|
@Toad
And and But are two real different things, there. I see what Jackal is looking at.
@Blazinghand
I don't need to say you're play sucks. You garnered four(?) votes yesterday because of you're poor play. Me saying that "Blazing is playing terribly this game" doesn't need to be stated again. I can't help it if you, or some other people, are too busy derping around the thread to actually contribute something solid to town discussion instead of derailing it into the ground. You've said it yourself in previous games: if you are a town, and you get lynched, it's you're own fault for acting so scummy.
@Risk.Nuke
I'll take that answer whenever you free yourself up, bro.
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On February 24 2012 07:32 Jitsu wrote:
@Blazinghand
I don't need to say you're play sucks. You garnered four(?) votes yesterday because of you're poor play. Me saying that "Blazing is playing terribly this game" doesn't need to be stated again. I can't help it if you, or some other people, are too busy derping around the thread to actually contribute something solid to town discussion instead of derailing it into the ground. You've said it yourself in previous games: if you are a town, and you get lynched, it's you're own fault for acting so scummy.
Make a case other than "4 people voted blazinghand" or it just looks to me (and to any rational observer) like you're trying to get some cred without doing anything.
|
Make a case on what? I said you are playing bad. I didn't say you are scum.
Guilty conscience?
|
WBG
Check his filter here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=313426&user=60039
You will notice the majority of the first page is spent calling other players bad. He spends many many many long posts describing RedFF's meta, calling him a bad player, only to come to the conclusion that this means RedFF is unreadable and thus not worth really lynching. The page ends with some of the most wishy washy play I've ever seen.
The problem with redFF is, how do you tell? I suppose we could just lynch him anyway, but then we aren't really lynching someone we surely think is scum. At that point we're just lynching to punish bad play.
While I'm not opposed to lynching people who play badly in this game, I think we can look into finding scum in people who are easier to read than redFF. Reading players who are generally detrimental when they play town has never been my strong suit.
We can lynch RedFF, but it's probably not good, but then again I'm not really opposed to it but let's try something else
If the missing/no-flip/whatever it is thing is indeed a scum power, I don't think scum would unanimously support that lynch, or any lynch in the game for that matter really.
On February 21 2012 14:36 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 14:26 Blazinghand wrote:
So your contention is "redFF is playing as bad town rather than scum", and although lynching bad town isn't the worst thing we could do, it's substantially preferable to lynch scum. This is a fair point. I will reread thread. you're still wrong, but whatever. My contention is that I have no clue what redFF's alignment is because he's capable of being like this regardless. Thus, he very well could be town, yes. Whether he is or not at this point I have no idea. A lynch on someone like that is purely an information lynch (although it would take a detrimental player out, that's true) I am not insinuating that he is town nor scum because I honestly don't know (and for now, don't care.) if I were a vig and I had no better choice I'd definitely shoot him, though. However I'm certain better choices will appear today. I will flush them out of their caves if they are hiding.
I find this post quite amusing considering WBG has called me scum for having "no backbone" and not making a super strong scum read on Day 1. Apply your own logic to your own play please.
but makes it apparent that redFF never really had a case on Toad to begin with. It certainly seemed like he just said "I think Toad is scum" to get heat off himself. While chaoser has done scummy things, this is scummier than anything chaoser has done.
I doubt scum redFF would publically announce "good job i took your bait" but it is a suspect post nonetheless.
WBG seems more interested in upsetting me and keeping me flustered than making a real case. This is literally the exact strategy scum devised to deal with me in Arkham City where he was scum. Radfield knew I would be a threat if somebody didn't distract/harass me because to be honest as town I am horrible under pressure and a threat otherwise. Huge reason I'm trying to slow down and keep it cool this game. Posting so much in Arkham City kept me out of the loop and distracted more than anything and I performed terribly in that game past maybe the first half of the first day.
Quotes from the AC scum QT:
"JJ, if you want to go after DocH, please do. Timezones aren't that important, and neither is getting into direct arguments... motivation is  . The important thing is that post you think he is scum(and why), and try to convince others. He needs to be spending his time defending himself, and not spending his time digging around. DocH is very strong if you let him run freely."
"One of us becomes the DocH harasser. They push him from the get go, and ideally even argue with him."
"DocH is extremely solid if you let him get his feet under him, so we need to rattle him and keep him rattled. I think one of our team members goals should be to keep DocH off balance and call him scum at every turn"
(all from radfield directing the other mafia)
This "pressure" you're putting on me is bullshit. I'm asking simple questions (something that you seem to have no problem doing) and you're making it out to seem that I'm really upset and defensive. If, in fact, WBG is scum this does absolutely nothing to clear VE or RoL. In the AC quicktopic you can see WBG and others calling out and criticizing VE's play and he'd make kind of the ideal target for a bus.
It is what it is. I'll be reading more closely to determine where my first vote will go. I'm torn between RoL, WBG, and Dirkzor and really need to see how VisceraEyes and BloodyC0bbler play today.
I hope you have a real response instead of some stupid ass one liner like "you scum bro" or "wow haha so defensive you're scum" while you wait for your team to help you formulate a real response
|
I think BH is a serial killer or village idiot. He's playing way too fucking stupid he's either setting up for a bus or has some alternative motivation.
See: Palmar in Arkham City
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On February 24 2012 07:37 Jitsu wrote:
Make a case on what? I said you are playing bad. I didn't say you are scum.
Guilty conscience?
So you think I'm town
|
On February 24 2012 07:40 DoctorHelvetica wrote:WBG Check his filter here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=313426&user=60039You will notice the majority of the first page is spent calling other players bad. He spends many many many long posts describing RedFF's meta, calling him a bad player, only to come to the conclusion that this means RedFF is unreadable and thus not worth really lynching. The page ends with some of the most wishy washy play I've ever seen. Show nested quote +The problem with redFF is, how do you tell? I suppose we could just lynch him anyway, but then we aren't really lynching someone we surely think is scum. At that point we're just lynching to punish bad play.
While I'm not opposed to lynching people who play badly in this game, I think we can look into finding scum in people who are easier to read than redFF. Reading players who are generally detrimental when they play town has never been my strong suit. We can lynch RedFF, but it's probably not good, but then again I'm not really opposed to it but let's try something else If the missing/no-flip/whatever it is thing is indeed a scum power, I don't think scum would unanimously support that lynch, or any lynch in the game for that matter really. Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 14:36 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 14:26 Blazinghand wrote:
So your contention is "redFF is playing as bad town rather than scum", and although lynching bad town isn't the worst thing we could do, it's substantially preferable to lynch scum. This is a fair point. I will reread thread. you're still wrong, but whatever. My contention is that I have no clue what redFF's alignment is because he's capable of being like this regardless. Thus, he very well could be town, yes. Whether he is or not at this point I have no idea. A lynch on someone like that is purely an information lynch (although it would take a detrimental player out, that's true) I am not insinuating that he is town nor scum because I honestly don't know (and for now, don't care.) if I were a vig and I had no better choice I'd definitely shoot him, though. However I'm certain better choices will appear today. I will flush them out of their caves if they are hiding. I find this post quite amusing considering WBG has called me scum for having "no backbone" and not making a super strong scum read on Day 1. Apply your own logic to your own play please. Show nested quote + but makes it apparent that redFF never really had a case on Toad to begin with. It certainly seemed like he just said "I think Toad is scum" to get heat off himself. While chaoser has done scummy things, this is scummier than anything chaoser has done. I doubt scum redFF would publically announce "good job i took your bait" but it is a suspect post nonetheless. WBG seems more interested in upsetting me and keeping me flustered than making a real case. This is literally the exact strategy scum devised to deal with me in Arkham City where he was scum. Radfield knew I would be a threat if somebody didn't distract/harass me because to be honest as town I am horrible under pressure and a threat otherwise. Huge reason I'm trying to slow down and keep it cool this game. Posting so much in Arkham City kept me out of the loop and distracted more than anything and I performed terribly in that game past maybe the first half of the first day. Quotes from the AC scum QT: "JJ, if you want to go after DocH, please do. Timezones aren't that important, and neither is getting into direct arguments... motivation is . The important thing is that post you think he is scum(and why), and try to convince others. He needs to be spending his time defending himself, and not spending his time digging around. DocH is very strong if you let him run freely." "One of us becomes the DocH harasser. They push him from the get go, and ideally even argue with him." "DocH is extremely solid if you let him get his feet under him, so we need to rattle him and keep him rattled. I think one of our team members goals should be to keep DocH off balance and call him scum at every turn" (all from radfield directing the other mafia) This "pressure" you're putting on me is bullshit. I'm asking simple questions (something that you seem to have no problem doing) and you're making it out to seem that I'm really upset and defensive. If, in fact, WBG is scum this does absolutely nothing to clear VE or RoL. In the AC quicktopic you can see WBG and others calling out and criticizing VE's play and he'd make kind of the ideal target for a bus. It is what it is. I'll be reading more closely to determine where my first vote will go. I'm torn between RoL, WBG, and Dirkzor and really need to see how VisceraEyes and BloodyC0bbler play today. I hope you have a real response instead of some stupid ass one liner like "you scum bro" or "wow haha so defensive you're scum" while you wait for your team to help you formulate a real response
Doc that this doesn't have to be a conspiracy thing - this is WBG's strategy regardless of his alignment as far as I'm aware - get someone flustered, see if they slip up (town)/call their reactions scummy (scum). However, taken with the rest of his play, I agree with you that he's probably scum trying to fluster you this game. Radfield was leading scum unlike I've seen a vet lead a scumteam before, and I've been on a few scumteams here. I probably wouldn't take those quotes to be 'general scum strategy' here...although, I haven't played with you enough to know if you're REALLY that dangerous or not.
I'm aware I haven't responded to your case against me - I'll get around to it. Please keep that in mind regardless of what you perceive my alignment to be...sound observation is sound.
|
On February 24 2012 07:46 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 07:37 Jitsu wrote:
Make a case on what? I said you are playing bad. I didn't say you are scum.
Guilty conscience? So you think I'm town
he says he has no clue because it could be both, bad Town and bad Mafia.
And no way we got VIs. Yeah maybe in irc mafia games because it's funny after all but that role is just ridiculous when people are playing real.
I'd say BH is still mafia because I just don't see him the way he posts right now.
|
On February 24 2012 07:58 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 07:40 DoctorHelvetica wrote:WBG Check his filter here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=313426&user=60039You will notice the majority of the first page is spent calling other players bad. He spends many many many long posts describing RedFF's meta, calling him a bad player, only to come to the conclusion that this means RedFF is unreadable and thus not worth really lynching. The page ends with some of the most wishy washy play I've ever seen. The problem with redFF is, how do you tell? I suppose we could just lynch him anyway, but then we aren't really lynching someone we surely think is scum. At that point we're just lynching to punish bad play.
While I'm not opposed to lynching people who play badly in this game, I think we can look into finding scum in people who are easier to read than redFF. Reading players who are generally detrimental when they play town has never been my strong suit. We can lynch RedFF, but it's probably not good, but then again I'm not really opposed to it but let's try something else If the missing/no-flip/whatever it is thing is indeed a scum power, I don't think scum would unanimously support that lynch, or any lynch in the game for that matter really. On February 21 2012 14:36 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 14:26 Blazinghand wrote:
So your contention is "redFF is playing as bad town rather than scum", and although lynching bad town isn't the worst thing we could do, it's substantially preferable to lynch scum. This is a fair point. I will reread thread. you're still wrong, but whatever. My contention is that I have no clue what redFF's alignment is because he's capable of being like this regardless. Thus, he very well could be town, yes. Whether he is or not at this point I have no idea. A lynch on someone like that is purely an information lynch (although it would take a detrimental player out, that's true) I am not insinuating that he is town nor scum because I honestly don't know (and for now, don't care.) if I were a vig and I had no better choice I'd definitely shoot him, though. However I'm certain better choices will appear today. I will flush them out of their caves if they are hiding. I find this post quite amusing considering WBG has called me scum for having "no backbone" and not making a super strong scum read on Day 1. Apply your own logic to your own play please. but makes it apparent that redFF never really had a case on Toad to begin with. It certainly seemed like he just said "I think Toad is scum" to get heat off himself. While chaoser has done scummy things, this is scummier than anything chaoser has done. I doubt scum redFF would publically announce "good job i took your bait" but it is a suspect post nonetheless. WBG seems more interested in upsetting me and keeping me flustered than making a real case. This is literally the exact strategy scum devised to deal with me in Arkham City where he was scum. Radfield knew I would be a threat if somebody didn't distract/harass me because to be honest as town I am horrible under pressure and a threat otherwise. Huge reason I'm trying to slow down and keep it cool this game. Posting so much in Arkham City kept me out of the loop and distracted more than anything and I performed terribly in that game past maybe the first half of the first day. Quotes from the AC scum QT: "JJ, if you want to go after DocH, please do. Timezones aren't that important, and neither is getting into direct arguments... motivation is . The important thing is that post you think he is scum(and why), and try to convince others. He needs to be spending his time defending himself, and not spending his time digging around. DocH is very strong if you let him run freely." "One of us becomes the DocH harasser. They push him from the get go, and ideally even argue with him." "DocH is extremely solid if you let him get his feet under him, so we need to rattle him and keep him rattled. I think one of our team members goals should be to keep DocH off balance and call him scum at every turn" (all from radfield directing the other mafia) This "pressure" you're putting on me is bullshit. I'm asking simple questions (something that you seem to have no problem doing) and you're making it out to seem that I'm really upset and defensive. If, in fact, WBG is scum this does absolutely nothing to clear VE or RoL. In the AC quicktopic you can see WBG and others calling out and criticizing VE's play and he'd make kind of the ideal target for a bus. It is what it is. I'll be reading more closely to determine where my first vote will go. I'm torn between RoL, WBG, and Dirkzor and really need to see how VisceraEyes and BloodyC0bbler play today. I hope you have a real response instead of some stupid ass one liner like "you scum bro" or "wow haha so defensive you're scum" while you wait for your team to help you formulate a real response Doc that this doesn't have to be a conspiracy thing - this is WBG's strategy regardless of his alignment as far as I'm aware - get someone flustered, see if they slip up (town)/call their reactions scummy (scum). However, taken with the rest of his play, I agree with you that he's probably scum trying to fluster you this game. Radfield was leading scum unlike I've seen a vet lead a scumteam before, and I've been on a few scumteams here. I probably wouldn't take those quotes to be 'general scum strategy' here...although, I haven't played with you enough to know if you're REALLY that dangerous or not. I'm aware I haven't responded to your case against me - I'll get around to it. Please keep that in mind regardless of what you perceive my alignment to be...sound observation is sound.
I find all the mafia then second guess myself into oblivion and change all my reads to the wrong ones usually
The first half of this case is more important than the second which is a meta explanation of his behavior and thus less reliable
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
Alright guys I think we should lynch BC today. Here's the case, which others have made, and which is only stronger over a day later with him not having contributed substantially in the meantime:
So here's my case for BC
BC opens up like this:
+ Show Spoiler +On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. On February 21 2012 11:53 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 11:50 redFF wrote:
Ace is a cunt and not in this game, stop riding his dick and play. and yet hes better than you in near every way. What does that say about you? On February 21 2012 11:59 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 11:56 redFF wrote:On February 21 2012 11:53 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:50 redFF wrote:
Ace is a cunt and not in this game, stop riding his dick and play. and yet hes better than you in near every way. What does that say about you? him being a cunt has nothing to do with his skill at mafia. I was more referencing the fact your behaving worse than he normally does (he is better than you). As you are being a total douche canoe yet don't carry the level of skill or better than him I was referencing that you were deserving of a far lower and baser title. I am free to let others pick for you as I simply switch to different and more entertaining terms. Now, shall we play instead of focusing on how fun it is that you play in the shallow end of the sandbox all alone.
This is BC being mad, unhelpful, and criticising the discussion without legitimately helping or doing anything. This isn't very BC-like and isn't really helping the town at all.
Then he's actually kinda noncomittal on redFF:
+ Show Spoiler +On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. This is actually a worthless post. "He's being bad, mocking poeple, but so am I, there are a few players like this, oh hey look a policy discussion" On February 21 2012 12:09 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:06 redFF wrote:
Actually bc I'm kind of pissed you're calling me the troll when any personal flaming/animosity started with wbg's first posts of the game, everything I've said has been a response to that. Before that I was being perfectly civil, maybe bad and stupid, but not a dick. Trolls aren't always flaming asshats. I find that the way you continued talking about policy lynching troll like. The continuing of posts between you and wbg (screams troll from both of you) is bad. I am moderately guilty as well, but as someone who has played with ace for years and as he is not in this game it is moderately disrespectful to trash him. You also said things I viewed as bad  Pushing what I will view as bad agendas or bad forms of play is something I near always comment on. The kettle and the pot calling each other black
On February 21 2012 12:15 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote:
Dear redFF and WBG
You both suck.
Sincerely,
Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad.
This is actually semi reasonable but it's an important thing to note to contrast with his next post:
On February 22 2012 10:37 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Why did I subject myself to read this fucking nonsense. Do I have to say this? Role does not equal alignment. Redff claiming his role in hopes to confirm his alignment is horseshit. In an unknown setup and him claiming that there may be multi target abilities the chances of mafia having a role to find said abilities is just as within reason as the town.
He then states that if he is roleblocked to lynch him, but says its not optimal to lynch claimed blues? Contradiction and sounds like hes just finding any reason to stay alive.
This level of play is so insanely bad that it makes me sad. He knows all this and yet still does the play to create a total shit fest of a thread and does not in anyway create a pro town environment.
As for syllo.
Get off my nuts. 5 hours is never enough information to actually commit to a read especially given my horrible ability to differentiate between bad play and bad scum. Find other straw men to go burn.
##vote redff
Now let's take a look at where we are so far
1) BC hasn't analyzed dick all game
2) redFF claims tracker
3) this causes BC to say "well before the claim he seemed iffy, but claiming tracker means he could be a scum-aligned tracker? maybe there are multiple trackers!"
This is possibly the worst reason to get on the redFF wagon I could think of.
He then continues to defend himself not with reason but with rage and incoherences, since there's no real reason for his defense. He claims that there's nothing you can really do day 1 in a closed setup, and generally makes excuses.
As he avoids the noose, and here's what he promises:
On February 23 2012 06:52 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2012 06:51 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
That's fine then. Can I expect to see some contribution beyond criticism from you on Day 2, BC?
I'm pretty sure prplhz is scum and I'll make my case on him tonight in case I die. RedFF seems likely as well, but we'll see when the flip happens. BC has responded fairly well to the pressure as far as explaining himself in my opinion, all that's lacking is for him to make some positive play or follow through with his criticisms by scumhunting on the second day.
correct.
And yet here we are, over a day later. Was BC so sure he wouldn't die overnight? Will we see anything at all useful from him today?
I don't think there's anything valuable coming out of BC because he's trying to be unvaluable. His attacks were shoddy, his vote on redFF was antireasoned (he provided a reason that was literally bad), and his defense was empty and hollow.
And here we are, greeted by crushing silence from him.
What's the deal, BC?
##Vote: BloodyC0bbler
|
On February 24 2012 08:13 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 07:58 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 24 2012 07:40 DoctorHelvetica wrote:WBG Check his filter here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=313426&user=60039You will notice the majority of the first page is spent calling other players bad. He spends many many many long posts describing RedFF's meta, calling him a bad player, only to come to the conclusion that this means RedFF is unreadable and thus not worth really lynching. The page ends with some of the most wishy washy play I've ever seen. The problem with redFF is, how do you tell? I suppose we could just lynch him anyway, but then we aren't really lynching someone we surely think is scum. At that point we're just lynching to punish bad play.
While I'm not opposed to lynching people who play badly in this game, I think we can look into finding scum in people who are easier to read than redFF. Reading players who are generally detrimental when they play town has never been my strong suit. We can lynch RedFF, but it's probably not good, but then again I'm not really opposed to it but let's try something else If the missing/no-flip/whatever it is thing is indeed a scum power, I don't think scum would unanimously support that lynch, or any lynch in the game for that matter really. On February 21 2012 14:36 wherebugsgo wrote:On February 21 2012 14:26 Blazinghand wrote:
So your contention is "redFF is playing as bad town rather than scum", and although lynching bad town isn't the worst thing we could do, it's substantially preferable to lynch scum. This is a fair point. I will reread thread. you're still wrong, but whatever. My contention is that I have no clue what redFF's alignment is because he's capable of being like this regardless. Thus, he very well could be town, yes. Whether he is or not at this point I have no idea. A lynch on someone like that is purely an information lynch (although it would take a detrimental player out, that's true) I am not insinuating that he is town nor scum because I honestly don't know (and for now, don't care.) if I were a vig and I had no better choice I'd definitely shoot him, though. However I'm certain better choices will appear today. I will flush them out of their caves if they are hiding. I find this post quite amusing considering WBG has called me scum for having "no backbone" and not making a super strong scum read on Day 1. Apply your own logic to your own play please. but makes it apparent that redFF never really had a case on Toad to begin with. It certainly seemed like he just said "I think Toad is scum" to get heat off himself. While chaoser has done scummy things, this is scummier than anything chaoser has done. I doubt scum redFF would publically announce "good job i took your bait" but it is a suspect post nonetheless. WBG seems more interested in upsetting me and keeping me flustered than making a real case. This is literally the exact strategy scum devised to deal with me in Arkham City where he was scum. Radfield knew I would be a threat if somebody didn't distract/harass me because to be honest as town I am horrible under pressure and a threat otherwise. Huge reason I'm trying to slow down and keep it cool this game. Posting so much in Arkham City kept me out of the loop and distracted more than anything and I performed terribly in that game past maybe the first half of the first day. Quotes from the AC scum QT: "JJ, if you want to go after DocH, please do. Timezones aren't that important, and neither is getting into direct arguments... motivation is . The important thing is that post you think he is scum(and why), and try to convince others. He needs to be spending his time defending himself, and not spending his time digging around. DocH is very strong if you let him run freely." "One of us becomes the DocH harasser. They push him from the get go, and ideally even argue with him." "DocH is extremely solid if you let him get his feet under him, so we need to rattle him and keep him rattled. I think one of our team members goals should be to keep DocH off balance and call him scum at every turn" (all from radfield directing the other mafia) This "pressure" you're putting on me is bullshit. I'm asking simple questions (something that you seem to have no problem doing) and you're making it out to seem that I'm really upset and defensive. If, in fact, WBG is scum this does absolutely nothing to clear VE or RoL. In the AC quicktopic you can see WBG and others calling out and criticizing VE's play and he'd make kind of the ideal target for a bus. It is what it is. I'll be reading more closely to determine where my first vote will go. I'm torn between RoL, WBG, and Dirkzor and really need to see how VisceraEyes and BloodyC0bbler play today. I hope you have a real response instead of some stupid ass one liner like "you scum bro" or "wow haha so defensive you're scum" while you wait for your team to help you formulate a real response Doc that this doesn't have to be a conspiracy thing - this is WBG's strategy regardless of his alignment as far as I'm aware - get someone flustered, see if they slip up (town)/call their reactions scummy (scum). However, taken with the rest of his play, I agree with you that he's probably scum trying to fluster you this game. Radfield was leading scum unlike I've seen a vet lead a scumteam before, and I've been on a few scumteams here. I probably wouldn't take those quotes to be 'general scum strategy' here...although, I haven't played with you enough to know if you're REALLY that dangerous or not. I'm aware I haven't responded to your case against me - I'll get around to it. Please keep that in mind regardless of what you perceive my alignment to be...sound observation is sound. I find all the mafia then second guess myself into oblivion and change all my reads to the wrong ones usually The first half of this case is more important than the second which is a meta explanation of his behavior and thus less reliable
I mean, call it what you will. I'm just saying, WBG is abrasive, and he uses it to his full advantage regardless of his alignment. That's all I'm saying - I'm not going to provide you with links, or make a case about it or anything. It's not meta, it's just an observation.
Just trying to keep you grounded. If you'd rather I just shut the hell up because you think I'm scum, just let me know.
/facepalm
I did this same thing in AC. I appealed to your sensibilities. I'll stop now.
|
|
|
On February 24 2012 08:33 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Good idea.
Here's a good neutral topic we can at least have a conversation about.
I think Blazinghand is scum and his vote on BloodyC0bbler serves as a.....fuck, I don't know, like an ANTI-lightning rod. I think it serves to remove credibility from the wagon by his sheer presence, repulsing votes. I think this was planned.
What do you think about Blazinghand?
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On February 24 2012 08:46 VisceraEyes wrote:Here's a good neutral topic we can at least have a conversation about. I think Blazinghand is scum and his vote on BloodyC0bbler serves as a.....fuck, I don't know, like an ANTI-lightning rod. I think it serves to remove credibility from the wagon by his sheer presence, repulsing votes. I think this was planned. What do you think about Blazinghand?
If you think that's the case, then join me and lynch BC. My case is reasonable. Maybe you think I played scummy D1, but my case is fundamentally reasonable and it cannot be denied.
|
On February 24 2012 08:50 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 08:46 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 24 2012 08:33 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Good idea. Here's a good neutral topic we can at least have a conversation about. I think Blazinghand is scum and his vote on BloodyC0bbler serves as a.....fuck, I don't know, like an ANTI-lightning rod. I think it serves to remove credibility from the wagon by his sheer presence, repulsing votes. I think this was planned. What do you think about Blazinghand? If you think that's the case, then join me and lynch BC. My case is reasonable. Maybe you think I played scummy D1, but my case is fundamentally reasonable and it cannot be denied.
Your case is nothing that hasn't already been said BH. I'm giving BC a chance to manipulate me (or try). Hold your horses. He's still on my list sir.
|
On February 24 2012 07:23 Toadesstern wrote:
Okay I think I understand what you thinkt I said
You thought I'm saying: I doubt X, but palmar ended up Y
I was actually saying: I doubt (X + Y)
or at least that's what I was trying to say
If that's the case cool. I'm incapable of calling you needledickthebugfucker in German.
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On February 24 2012 08:52 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 08:50 Blazinghand wrote:On February 24 2012 08:46 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 24 2012 08:33 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Good idea. Here's a good neutral topic we can at least have a conversation about. I think Blazinghand is scum and his vote on BloodyC0bbler serves as a.....fuck, I don't know, like an ANTI-lightning rod. I think it serves to remove credibility from the wagon by his sheer presence, repulsing votes. I think this was planned. What do you think about Blazinghand? If you think that's the case, then join me and lynch BC. My case is reasonable. Maybe you think I played scummy D1, but my case is fundamentally reasonable and it cannot be denied. Your case is nothing that hasn't already been said BH. I'm giving BC a chance to manipulate me (or try). Hold your horses. He's still on my list sir.
Well, believe it or not I am rather comfortable changing my vote if I should later determine him to be a town player. For now my vote is on the player who I believe is scum.
|
On February 24 2012 08:52 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 07:23 Toadesstern wrote:
Okay I think I understand what you thinkt I said
You thought I'm saying: I doubt X, but palmar ended up Y
I was actually saying: I doubt (X + Y)
or at least that's what I was trying to say If that's the case cool. I'm incapable of calling you needledickthebugfucker in German.
I love playing with you in games Jackal. You're so fun.
Would you like, do me a solid and clarify your read on syllogism for me? I've had him at a town read, but threatening to quit trying looks really bad to me no matter how you slice it. I think you said you want to lynch him right? That still the case?
|
herp herp herp herp herp?
|
On February 24 2012 08:54 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2012 08:52 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 24 2012 08:50 Blazinghand wrote:On February 24 2012 08:46 VisceraEyes wrote:On February 24 2012 08:33 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Good idea. Here's a good neutral topic we can at least have a conversation about. I think Blazinghand is scum and his vote on BloodyC0bbler serves as a.....fuck, I don't know, like an ANTI-lightning rod. I think it serves to remove credibility from the wagon by his sheer presence, repulsing votes. I think this was planned. What do you think about Blazinghand? If you think that's the case, then join me and lynch BC. My case is reasonable. Maybe you think I played scummy D1, but my case is fundamentally reasonable and it cannot be denied. Your case is nothing that hasn't already been said BH. I'm giving BC a chance to manipulate me (or try). Hold your horses. He's still on my list sir. Well, believe it or not I am rather comfortable changing my vote if I should later determine him to be a town player. For now my vote is on the player who I believe is scum.
Oh, I believe it - your buddy was actually in danger of dying yesterday, you had to do something right?. XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
