|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On December 29 2011 11:27 GreYMisT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2011 11:17 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 11:10 GreYMisT wrote:On December 29 2011 10:02 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 09:55 VisceraEyes wrote:/:| (that's a raised eyebrow...at you sir.) Calm down a second. First of all, you just got back from a failed mission, and you shouldn't be calling ANYONE spy. Now, I found your post suspicious REGARDLESS of when it was made. The content was what I had a problem with (if you'll kindly read MY post on the matter...which you're either ignoring or intentionally overlooking.) The fact that you Nay'd a team that included you (as town) doesn't make any sense. I can understand after N1 maybe because you have more information, but ALL you have to go on, as town, is YOUR alignment...so a team that includes you is more likely to succeed by virtue of yo being town. But I wouldn't expect a Spy like you to think in those terms.  Let me refer you to my previous post... which it seems you still have not read. Am i town? Yes. I like teams with me on them and will vote yay on them... unless of course they include obvious sxum like Radfield. I made a read and made a call. It's a vote i stand by. wait, did you not just say you will vote nay for any team with the previous night's members....and then just said you will vote yay for teams with you on them? Also why would we be worried about a quickhammer on a day1 team. we have almost 0 info on teams day one as this is a game of logic. we have to send someone, and rad's picks made sense. ?? I will vote nay for teams with the previous nights members who aren't me. ._. Also, I will vote yay for teams with me on them. However, as always, this is subject to things like "obvious scum on a team" which I will vote nay for, etc. The fact of the matter is, the quickhammer on the day 1 team is the reason we have so little info now re: reads on people and their reasoning and post history. Do you really think that there's no way to make a read day 1? I disagree. I made a read, and I was right. The fact of the matter is, a quickhammer on day 1 reduced our information and our histories of people's posting here on day 2. how were you right? that radfield is for sure scum? I'm afraid I must not be privy to the same information that you are.
What? I voted Nay on the team. Radfield was scummy... and then the mission failed. At the very least, from my personal view, you have to admit-- if I'm town, I'm a fucking G. I'm da man. I called it like I saw it and I was right.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On December 29 2011 11:31 GreYMisT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2011 11:29 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 11:27 GreYMisT wrote:On December 29 2011 11:17 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 11:10 GreYMisT wrote:On December 29 2011 10:02 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 09:55 VisceraEyes wrote:/:| (that's a raised eyebrow...at you sir.) Calm down a second. First of all, you just got back from a failed mission, and you shouldn't be calling ANYONE spy. Now, I found your post suspicious REGARDLESS of when it was made. The content was what I had a problem with (if you'll kindly read MY post on the matter...which you're either ignoring or intentionally overlooking.) The fact that you Nay'd a team that included you (as town) doesn't make any sense. I can understand after N1 maybe because you have more information, but ALL you have to go on, as town, is YOUR alignment...so a team that includes you is more likely to succeed by virtue of yo being town. But I wouldn't expect a Spy like you to think in those terms. Let me refer you to my previous post... which it seems you still have not read. Am i town? Yes. I like teams with me on them and will vote yay on them... unless of course they include obvious sxum like Radfield. I made a read and made a call. It's a vote i stand by. wait, did you not just say you will vote nay for any team with the previous night's members....and then just said you will vote yay for teams with you on them? Also why would we be worried about a quickhammer on a day1 team. we have almost 0 info on teams day one as this is a game of logic. we have to send someone, and rad's picks made sense. ?? I will vote nay for teams with the previous nights members who aren't me. ._. Also, I will vote yay for teams with me on them. However, as always, this is subject to things like "obvious scum on a team" which I will vote nay for, etc. The fact of the matter is, the quickhammer on the day 1 team is the reason we have so little info now re: reads on people and their reasoning and post history. Do you really think that there's no way to make a read day 1? I disagree. I made a read, and I was right. The fact of the matter is, a quickhammer on day 1 reduced our information and our histories of people's posting here on day 2. how were you right? that radfield is for sure scum? I'm afraid I must not be privy to the same information that you are. What? I voted Nay on the team. Radfield was scummy... and then the mission failed. At the very least, from my personal view, you have to admit-- if I'm town, I'm a fucking G. I'm da man. I called it like I saw it and I was right. If your town you shouldnt worry about how this is making you look. Instead you are...interesting
?? If I'm town I should totally worry because IF I AM THE ONE WHO GETS REPLACED WE LOSE ANOTHER MISSION. are you kidding me? I should try as hard as I can to make sure the other dudes get replaced instead of me... since I know the traitor is one of them two. If I'm town, it is exigent that I try as hard as possible to look good. ._. Have you even thought this through?
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On December 29 2011 11:49 GreYMisT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2011 11:32 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 11:31 GreYMisT wrote:On December 29 2011 11:29 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 11:27 GreYMisT wrote:On December 29 2011 11:17 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 11:10 GreYMisT wrote:On December 29 2011 10:02 Blazinghand wrote:On December 29 2011 09:55 VisceraEyes wrote:/:| (that's a raised eyebrow...at you sir.) Calm down a second. First of all, you just got back from a failed mission, and you shouldn't be calling ANYONE spy. Now, I found your post suspicious REGARDLESS of when it was made. The content was what I had a problem with (if you'll kindly read MY post on the matter...which you're either ignoring or intentionally overlooking.) The fact that you Nay'd a team that included you (as town) doesn't make any sense. I can understand after N1 maybe because you have more information, but ALL you have to go on, as town, is YOUR alignment...so a team that includes you is more likely to succeed by virtue of yo being town. But I wouldn't expect a Spy like you to think in those terms. Let me refer you to my previous post... which it seems you still have not read. Am i town? Yes. I like teams with me on them and will vote yay on them... unless of course they include obvious sxum like Radfield. I made a read and made a call. It's a vote i stand by. wait, did you not just say you will vote nay for any team with the previous night's members....and then just said you will vote yay for teams with you on them? Also why would we be worried about a quickhammer on a day1 team. we have almost 0 info on teams day one as this is a game of logic. we have to send someone, and rad's picks made sense. ?? I will vote nay for teams with the previous nights members who aren't me. ._. Also, I will vote yay for teams with me on them. However, as always, this is subject to things like "obvious scum on a team" which I will vote nay for, etc. The fact of the matter is, the quickhammer on the day 1 team is the reason we have so little info now re: reads on people and their reasoning and post history. Do you really think that there's no way to make a read day 1? I disagree. I made a read, and I was right. The fact of the matter is, a quickhammer on day 1 reduced our information and our histories of people's posting here on day 2. how were you right? that radfield is for sure scum? I'm afraid I must not be privy to the same information that you are. What? I voted Nay on the team. Radfield was scummy... and then the mission failed. At the very least, from my personal view, you have to admit-- if I'm town, I'm a fucking G. I'm da man. I called it like I saw it and I was right. If your town you shouldnt worry about how this is making you look. Instead you are...interesting ?? If I'm town I should totally worry because IF I AM THE ONE WHO GETS REPLACED WE LOSE ANOTHER MISSION. are you kidding me? I should try as hard as I can to make sure the other dudes get replaced instead of me... since I know the traitor is one of them two. If I'm town, it is exigent that I try as hard as possible to look good. ._. Have you even thought this through? yes i have, but the best way to look town is to not say: guys look how town I am. who would you send on the next mission?
Did I say "guys look how town I am" in the post you quoted initially? no I said "if I am town I am a baller"
I think it's reasonable to say that if I am town, I am a HUGE baller. After all, if I'm town I totally called it on the first day and Nay-voted that scum-infested team. :D
I'm not sure who I'd send on the next mission. If I were leader I think I'd bring myself, obviously, but I think I'd interrogate some of the people who haven't posted much to try to get reads. I'd also try to ask people what they think about Palmar and Radfield and whether it's possible Palmar is scum. If most people agree with me, I'd replace Radfield with a town-looking player.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Truthbringer is the upcoming leader.
Why would it be better to send a Vet than a non-Vet? Any particular reasoning behind that?
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On December 29 2011 13:15 GreYMisT wrote:
After thinking about it for a bit, im starting to think it might be a better idea to create a new team of 4 players as someone else mentioned. Here is why: the scientific method of just changing one thing in the system no longer works at the moment, because we have to add 2 members instead of just changing out 1, thus impeding our efforts to find the spies. of course a new group of 4 does bring its own risks, but we now know at least one of the 3 spies is among rad, palmar, and blazing.
Thoughts?
A new team of 4 player is literally the worst possible move behind "A team that includes all three of the night 1 players".
Assuming there was 1 and only 1 spy in the 3 who went last night, there are 2 in the 6 who didn't go. This means that if we pick 4 players who didn't go, IT'S SUPER DUPER EASY TO PICK A SPY IN THERE AND SUPER DUPER HARD TO MAKE THE ONE POSSIBLE COMBINATION THAT DOESN'T HAVE A SPY.
If you don't want throw this game you have to pick some people from last night AND some people who didn't go last night, imo. There's a possibility there was 2 spies on board rather than 1 last night, in which case it would be reasonable to pick entirely from the people who didn't go, but we can't know that.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On December 29 2011 19:24 Palmar wrote:It is highly unlikely there were two scum on last day's team, I've gone through both Rad's and Blazinghand's filters, and neither of them posted anything that can be called out for being communication about whether or not they'd sabotage. The closest thing is this post from Blazinghand which could possible be him claiming he'd not sabotage: Show nested quote +On December 26 2011 17:03 Blazinghand wrote:
If your mission succeeds, you've pinned down a mafia member! (WIFOM alert: Mafia, knowing this, might intentionally not sabotage, etc).
On December 29 2011 19:25 Palmar wrote:
Stuff like this is the reason I said there should be absolutely no talk about Spy strategies.
Yeah well you hadn't mentioned that yet at the time I made that post man D: Also that was made WRT: 2 "vets", 1 "me" etc, in a post talking about a plan for Radfield given that certain assumptions with which I disagreed were true.
You didn't mention the "don't talk about spy strategies" tip (a useful tip, btw) until the 27th. I wasn't breaking the rule.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
If you suggest a team that includes Radfield you will not have my vote, Palmar. One of you two is mafia-- such a team will certainly fail. Regardless, I think it's fairly reasonable to not post spy strategies, unless your'e suggesting that people SHOULD do so? Also, What the hell a breadcrumb? I was talking about a hypothetical circumstance in which somone held the same assumptions but put together a different team ._. it was a scenario that wasn't actually in existence at the time, and a team comp that I explicitly said I wouldn't support for a number of reasons.
And when Radfield did suggest a shitty ass team (because it included him, who was scummy), I voted against it. Did Jackal hammer it? yes. But it's worth noting that Radfield tried to be the hammer. He didn't vote for his own team until I called him out for it.
That being said, Jackal did hammer. Guys need to be more careful with their hammers man.
That ALSO being said, I find this current team with VE to be somewhat unacceptable. I am not comfortable voting Yay for it at the moment.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Man the reason we're in this crappy D2 situation is because nobody tried to like get stuff done D1 and stuff got hammered. I'm looking at you TruthBringer mr "oh I guess I might as well blindly yay vote this sounds like a good idea, oh no wait someone called me out well, I might as well wait until the team is suggested then yay vote immediately"
I see no reason to vote anything but Nay for this team. At LEAST it's not the terrible "4 people who didn't go last night" team AND it's not the "team with both radfield and palmar", but we seriously need to do better than this. A clean team tonight is basically worth 2 points since the 3rd mission is the same size as the 2nd mission.
I'm voting Nay.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Zona I think your post in the voting thread is misformatted, unless you're voting no for a team you yourself proposed.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
OH WOW I'M A MORON DON'T MIND ME
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On December 29 2011 23:09 Radfield wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2011 09:18 Blazinghand wrote:
I think the next day team should not inclide anyone from the day one team since one person from the day one team is scum. I will auto nay any vote that includes members of the day one team besides myself.it has been obvious to me that ras is scum in the way he presented and argued his team. That being said none of you guys know my aligment so yhe optimal strat for anyone not sent on last night's mission is to vote nay on any team containing members from that.
Also anyone who believes VE that i am more suspicious for my post against the team "near the end of the day" is a moron or scum or both. I was pointing out the danger of a Radfield quickhammer. The day was only close to the end because some guys voted yes after my post, not due to the time limitation. Believe it or not i fingered Rad as scum and I stand by that read and my nay vote. Show nested quote +On December 29 2011 20:19 Blazinghand wrote:
Man the reason we're in this crappy D2 situation is because nobody tried to like get stuff done D1 and stuff got hammered. I'm looking at you TruthBringer mr "oh I guess I might as well blindly yay vote this sounds like a good idea, oh no wait someone called me out well, I might as well wait until the team is suggested then yay vote immediately"
I see no reason to vote anything but Nay for this team. At LEAST it's not the terrible "4 people who didn't go last night" team AND it's not the "team with both radfield and palmar", but we seriously need to do better than this. A clean team tonight is basically worth 2 points since the 3rd mission is the same size as the 2nd mission.
I'm voting Nay. You are basically blatantly contradicting yourself. A) " I will not vote for any team which includes someone from day one", B) "at least it's not the terrible suggestions that I made". An additional contradiction: You are stating over and over that I am obvious scum, yet you are refusing to vote for any team that includes Palmar. Yet if you think only 1 scum went on the mission, and you are positive it was me, you should be backing Palmar to be included in the Day 2 mission. Yet you are stating the opposite. Show nested quote + I will auto nay any vote that includes members of the day one team besides myself.it has been obvious to me that ras is scum in the way he presented and argued his team. ^Look at this quote! You state I am the obvious scum on the team, yet you will not vote for any team with Palmar. That is brutal.
In case it's not clear, when I initially said "I don't want any teams with Radfield or Palmar" I hadn't actually realized that the day 2 team was a 4-man team. My suggestion for the team composition is a suggestion for 3 people in that post. Novice mistake:
On December 30 2011 04:08 GreYMisT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 29 2011 09:18 Blazinghand wrote:
I think the next day team should not inclide anyone from the day one team since one person from the day one team is scum I will auto nay any vote that includes members of the day one team besides myself.it has been obvious to me that ras is scum in the way he presented and argued his team. That being said none of you guys know my aligment so yhe optimal strat for anyone not sent on last night's mission is to vote nay on any team containing members from that.
Also anyone who believes VE that i am more suspicious for my post against the team "near the end of the day" is a moron or scum or both. I was pointing out the danger of a Radfield quickhammer. The day was only close to the end because some guys voted yes after my post, not due to the time limitation. Believe it or not i fingered Rad as scum and I stand by that read and my nay vote. Wait you say this, then you shoot down my idea to not include members from the day1 team, which is essentially the exact same thing you say here?
Once I realize the team includes 4 people, it's fairly clear that it's very difficult to have a functioning team with 4 people who all didn't go last night. So, to reiterate:
I will vote nay on a team that includes both Radfield and Palmar, since this team is guaranteed to fail.
I will vote nay on a team that includes nobody from the N1 team, since this team is BASICALLY guaranteed to fail.
I like teams with me on them, but will vote nay on them if I think they include scum.
The fact that you guys couldn't figure out how to vote Nay on Radfield's obvious scum play yesterday isn't my fault.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On December 30 2011 03:32 TruthBringer wrote:
If you are a truly townie leader, trust yourself, not the concensus. If you trust the concensus, you may be allowing yourself to be influenced by the spies.
Obviously each leader should provide a team that he believes is good. Also obviously there are spies. That being said if you say "hey guys what do you think" then, before everyone gets a chance to respond, slap down a team, well, don't expect to be too successful.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
I'm preemptively Nay on Jackal in that case. If there was one spy exactly on the mission last night then his strat is dumb. He has no way of knowing... unless of course he is scum trying to sink the town.
Zona is voting nay on himself
I will follow suit. I am accessing via phone and will have acess to a keyboard later tonight for adressing other queries
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Whats your rwad in me toad? Are you part of this elusive "most people" or are you countig me out just becaise some bros be hatin
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Neither is my vote engraved in stone and unchanging rigjt? Im jist leyting jackal know hisnidea is dumbbbbbbb. If he doesnt chsnge his mind when he comes up for leader today neother wil I . He hammered home a crappy team and is pushing another. I will not stand for this
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Gremist thats old news jackals idea is clearly either moronical or scum as i have said
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Also greymist your math is totally erong the ods are way way worse than that were talkung like 80% chance of 1+ spy
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Ya man wtf 41.6% where did you learn your maths its def ovr 80%
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Unless of course jackal is scim and wamts us to fail
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
Rad i didjnt answe your questik adbi already mentioned causr im on my pjone and csnt like view peoples filtetd and stuff. Also read zonas post hes novoting his own team
Gos why does nobdoy read anybodybelses posts in this game
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
