January 28 2011 06:09 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Private Messaging This feature has been in a fair number of TL games. It is also an amazing tool if used properly. However, if it is not used properly, the mafia will abuse it and potentially win. They are also a function if used improperly will cause people to feel left out and like they don’t matter as players. Pm’s can and do make people elitist in games. IF Pm’s are allowed in a game they should be used properly. Role fishing, small analysis groups, alignment testing. Role fishing is straightforward so I will not go into it at this time. Small analysis groups. These groups need not be large, as you only need a few heads to flesh out analysis on people. It also means that if a red is in your group, it is easier to catch them, and it keeps the other groups safe from infiltration. Alignment testing. This is posting in a way to let you carefully analyze reactions. Townies are more inclined to answer in one way and mafia/blues another. Sometimes this will be obvious such as catching someone lying to you in pm’s or lying in thread. Other times this will be noticing subtle word choices. Regardless of how you opt to use the tool, if you do not feel comfortable in your ability to use them properly do not use them and play the game via the thread. Ask for detail from Ace on this, as he dislikes the PM feature. Quite a contradictory opinion from what he states in game. The essence of BC's out of game stance is that: "PMs are like playing with fire. Could be insanely awesome if used correctly, but could burn you if you don't. If you don't feel comfortable, don't use them". This is quite a stark contrast to his position in this game, where he seriously downplays the usefulness of town PMs, and does a bit of fear mongering in emphasizing how the mafia can screw you over with PMs. Is it possible that BC has changed his stance? I doubt it, but it certainly is possible. So lets dig deeper here. How is BC pushing his opinion? He does it subtly, and attempts to dissociate it from his personal point of view. In the beginning of his campaign to discuss masons, BC heavily uses the word "discuss" or "discussion", asks how "we as a whole" want to deal with masons, emphasizes that this is a discussion everyone should be weighing in on, and attempts to get the community involved in the discussion. He doesn't outright present his personal point of view, and frames the discussion so that it appears free and open-ended. But pretty much injects his own opinion into the discussion whenver possible. His initial point is that mafia masons are dangerous and that town needs to have a plan to deal with that. When asked for an example of PMs in action, BC drags in an example where he manipulated VE to do pro-mafia actions in just 1-2 PMs. (Reinforcing his stance on "PMs are scary") When asked behind why he thinks a mass claim will interfere with the mafia masons, he proposes in the hypothetical that if town agrees to not use PMs, then it shuts down mafia masons. A few posts later, he reemphasizes that "by making the town decide, vocally, now, we force everyone to have an opinion." While this is fine and dandy, really he is the one calling the shots here. When Cyber_Cheese suggests that we let masons use their discretion and suggests that smart town masons could cause the mafia masons to backfire, BC counters with "Mafia masons have the experience of an entire team to work manipulate someone", subtly pushing his opinion that PMs should be shunned. On January 14 2012 05:54 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 14 2012 05:52 VisceraEyes wrote: BC are you for or against a mass-mason claim? This is now the second time I've asked you. Please respond. I repeat, please respond to my query regarding the mass-mason claim. I am fine with either it, or having town just say "we ignore all pms that arent host pms" Making every mason accountable / making them useless to prevent manipulation seems the best play at the moment. making them all claim however is the optimal play, it may out the group of us, but it also prevents mafia from using their ability without being in the spotlight. When asked about his opinion on a mason claim, he says he's fine with it, but takes the opportunity to inject more of his "ignore all PMs" idea into the conversation (notice that nobody else has been saying "lets ignore PMs"). BC is pushing the anti-PM agenda, in a way that is quite subtle. He constantly brings in reference to "the town needs to decide", or "this is a very important discussion that everyone needs to weigh in on", while he is really the one dominating the conversation. In other words, he is injecting his mafia bias into the discussion while attempting to pass it off as a town discussion or collective town decision. Here's something BC didn't tell you. As he has told me in the past (out of game): "keep in mind as red i rarely pm", and "my heavy pm use is town play". Now what about the "spotlight factor" brought up by Meapak? BC putting himself in the spotlight is nothing unusual, both for his mafia and town play. If you've read past games, think of BC's style as much the same as Ace's. As stated above, red BC doesn't use a PM heavy style. He uses a style that focuses on thread control, shutting down serious opposition through arguments and generally trashing the thread. BC claiming mason does not give him any +town points in my book. The general heuristic of "mafia want to avoid the spotlight" doesn't apply to BC, who is an experienced mafia player and has proven that he is well capable of taking the spotlight as red. So what is the scenario for BC being red and pushing his mason claim? BC is in fact red, and can use the mason power (chooses it for himself early in the day). As a town mason would, BC picks a mason target and starts talking to them. Once he gets the town to agree to ban masons, he is off the hook, and doesn't have to worry about PMs anymore. More specifically, he doesn't have to worry about town PMs. Like stated before, mafia BC plays a powerhouse thread control style. By banning PMs, BC doesn't lose out on much (he admits he isn't a heavy PM user), and nerfs Foolishness, sandroba, and my abilities to play a PM centric game (which we are known for). And that's what is the difference between this game and XLII (the game he refers to when he says he dominates with only 1-2 PMs). Foolishness and I are playing in this game, and are real threats. BC wants to shut down PMs before it starts, and he doesn't have to give up much information or lie at all in order to do it. Furthermore, he has not followed up on his campaign promise: "I will question, analyze and call out all those who play in what I view as bad town/mafia like. (I have already done this with foolishness, he knows better)." Ok, so maybe he called out Foolishness yesterday, but where is the scumhunting today? Its non-existent, because BC is too busy derailing the thread with mason discussions instead of scumhunting. What is even more interesting is the timing of his initial claim post. It comes an hourish after my second post against Ciryandor, which conveniently most people except for sandroba and sheth have ignored. 1. BloodyC0bbler derailed today's discussion onto the irrelevant, highly controversial, and unsolvable PM debate. 2. Because the community is split over the PM debate, discussing it tells us nothing about alignment even if people contribute to the discussion. In other words, BC is overexaggerating the importance of this discussion. 3. BloodyC0bbler is masking his intentions and his clear anti-PM agenda, which is inconsistent with his previous (out of game) stance on PMs). 4. BloodyC0bbler is trying to frame the discussion as an open discussion, when he is clearly injecting his personal bias. 5. BloodyC0bbler's actions are completely consistent with his mafia style, which is to spread chaos and control the thread atmoshere and discussion. 6. BloodyC0bbler's actions are not consistent with his campaign promise to analyze and call out people. He has done none of that today BloodyC0bbler is mafia. If you vote for me I will lynch him. Hi incog, and as you didn't tag who you were I will say it again.. Hi incognito How do I know its you? I have never talked to mystlord. I am glad your third game post of the thread is once again a "i am running on the campaign of lynch this player" it gives nothing on yourself and yet people think you are doing something commendable. You ignore all game discussion and opt to push your own agenda to off players. I am impressed good sir. However, you fail to realize that I am not being the lazy bored me, I am actually playing. As for your analysis? Laughable. You make the claim of "bc has said he rarely pms as read and heavy pms as town" guess what? I have talked to opz before i wandered off to work, and the person I mason'd with Sandroba. As the only current way to talk to more is by having another mason mason me I am far more active than a mafia me would who would never use my ability to begin with. I will now quote the bit of my own words you attempted to use against me. On January 28 2011 06:09 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Private Messaging This feature has been in a fair number of TL games. It is also an amazing tool if used properly. However, if it is not used properly, the mafia will abuse it and potentially win. They are also a function if used improperly will cause people to feel left out and like they don’t matter as players. Pm’s can and do make people elitist in games. IF Pm’s are allowed in a game they should be used properly. Role fishing, small analysis groups, alignment testing. Role fishing is straightforward so I will not go into it at this time. Small analysis groups. These groups need not be large, as you only need a few heads to flesh out analysis on people. It also means that if a red is in your group, it is easier to catch them, and it keeps the other groups safe from infiltration. Alignment testing. This is posting in a way to let you carefully analyze reactions. Townies are more inclined to answer in one way and mafia/blues another. Sometimes this will be obvious such as catching someone lying to you in pm’s or lying in thread. Other times this will be noticing subtle word choices. Regardless of how you opt to use the tool, if you do not feel comfortable in your ability to use them properly do not use them and play the game via the thread. Ask for detail from Ace on this, as he dislikes the PM feature. Notice the bolded section near the top, you know, the amazing tool if used properly? How about we continue reading to where i state it is not used properly and mafia abuse it to win. You and I both know that discussions have occurred between yourself, myself, ver, qatol, fw, foolishness and others over a large course of time about how town fail at using pms. My ability to use the mechanic is not the issue at hand. I do not anyone outside of a small core group of players to properly use the function, as such pushing for it to be something not used in general or heavily scrutinized is by far the best play. Can you honestly say based on the current claims that you feel mathchew is a player who can competently maneuver around pms without proper guidance? (not meant at a real jab at you matt, but you are newer and as such not someone I personally would want wandering unattended in the pm land). You and I both also know that reading people or catching people with pms is a skill that requires practice and takes time to learn. Only certain players on this site truly excel at them. Everyone else generally have proven over the last year that in most cases, town should not be in pm's period. I do appreciate that you are gunning for people, but you know just as well as I do that masons who are only able to talk to 1 person once over 1 day cycle when unexperienced in that field is a detriment to the town, not a positive. If you refuse to admit to this then we both know your scum alignment. As for subtle pushing against using masons? I can't decide for everyone. I have already said my bit and cant push this. By actively bringing it to the plate to even talk about I am forcing the issue What I also find amusing is you concentrate on my mafia style play but ignore my town style play which is near identical (as you well know) where the differences are pushing mafia or town objectives. You claim that I must be mafia for I take thread control etc.. As a note incog. Are mafia really that afraid of me removing their tool from the game that they sent you of all people to deal with me? You know just as well as I do that pms in experienced hands are usually detrimental to the town and know that even with guides and performances of towns as a whole pms cause more trouble than good. Anyone voting for protract at the moment needs to be seriously looked at. On January 14 2012 16:41 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 14 2012 16:32 Mattchew wrote: Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 16:23 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 14 2012 16:21 Mattchew wrote: On January 14 2012 16:17 ~OpZ~ wrote: On January 14 2012 16:12 Scamp wrote: On January 14 2012 16:08 Mattchew wrote: foolishness would have stuck with only bill murray had I not mason'd him. Now he pushes for me and bill because to him I am safe. With this post, you will not be getting my vote, unless you post something of substance really, really soon. Could not of said it better myself. But now that he mentions it, where the hell is BM? I'm not sold that any of the mayor candidate have a proper direction right now, and for all declaring they'd be active, they seem to be lacking. Please read post above. I have spoken on every issue brought up (palmar, masons, who to lynch) and I don't understand this logic of Mayor running the town / game. You get 2extra votes and a lynch and immunity. You don't have to be the most vocal to be a good mayor you just have to make decent decisions and read well. A mayor is someone players who surf by doing the bare minimum in thread follow at least early on. If you vote to off x then x will usually get sheeped. The other major reason is the player who gets mayor is someone you want to be able to hold accountable. IE is that person going to push a lynch hard, or is he going to get feedback first before deciding to push a lynch target. Forcing discussion, actively pushing lynches, etc.. are the things commonly looked for in a mayor. A. You are wrong. I think the shear volume of posts about foolishness, palmar, L (who hasn't even posted) and other vets not trying for mayor proves this. People will listen to vets and those who are most vocal, regardless of whether or not they are mayor. Also, I don't care for the people trying to scrap by doing the bare minimum, fuck them, to quote flamewheel Show nested quote + Of special importance for this game though: if you tend to "lurk" or I see that you are not putting effort into this game, despite not being modkilled you will be unable to participate in my future games. So please don't get modkilled and put a concerted effort into playing this. You are basically giving people an excuse to sheep the mayor. What the hell is that. My priority is getting 2 town elected officials. This is by far and away the best thing we can do on day 1. The mayor basically is a 3 power jack, with a dayvig shot, 2 extra votes and 2 bodyguards. Putting a scum member (regardless of how pro-town their campaign is) is terrible for town. This is why I have done everything logically under the sun to prove that I am town. And will vote for the person I believe to be most town running alongside me. Giving people an excuse? I am stating mere observations about previous games. You can put in a warning of how people will be punished for being inactive jerkwads and they will still do it. Shit happens in peoples lives, they get a role they dont want and skirt by doing the minimum, etc... I am not giving an excuse for them I am stating a simple observation, people sheep. People tend to sheep those in power. Do people also listen to players such as myself, L, Palmar and the like if they aren't elected? Yes, but people typically elect these players to keep them alive longer. The skillset that a vet carries is why vets more typically run for elections. Long term those skillsets if on a townie player are a huge benefit to keep around, and if it is a red there is a higher chance of catching them as the mayor is expected to be active and a good player is expected to perform at a certain level. If the person running is unable to perform at the required level it is effectively giving a townie who will just follow someone elses choice powers that they shouldnt have. If they are heavily listening to the vets, give vets the extra shite. If you want to step up and stand on your own two feet do so. Think of being the mayor the leader of a country. You must have solid thread prescense. Keeping yourself alive with your role (a role i firmly believe you should not be using after today), is not say as good as a newer player with a dt or med role getting it. I am not condoning either of those roles claiming but you get the idea. The mason role is something an experienced player theoretically could use effectively and warrant getting elected while possessing it but I personally believe no one should sit in pms. Mafia choose who on their team gets to be a mason, whereas hosts rng who got it for town. Regardless the mafia have 10 heads to properly work on who to mason and which approach to take while a newer player has his own thoughts. On January 14 2012 16:44 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 14 2012 16:41 Cyber_Cheese wrote: Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 16:38 bumatlarge wrote: On January 14 2012 16:33 Cyber_Cheese wrote: On January 14 2012 16:30 bumatlarge wrote: On January 14 2012 16:19 Cyber_Cheese wrote: On January 13 2012 15:57 bumatlarge wrote: Mason Favorite role, I kind of laugh when I see mafia masons, as they are not good at all. It's basically more work for mafia to convince people in the thread and then in PMs. Still be wary. There is a lot of mindgames in PMs, but nothing is as cool as being sure the other person is town. It's basically like a mini-game of mafia. Give each other analysis, and plan out what you will do with the other person. Better yet, mason me and we will a force to be reckoned with. On January 14 2012 04:52 bumatlarge wrote: I don't think people are understanding where BC is coming from, a town mason is more likely to just immediately get rights, but if you look at scum mason; Mason At the beginning of every cycle, you may send a PM to me detailing who you would like to Mason with during that cycle. You may PM with that person for the full cycle. You may not choose a person you have already Masoned with for the remainder of the game. The Mafia team will have a set number of people to choose as Masons. Mafia with other roles (Roleblocker, Framer, Godfather) can double up on Mason roles. They have to pick them. Do you think mafia right off the bat is going to grab the mason role and start yapping away? I think if BC is mafia, he is doing us a favor. I think masons should claim in thread, the faster the better. It forces mafia into an awkward position, or else they can't claim at all. Why and how did your opinion completely change? Well just because I think mafia masons are bad, doesnt mean they cant be useful. I think BC's plan does a good job of stopping their use, or severely attaching scum to one another. Nice try Monsieur cheese ![]() It also completely shuts down town masons, which you thought were excellent. Why are you willing to give up such an awesome protown role, where two townies could be 'a force to be reckoned with', just to cancel the abilities of the scum masons, which are 'not good at all'. Town masons claiming doesnt shut down town masons. They can get into contact with any individual they want? They are unrole-blockable, and they eventually have to release the information/analysis they find. I never say that anywhere. Did BC say that? BC was talking about ignoring PM's completely, and he's been wishy washy on whether he's keen on all the masons claiming. On January 14 2012 05:54 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 05:52 VisceraEyes wrote: BC are you for or against a mass-mason claim? This is now the second time I've asked you. Please respond. I repeat, please respond to my query regarding the mass-mason claim. I am fine with either it, or having town just say "we ignore all pms that arent host pms" Making every mason accountable / making them useless to prevent manipulation seems the best play at the moment. making them all claim however is the optimal play, it may out the group of us, but it also prevents mafia from using their ability without being in the spotlight. How about you read what I say and properly reflect it. I prefer ignoring pms and deciding that masons be ignored, but in the case no one agrees with that then mass claim so town knows who to heavily watch in pms. Everyone being on the same playing field is far more advantaegous than a minority playing with a different hand. On January 15 2012 03:08 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 15 2012 03:00 VisceraEyes wrote: How does the fact that I pulled out of the elections make me more suspicious? And did you completely ignore my plea for help regarding my mason situation? Or do you not care because now I'm suspicious? You as a former candidate go out of your way to encourage people to withdraw votes based on a lie. You can say you misread my post which potentially believable due to its length I find unlikely. If people were actively waiting for a piece of information then my large posts theoretically should be read carefully for said information. You are not like jay who has been on my nuts all game. Had you chosen to encourage people to not vote for me as I claimed mason and had solid reasons behind it then I would see you as more townlike, as it would also be discrediting another player with the same claim. By opting to instead cherry pick one candidate over the other I see an inconsistancy. I say this as you made mention before in thread that you had reservations of electing me before as my alignment with my role was not provable (minus a lynching obviously), however this issue would be near identical to another mason and had you kept with that line of thinking as two masons were in the running I would have understood. Singling me out however, via incorrect information, is why you are on my list. On January 15 2012 03:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 15 2012 03:06 Mattchew wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 02:54 Cyber_Cheese wrote: Not to mention, BC declared his mason status 7 hours before you did, why are you a better choice than him, if the main thing confirming you as town is how quickly you declared your role? Because my posting, my logic, and the lack of cases against me (other than slippery slope highly unlikely situations) make me far more townie than BC is. Incorrect. We would be if nothing else equal playing ground. You used my initial claim to play off of foolishness to make a power play at an elected slot using your role. I have openly stated that I would not be surprised or expect to get in because of my claim. In short I expect if i was elected it would be off my ability, not my role. You run was purely something you did via "im a confirmed townie" because of your role. The "cases" against you were that just because you are a mason does not make you confirmed town. You have been transparent with your pms yes, in which you have a townie who is helping you openly admit that bm is easily controllable and you are taking advice from him. IE you are also easily controllable. I am very hesitant to want someone elected that foolishness supports when his main reason admitted in a pm to you was an ability to control bm. Do you think he would support you if it was any different? Why would a vet player want someone in office he can manipulate/control instead of himself. And jesus, I totally just stumbled across that thought in help of one of L's earlier posts. Does anyone have a solid reason why it is advantageous to have an elected official in office you can manipulate/control instead of running yourself? If you are controlling/manipulating wouldn't that suggest you are more sure of your own ability to play and should be running rather than ducking responsibility? On January 15 2012 03:18 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 15 2012 03:11 VisceraEyes wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 03:08 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 15 2012 03:00 VisceraEyes wrote: How does the fact that I pulled out of the elections make me more suspicious? And did you completely ignore my plea for help regarding my mason situation? Or do you not care because now I'm suspicious? You as a former candidate go out of your way to encourage people to withdraw votes based on a lie. You can say you misread my post which potentially believable due to its length I find unlikely. If people were actively waiting for a piece of information then my large posts theoretically should be read carefully for said information. You are not like jay who has been on my nuts all game. Had you chosen to encourage people to not vote for me as I claimed mason and had solid reasons behind it then I would see you as more townlike, as it would also be discrediting another player with the same claim. By opting to instead cherry pick one candidate over the other I see an inconsistancy. I say this as you made mention before in thread that you had reservations of electing me before as my alignment with my role was not provable (minus a lynching obviously), however this issue would be near identical to another mason and had you kept with that line of thinking as two masons were in the running I would have understood. Singling me out however, via incorrect information, is why you are on my list. I just don't want you to be mayor! You're fucking scary! And you've claimed a role that if you're scum you can rape my asshole with (as proven!) Don't give me any of your "cherry-pick one candidate over another" bullshit! I know what you can do with PMs! You USED ME IN YOUR CAMPAIGN! You're NOT going to be mayor! isn't this a complete contradiction to. On January 14 2012 09:07 VisceraEyes wrote: Show nested quote + On January 14 2012 07:51 Foolishness wrote: On January 14 2012 00:50 Kurumi wrote: Why would someone create a campaign for someone else without seeing him post ever? If anyone is voting for someone partly with the reason of "he's a good player" then they are doing the same thing. Don't know why you choose to call me out instead of any of the other lackluster votes. At least I have a plan and reasoning. I found Foolish's campaign to be both hilarious and appropriate and will support either BM or BC today. I still think people should vote for me, but the general consensus seems to be that I'm not experienced enough, which is totally fair. I don't think I'm totally out of the running though, so I'm not going to withdraw quite yet...but expect me to withdraw if I don't get any more support by 12 hours to deadline. near nothing new has appeared since this post aside from potentially incogs tunnel of me in which he incorrectly states an opinion. However, you never give your opinion on that post of his, just instead say your reading it and then reading my posts. Note how he never returned to even respond to me? There are two people on one name, and neither has appeared. You're reason to then push against me was debunked. If you don't want someone in office build a real case, dont make fake ones. On January 15 2012 03:31 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 15 2012 03:26 Mattchew wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 03:23 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 15 2012 03:15 Mattchew wrote: On January 15 2012 03:12 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: On January 15 2012 03:06 Mattchew wrote: On January 15 2012 02:54 Cyber_Cheese wrote: Not to mention, BC declared his mason status 7 hours before you did, why are you a better choice than him, if the main thing confirming you as town is how quickly you declared your role? Because my posting, my logic, and the lack of cases against me (other than slippery slope highly unlikely situations) make me far more townie than BC is. No actually they don't. Your only reason for being mayor is that you're a mason and that foolishness trusts you. Given foolishnesses actions so far it's pretty clear he's trolling so that's really not an endorsement. And as for your mason claim, you're no more confirmed than BC is and he's done a lot more than you. imma quote myself from earlier I want you to ask yourself, What are the real odds of about 13 hours after roles go out that a scum team elects me as mason over a vet, sends me at the best town player who already made a troll campaign, and comes up with a relatively elaborate plan to get me (A non-vet) into office. Is it possible, yes. Is it 99% unlikely, yes. why? Heres a scenario for you. Mafia sees that I out myself as a mason. They see that I am attempting to fubar the use of the mason role completely. Mafia goes "FUUUUUUUUUUUUU" then thinks, wait, maybe we can use this to our advantage. Mafia concocts a scheme to use one of their newer members as a mason and get him elected via his claim. Foolishness could be a red or green and go along with it because he thinks that he can control you? Or, you are green, do this move and foolishness is red and goes "score and easier person for me to use than bm" and backs you to get you into office. Doing so would make him seem town in your eyes and would gain him a mayor who trusts him. A newbie mayor who would go to him for advice before making his own decisions -_-. Either situation you could be red or green, and it doesn't matter. A mafia team putting forth a member to get elected on a role that once elected's alignment can only be determined via death, or a town candidate who is controlled like a puppet via the mafia are both good scenarios for them. scenario is broken because i pm'd foolishness before you outed yourself. I don't see Foolishness as a strong town read. I would lean towards town if a gun was to my head but I still want to hear a lot more from him. without timestamps we have your word to take for that. Is that likely? Yes, however, your run for mayor was timed AFTER my claim. You're role + my claim in open prompted you to think of running for mayor. This is mafia, any situation is possible. Just because you can say "well im new do you think I would do that?" You know what? If you have a good player or players on your team as scum, a new player isn't going to be that bad as they can coach said player while using the "im new card" to explain minor mistakes. My argument is that you are no more confirmed town than I am. On January 15 2012 04:52 BloodyC0bbler wrote: On January 15 2012 04:46 Liquid`Sheth wrote: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 00:57 Toadesstern wrote: I'm visiting my sis so I'm out for a couple of hours. However I still have a couple of people I have no idea about. I'm just leaving you with a list of 5 or so names and if you see your name on that list I'd like to know who you want to vote for mayor and if you had to decide the first lynch who it would be. I'm only mentioning people I think might read this, so thx if you do: + Show Spoiler + 5. risk.nuke 9. Kenpachi (you won't answer this right?) 11. EchelonTee 14. Liquid`Sheth 20. Ciryandor 49. Scamp turns out I got 6 names instead of only 5 but yeah that's it for now. I'm voting for Protactinium for Mayor at the moment. He has what I believe to have been the best case for Mayor. If I had to decide the first lynch, I'd probably make it a town affair and get everyone's opinions on who they wanted to lynch and then decide based on what that information gave me. so the belief you have for deciding a lynch is via discussion and town consensus but you are voting for a player who has made 0 posts aside from saying he would kill ciryandor if elected or kill me if elected. so You are actually in favour of having someone lynched with 0 discussion as you are strictly following the most inactive of all the candidates who sole stance currently is lynching me. contradiction On January 15 2012 05:02 BloodyC0bbler wrote: VE, if you really are a jack, your fucking stupid unless you clarified before you claimed that jacks can dayvig. ... His next post: Show nested quote + On January 15 2012 08:45 Protactinium wrote: On January 15 2012 08:37 rgTheSchworz wrote: So confused at the moment. Have the feeling we're going nowhere, even worse, several of our blues have blundered. I'm gonna vote BM, as Sandroba has the highest chance of being scum out of potential candidates.His posts have been weird enough, he runs for mayor then isnt particularly active or scum-hunting,some of his posts like the one with the eagle landing on his arm disturbed me. I'll keep an eye on the following: Risk.nuke, Palmar. I feel palmar still has a role to play. Don't lynch him day1, maybe day 2 if he continues like that. The whole mason thing started by BC was useless in my opinion.50/50 chance of being mafia/town. Bollocks, they're maybe more town masons than mafia, maybe less. You can't know that, unless maybe.. you have external information. Also, as sandro is suspicious and BC had made a sort of a deal with him, my feelings about this persona shall remain mixed at best. When the town isn't going anywhere, look for mafia interference. I clearly have been trying to give some direction to this thread, so there isn't really the excuse that the town is just newb and doesn't know what to do. Furthermore, this game isn't like some others where 2 mistaken townies pollute the thread by attacking each other on pretty thin grounds. If you look at the thread as a whole, you probably will only be able to find 1 player who really sticks out of the discussion, and that's BC. If you agree that the town isn't going anywhere, the question should be why. BC has steered the course of the discussion for the most part of this day, despite only having around 5% of the total game posts. While I have no problem with someone having this few amount of posts, an examination of BC's posts shows that he has created more confusion and unanswered questions than answers and direction. The conclusion is that the mafia are interfering with the town's attempt to find clarity. In other words, the game has a mafia-favored atmosphere. As you know, my thesis is that BloodyC0bbler is at the bottom of it. This is utter bullshit. Good discussion was going on, and Protactinium dismisses it as having "no direction" and mafia interference. The next post is an analysis on Macpo. I have a null read on Macpo; I don't think it's fair to base an analysis entirely on his tone, but he's still not off the hook. But this is more interesting: Protact just made a huge deal about how BC is scum. And now he wants to switch over to Macpo? This doesn't seem right. Protact doesn't post much during the night. But during the day, he says this: Show nested quote + On January 16 2012 12:25 Protactinium wrote: HEY GUESS WHO FLIPPED MAFIA Sandroba is obviously innocent now. ##Vote Macpo WTF? He provides no reasoning, and what he says doesn't even make sense. This means that he must have some information that town doesn't have. [b]IN CONCLUSION, Protactinium was heavily bullshitting the town in order to get a mayor spot. He is scum and should die. ##Vote: Protactinium You have my sword. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 17 2012 07:17 kingjames01 wrote: Bill Murray: You incarcerated Lanaia during Night 1. Why did you choose her? Also, why do you think you saved her from death? She received no such notification. Do you believe that the mafia joined the election Day 1 and do you think that they succeeded to take at least one of the roles? Have you taken also precautions so that in the event of BC and/or your early demise, the Bodyguards will be revealed to the thread? Better question. Bill, Why did you use "incarcerate" It's limited 3 time use. What made you think it was good to use it on lanaia rather then saving it? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Since the start he have felt pretty strongly that Sandroba was scum. Why? Because sandroba wanted to lynch ciryandor. Even after ciryandors flip which didn't slow him down the least he kept going after sandroba. About people who have flipped we know that Bill Murray was against Mattchew, initially wanting to lynch him as part of his campaign. And he claimed Ciryandor was a townie. On January 16 2012 14:10 Bill Murray wrote: I am pretty sure I saved Lanaia from being killed last night + Show Spoiler + On January 15 2012 21:52 Bill Murray wrote: Town supersoft Cyber_Cheese Toadesstern Adam4167 Foolishness Nisani201 EchelonTee Jayjay54 L Liquid`Sheth kitaman27 BloodyC0bbler Kurumi p4NDemik Meapak_Ziphh wherebugsgo Dont want to lynch: VisceraEyes Jitsu Mr. Wiggles ~OpZ~ Ciryandor Jackal58 hiro protagonist GiygaS BrownBear Where have you been? Wouldn't mind lynching these lurkers: igabod zeks evantrees Chaosquo Cwave Slardar rgTheSchworz Scamp glurio rtgICEMAN Maxella blahz0r GGQ Lynch, Lynch, Lynch!: Protactinium (Mystlord/Incognito) sandroba risk.nuke Munk-E scumatlarge Lanaia Macpo Mafia What is this? You say you think you saved lanaia? I thought you firmly belived lanaia was scum. Sorry what? I really don't feel like you're sticking to the same story. Potentially yes you could had thought hmm, 1 kp is missing, and roleblocks aren't likely to have lowered the kp so theoreticly yes someone could had tried to shoot lanaia and you could had reached the conclusion that someone shot the person you incarnated. BUT comeon you claim you were sure lanaia was scum so what's the rush. You know there is the possibility of medic saves. So why did you so quickly say you are pretty sure they hit lanaia. I could understand a "fyi, I used incarnate on lanaia tonight". But I can't understand how you would go from lanaia i scum to lanaia took a hit. Here is my theory. You are scum. You knew they didn't hit lanaia. Instead you were worried that maybe a townie who jailed someone and see's 1 kp is missing would had informed the town that they had used incarnate and specculated that they might had shot that person. Assuming they had used it on someone they thought likely to be town. I don't belive your story because you overdid it. You say you targeted a person you think is mafia and then you claim too belive they took a hit. If I had used it on someone I thought was scum (Which is [stupid=aka-antitown] in itself to begin with) I would not swiftly assume that person had taken a hit. After a while if nobody claimed a hit, sure then I might be inclined to belive it. On January 17 2012 10:10 Bill Murray wrote: WBG I am trying to jail to lower their KP Say L was roleblocked and Lanaia was jailed WHAT IF BOTH ARE MAFIA? That would explain why we had 3 mafia KP last night, and not 4 i am CERTAIN 1 of OpZ or BC are mafia, now, and who else to elect mayor if not the mafia jack? Then apparently you don't have one theory you deem more likely then the others. Instead you derp around claiming everything from lanaia took a hit too lanaia could had lowered scum kp. You really just don't have any idea what would the best thing to claim so you claim it all. Damn derping imo. It just looks so stupid when you read it. Then there is the potential scumslip where you accidently say the mafia have 1 mason which ViceraEyes brough up before. Conclusion: Besides having stacked up on scumpoints. I want to lynch this liar who can't decide what story to stick to. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 18 2012 01:26 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 18 2012 01:15 risk.nuke wrote: ##unvote: Protactinium ##vote: Bill Murray why is that risky? what did convince you? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=108#2141 And please, call me nuke. risk is more similar to a clantag so it would be more correct and make it easier for me since people use the word "risk" quite alot in mafia. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 18 2012 01:41 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 18 2012 01:36 risk.nuke wrote: On January 18 2012 01:26 Jayjay54 wrote: On January 18 2012 01:15 risk.nuke wrote: ##unvote: Protactinium ##vote: Bill Murray why is that risky? what did convince you? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=108#2141 And please, call me nuke. risk is more similar to a clantag so it would be more correct and make it easier for me since people use the word "risk" quite alot in mafia. fail on my part, sorry mr nuke ![]() No harm done ![]() What do you think of Bill Murray? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 18 2012 01:50 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 18 2012 01:44 risk.nuke wrote: On January 18 2012 01:41 Jayjay54 wrote: On January 18 2012 01:36 risk.nuke wrote: On January 18 2012 01:26 Jayjay54 wrote: On January 18 2012 01:15 risk.nuke wrote: ##unvote: Protactinium ##vote: Bill Murray why is that risky? what did convince you? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=253716¤tpage=108#2141 And please, call me nuke. risk is more similar to a clantag so it would be more correct and make it easier for me since people use the word "risk" quite alot in mafia. fail on my part, sorry mr nuke ![]() No harm done ![]() What do you think of Bill Murray? I certainly think that at least one of the three mayor candidates is scum. The vote had so little interference. Furthermore, I think hydra is town. => BM and/or BC scum. What I think of BC is common knowledge. BMs latest action made no sense, you got a point there. The thing is, they make no sense from a scum perspective either. Even as a scum sheriff there's no reason to waste a jailtown without reason. He basically acted like a mad scientist and is probably gone insane or trolling. I don't know about scum though, because, like I said, those actions were neither town nor scum favoured. Wrong. while you could argue whether his motive makes sense for scum or town, they were in the end were scum favored. If he were scum: Using the power on a townie hoping to block a possible heal/check but also wasting one use which means we can not use it in a later situation. Possibly in a town controlled way. Say when we get confirmed townies we want to protect. If he were Town: Why would he use it on lanaia after arguing she is scum. Blocking potential dt checks or vig hits for the slim chance of actually preventing a mafia move. Consider it's probably just roleblocker and framer who would suffer from it. Godfather Goon and Mason nothing happens. And the jack is limited use anyway. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 18 2012 19:02 Bill Murray wrote: GG scum we lynch Protactinium and BC tomorrow and we are guaranteed 1 scum, bringing their KP down Is this a joke? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 18 2012 19:42 Bill Murray wrote: Not at all Are you trying to tell me you don't believe mafia had someone running for election? I think it should be painfully clear if you read my filter which candidate I belive is scum. Some of your defenders have said I don't want to lynch into office yet, and lets face it. The fact that you're sheriff is the only reason you didn't die instead of macpo and not already nailed to die tomorrow. And then you suggest going for BC, AND protactinum which is basicly killing two vets who seems far less suspicious then yourself. Your post is ment to be wifom. I'm 90% sure on you beeing red and fairly sure one out of the two you mentioned are red because you said it like that. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Medics, ignore the shit out of BC. This is my idea instead. Medics. Go with your own gut. Who do you think will likely be targeted by the mafia? & Who could be wise to keep alive? In my opinion every medic should basicly make up a small list with people who fulfills one or both of these criteria. And pick OR random a name from there. Furthermore the town should agree on two people and have Bill Murray wifom incarnate between them. Obviously that means this medics, if these names are on your list you exlcude them from your list this night. The point is to potentially block kills and frighten the mafia to target the weak townies because the strong townies could have protection. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 19 2012 07:52 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 19 2012 07:47 risk.nuke wrote: BC, are you dumb or scum, a 50 man game and you want to limit the protection to two potentially strong townies when their alignment isn't even confirmed. Medics, ignore the shit out of BC. This is my idea instead. Medics. Go with your own gut. Who do you think will likely be targeted by the mafia? & Who could be wise to keep alive? In my opinion every medic should basicly make up a small list with people who fulfills one or both of these criteria. And pick OR random a name from there. Furthermore the town should agree on two people and have Bill Murray wifom incarnate between them. Obviously that means this medics, if these names are on your list you exlcude them from your list this night. The point is to potentially block kills and frighten the mafia to target the weak townies because the strong townies could have protection. Though I tend to generally agree to this plan, I am afraid this plan has the fatal flaw that our sheriff is red and mafia will know whos gonna be jailed... the part where I agree: medics don't focus on two people Well if they hit 1 of the incarnated 2 and no kp is missing that wouldn't look very good for Murray would it? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 19 2012 08:24 VisceraEyes wrote: Scum also love to make blanket statements about what scum love to do. :D lol, this is funny on two levels. :D | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
It's also possible that he is simply lying about it after he saw two dead vigs and figured it was pretty safe that nobody could prove he was lying. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 20 2012 00:24 jaj22 wrote: @Lanaia: You want Bill to blow up two of Foolishness/Protact/BC? Fuck it, he could be the jack just wanting to use his nightkill. BM dies today. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On other notes. There are damn too many lurkers who doesn't participate in any discussion. Everytime I look at the roaster I'm chocked. I'm not sure yet if I want to double lynch tomorrow or not. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
For now Bill Murray is the one obvious choice. He is just desperate to survive another day I don't buy his MH claim. It's too impossibly stupid to be true. And there is much bullshit in his posts. Toad gained some early townpoints with me which is why I don't want to lynch him today,+ Show Spoiler + I'd prefer not to post the post but I will if requested. On the other hand I don't buy his vet claim and he has never been correct with alot of reads before which makes me suspicious of him. I'm leaning not lynching him but not by much, | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
I'll vote for bm and someone else. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
--> No new evidence has been added <-- (or have I missed something) People keep tunneling him with the only case beeing his playstyle. wanting to lynch red + nothing = lynch... NO, Sandroba voters. you're going to first take your vote of him NOW. And then TELL the thread why the shit you were voting for him or I'll have your heads!! | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Scum decided BM was doomed, and decided to just go along with it to avoid suspicion. Which caused a few townies unease because everyone were agreeing on BM (aka seemed to easy). Combination with BM's bullshit-claim, which is just the worlds worst dumbest lie. Because you don't let yourself get elected mayor as a Mad Hatter to begin with. It's like getting elected when you're a veteran... ONLY MUCH WORSE. The only reason he bloody said it was fearmongering that we might loose protact who was looking pro-town. Comeon If he actually were a mad hatter why on earth would he even had set a bomb on protect. And do you think he would had missed the damn second night action if he had an that important role? LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES, + Show Spoiler + ![]() And 15 votes on sandroba. What? Where is the reasoning and logic to support 15 votes. the guy is leading jesus. and you're worried about reds wagoning BM!! + Show Spoiler + Townies, get of Sandroba or start singing why? Because if sandroba flips town I'll be going after sandroba voters with apocalyptic fury. TLDR: Get the damn votes back on BM & get your damn votes off sandroba or give me a satisfying reason to lynch him. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
My stance on mad hatter getting elected. Spoilered because I don't want to debate it "right now". + Show Spoiler + No, I will under no circumstances accept that it is good for a mad hatter to get elected. Optimally as a mad hatter you would want to plant your bombs one 2 people (with some regard to veterans) whos flips will provide the most information and then preferably get killed by the mafia night 2/3 so the town can get more information and nail the lynches. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 21 2012 12:20 Scamp wrote: One out of two is still pretty good. I'm relieved. Vig's. steady. aim. fire. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 21 2012 12:22 risk.nuke wrote: Show nested quote + On January 21 2012 12:20 Scamp wrote: One out of two is still pretty good. I'm relieved. Vig's. steady. aim. fire. *Reminder* | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 22 2012 03:47 VisceraEyes wrote: Show nested quote + On January 22 2012 03:44 Jitsu wrote: On January 21 2012 23:11 Jackal58 wrote: On January 21 2012 13:42 Jackal58 wrote: Proactinium is scum. If we have any vigs left shoot him. Drunk Jackal apparently has different reads than sober Jackal. LOL. I actually laughed at this line. Did drunk or sober Jackal take the shot at L? Maybe it was Schizophrenic-Jackal-With-Two-Head-From-The-Future. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Furthermore. We need to discuss these nightkills. Looking at it I feel Protact was likely stacked since both scamp and GGQ were far more likely vigged then killed by the mafia. I'm going to assume every unaccounted shot went on protact, that is a possible 2 or 3 stack if nobody claims to have been saved. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
Still BM needs to die today. I hope I'm right that he is scum and that madman haven't put a bomb on me. ##Vote BM ##Vote DL | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 23 2012 05:04 hiro protagonist wrote: Dont worry kita, I will crumb it one way or another. What? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 23 2012 05:16 hiro protagonist wrote: Show nested quote + On January 23 2012 05:13 risk.nuke wrote: On January 23 2012 05:04 hiro protagonist wrote: Dont worry kita, I will crumb it one way or another. What? I will crumb the identity of my night 2 check before I die. Okey, maybe you're new to mafia but sorry that is stupid. Crumbing works like this. When you die and we see your role we can read your filter, find your crumbs, and understand your nightactions. You can't crumb since you've already claimed. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 23 2012 21:47 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 23 2012 20:55 Bill Murray wrote: I'm a doctor I haven't used a jailkeep the last 2 nights because I have been truly protecting Foolishness say goodbye to your protection folks I wouldnt normally ever claim doctor, but I feel like Im really going to be lynched adios a) you can do both, protect and jail b) why didnt you claim medic in the first place? . This is your last day here sheriff. Pack your stuff and get out If he really were a medic he would had asked flamewheel about that stuff. I'll be waiting for him outside town, with the rope. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 24 2012 03:25 Jayjay54 wrote: Show nested quote + On January 24 2012 03:17 VisceraEyes wrote: I also unvoted for Double-Lynch: I feel like we're all pulling in different directions and scum are going to take advantage of that tomorrow to kill 2 townies. No effin thanks. I don't agree with the hero thing, VE. But you're damn right about the DL! people need to unvote it! Negative on that. No matter what the fuck murray will flip. we need to kill people. I haven't read a filter for a while and I will likely not do so untill murray hangs because I'm lazy. But I can promise you I can find atleast two good candidates as far in on a game as day 5. That should be easy. There is no point in saving the double-lynch. We need information and the faster we get it the better. | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 24 2012 03:33 supersoft wrote: Show nested quote + On January 24 2012 03:30 risk.nuke wrote: On January 24 2012 03:25 Jayjay54 wrote: On January 24 2012 03:17 VisceraEyes wrote: I also unvoted for Double-Lynch: I feel like we're all pulling in different directions and scum are going to take advantage of that tomorrow to kill 2 townies. No effin thanks. I don't agree with the hero thing, VE. But you're damn right about the DL! people need to unvote it! Negative on that. No matter what the fuck murray will flip. we need to kill people. I haven't read a filter for a while and I will likely not do so untill murray hangs because I'm lazy. But I can promise you I can find atleast two good candidates as far in on a game as day 5. That should be easy. There is no point in saving the double-lynch. We need information and the faster we get it the better. lol risk. You're fucking useless this game. + you even dont find scum when you're active. Overestimation!!!!! lol, I won't be called useless by one of the few people who has actually been more useless then me. Secondly I do find scum. Altough your accusation seems heart-true. Are you not feeling useless in this game because you are infact red? | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
![]() | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
And take that Murray! | ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
| ||
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On January 25 2012 01:48 Cyber_Cheese wrote: Show nested quote + On January 25 2012 01:48 Jackal58 wrote: I should probably apologize for posting while drunk but I won't. Just as long as you keep your vig shots sober while I'm town, you're forgiven ![]() I thought we concluded. Drunk Jackal is best Jackal. | ||
| ||
![]() StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Rain Dota 2![]() Sea ![]() Stork ![]() Hyuk ![]() PianO ![]() ToSsGirL ![]() Jaedong ![]() JulyZerg ![]() TY ![]() GuemChi ![]() [ Show more ] sSak ![]() BeSt ![]() Free ![]() NotJumperer ![]() Killer ![]() Liquid`Ret ![]() Hyun ![]() HiyA ![]() ajuk12(nOOB) ![]() Bisu ![]() League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • Berry_CruncH286 StarCraft: Brood War• AfreecaTV YouTube • intothetv ![]() • Kozan • IndyKCrew ![]() • LaughNgamezSOOP • Migwel ![]() • sooper7s League of Legends |
Afreeca Starleague
Soulkey vs Rush
Replay Cast
Kung Fu Cup
WardiTV Qualifier
PiGosaur Monday
OSC
GSL Code S
Cure vs sOs
Reynor vs Solar
OSC
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
Maru vs TriGGeR
Rogue vs NightMare
[ Show More ] The PondCast
Replay Cast
OSC
Replay Cast
Online Event
CranKy Ducklings
SC Evo League
Chat StarLeague
PassionCraft
Circuito Brasileiro de…
Online Event
Sparkling Tuna Cup
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Chat StarLeague
Circuito Brasileiro de…
Wardi Open
PiGosaur Monday
|
|