|
On June 25 2012 08:49 Zephirdd wrote: Let me tell you what I think happened. VE was jailed. Then scum KP didn't happen. Then you thought "fuck, our goon was jailed." and then you posted that.
Zephirdd, if scum's shot was blocked because the shooter was jailed they would get a roleblock notification.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
stuff like this:
On June 23 2012 10:15 risk.nuke wrote: So my first thought is what two players are yelling the loudest at eachother. It's Vicera and Marv. So naturally my first assumption would be to remove both of those from my day 1 lynch pool. While Vicera doubtlessly seems like the towniest townie ever towned marv seems a bit scummy. Partly because how his inabillity to see how Vicera is town.
|
On June 25 2012 08:30 prplhz wrote: If we have a roleblocker then he should just claim who he blocked and we lynch that guy. It's that simple. The odds of us having a roleblocker AND a jailkeeper who jailed successfully should be negligible in a balanced-for-teamliquid C9++. If there is a jailkeeper and there is no roleblocker claim then this jailkeeper should think carefully if his target is now confirmed town or confirmed scum. If I understand right we have no way of knowing. The rb could have blocked someone and it was a jailer that save the hit so the rbs block didn't matter. The guy the jailer tried to save could have been the shooter, or the guys role blocked could have shot. No one claim, at least not yet as we don't know what could have happened.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
and also this:
On June 23 2012 07:36 marvellosity wrote: fuck you're probably town
On June 23 2012 07:45 Probulous wrote: Well Marv seeing the light.
|
Let's not WIFOM at who we would shoot as scum. It won't produce anything substantial and allows scum to blend in and derails thread from what is truly important: hunting and lynching scum. Since there is finally some thread activity going on, I'll be happy to sit down and think carefully what the heck is going on. Probulous I'm still unhappy about your play this game, starting with the oversight in your Zentor vote. Of course this could be an honest mistake so I'm gonna sit on it for now. Still waiting for von Klaust as well. If you ignore me I'ma hound you down.
|
Also everyone should just reread OP again. And bug's analysis for previous C9++ he held. Cause right now it's hard differentiating if scum is pushing agenda or townies just don't read.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
On June 25 2012 08:58 slOosh wrote: Let's not WIFOM at who we would shoot as scum. It won't produce anything substantial and allows scum to blend in and derails thread from what is truly important: hunting and lynching scum. Since there is finally some thread activity going on, I'll be happy to sit down and think carefully what the heck is going on. Probulous I'm still unhappy about your play this game, starting with the oversight in your Zentor vote. Of course this could be an honest mistake so I'm gonna sit on it for now. Still waiting for von Klaust as well. If you ignore me I'ma hound you down.
You need to stop doing this. You keep asking people about Probulous and telling him you're suspicious, but all you're willing to say is that you didn't like his Zentor vote oversight.
Either make a case or don't. Stop expecting others to answer for you, or telling Probulous he's suspicious with no way to make a defence as you won't actually make a case.
|
On June 25 2012 08:53 Probulous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 08:49 Zephirdd wrote: Let me tell you what I think happened. VE was jailed. Then scum KP didn't happen. Then you thought "fuck, our goon was jailed." and then you posted that. Zephirdd, if scum's shot was blocked because the shooter was jailed they would get a roleblock notification.
Well, we would never know that right? A roleblocked scum would never claim it.
|
On June 25 2012 08:54 rastaban wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 08:30 prplhz wrote: If we have a roleblocker then he should just claim who he blocked and we lynch that guy. It's that simple. The odds of us having a roleblocker AND a jailkeeper who jailed successfully should be negligible in a balanced-for-teamliquid C9++. If there is a jailkeeper and there is no roleblocker claim then this jailkeeper should think carefully if his target is now confirmed town or confirmed scum. If I understand right we have no way of knowing. The rb could have blocked someone and it was a jailer that save the hit so the rbs block didn't matter. The guy the jailer tried to save could have been the shooter, or the guys role blocked could have shot. No one claim, at least not yet as we don't know what could have happened. Yea, I'm kind of covering all that in my post. Roleblocker claim is the best thing he can do right now, jailkeeper need to think it over if he wants to claim and he probably shouldn't unless he's very sure about himself (in which he probably can't help it but to claim).
|
On June 25 2012 09:06 Zephirdd wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 08:53 Probulous wrote:On June 25 2012 08:49 Zephirdd wrote: Let me tell you what I think happened. VE was jailed. Then scum KP didn't happen. Then you thought "fuck, our goon was jailed." and then you posted that. Zephirdd, if scum's shot was blocked because the shooter was jailed they would get a roleblock notification. Well, we would never know that right? A roleblocked scum would never claim it. Why not, we don't know if he was the one hit, or if he tried to shoot and got blocked. you get notified both ways and as Artanis said even if they are notified they haven't been yet since he isn't sure. On top of this their could be a role blocker out there as well that may have actually stopped the kill. not counting possible duplicate roles.
I think claiming to have been roleblocked last night is fine if you got one, as mafia might have a RB as well.
|
slOosh, I am not ignoring you. If you really want an explanation (with quotes and shit) I will write it out, but basically it came down to me realising marv was not getting lynched and so I had to choose between Zentor and Rastaban. Call it sheeping if you want but to me it was playing realistically. I already said that Zentor was scummy since I asked him to post his top scum candidate and he refused to. So I took a closer look at his filter. His change on Marv/Ve was due to a ridiculous theory by Zephirdd but he didn't even bother with the better cases about Rastaban. It seemed scummy so I chose him.
Remember I have to make my mind hours before you do. There was no way I was going to be able to argue for my lynch and it didn't seem to be going anywhere so I switched to my next scummiest candidate. I hope that is enough for you to see the light but if you have more questions I will gladly answer them.
Still working on Marv's filter. Something is wrotten in the state of Britain.
|
On June 25 2012 09:11 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 08:54 rastaban wrote:On June 25 2012 08:30 prplhz wrote: If we have a roleblocker then he should just claim who he blocked and we lynch that guy. It's that simple. The odds of us having a roleblocker AND a jailkeeper who jailed successfully should be negligible in a balanced-for-teamliquid C9++. If there is a jailkeeper and there is no roleblocker claim then this jailkeeper should think carefully if his target is now confirmed town or confirmed scum. If I understand right we have no way of knowing. The rb could have blocked someone and it was a jailer that save the hit so the rbs block didn't matter. The guy the jailer tried to save could have been the shooter, or the guys role blocked could have shot. No one claim, at least not yet as we don't know what could have happened. Yea, I'm kind of covering all that in my post. Roleblocker claim is the best thing he can do right now, jailkeeper need to think it over if he wants to claim and he probably shouldn't unless he's very sure about himself (in which he probably can't help it but to claim).
Why do you want them to claim? that seems really bad to me. Am I missing something, but if they claim we still don't know who shot, there is a chance it was the person they blocked but we don't know that for sure.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
Surely the person who got roleblocked should just claim, not the person jailing/roleblocking?
|
On June 25 2012 09:15 marvellosity wrote: Surely the person who got roleblocked should just claim, not the person jailing/roleblocking? yes, and remember anyone jailed hasn't been notified yet so no jumping the gun as we don't know the jailers yet.
|
Urgh, rastaban, take a little time to think before you post.
If you are roleblocked, claim it. It is that simple. It gives town more information that scum would already have. If the roleblocker or jailer claim, they are giving mafia more info which needs to be weighed up.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
mm. we need us some wbg action
|
On June 25 2012 09:17 rastaban wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 09:15 marvellosity wrote: Surely the person who got roleblocked should just claim, not the person jailing/roleblocking? yes, and remember anyone jailed hasn't been notified yet so no jumping the gun as we don't know the jailers yet. What I mean by "we don't know the jailers yet" is that if there is only a role blocker then his target is most likely scum, however if there is a jailer or more than one role blocker (including a scum one) then the chance of the claimer being scum is way less.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
Probulous, no unwarranted prodding
On June 25 2012 08:29 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 08:07 Probulous wrote: If a person is jailed are they notified? If so, is the notification the same as if they have been roleblocked? I'm uncertain. If such an event took place this night, I have not sent PM's about it. WBG will answer you once he gets online.
rastaban was just saying we currently don't know what ppl are told
|
On June 25 2012 09:12 rastaban wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 09:11 prplhz wrote:On June 25 2012 08:54 rastaban wrote:On June 25 2012 08:30 prplhz wrote: If we have a roleblocker then he should just claim who he blocked and we lynch that guy. It's that simple. The odds of us having a roleblocker AND a jailkeeper who jailed successfully should be negligible in a balanced-for-teamliquid C9++. If there is a jailkeeper and there is no roleblocker claim then this jailkeeper should think carefully if his target is now confirmed town or confirmed scum. If I understand right we have no way of knowing. The rb could have blocked someone and it was a jailer that save the hit so the rbs block didn't matter. The guy the jailer tried to save could have been the shooter, or the guys role blocked could have shot. No one claim, at least not yet as we don't know what could have happened. Yea, I'm kind of covering all that in my post. Roleblocker claim is the best thing he can do right now, jailkeeper need to think it over if he wants to claim and he probably shouldn't unless he's very sure about himself (in which he probably can't help it but to claim). Why do you want them to claim? that seems really bad to me. Am I missing something, but if they claim we still don't know who shot, there is a chance it was the person they blocked but we don't know that for sure. I'm sorry, did you not read my post? Who is "them" in "Why do you want them to claim?"?
I don't know if you're missing something. Roleblocker is pretty useless role and if he got insanely lucky on day1 then he should claim 'cause that'll give us a lot of information and I think it's worth it.
|
United Kingdom36160 Posts
oh, he wasn't saying that. i'll be quiet then.
|
|
|
|