|
On November 09 2012 08:55 Release wrote:
I claimed VT. I'll claim VT again.
The purpose of the breadcrumb was to see whether i would be role blocked for wanting to vig kush. A side effect is that it drew RB away from other town (i was assuming that if i were RBed, it would be a mafia RB).
What's your rolename. Chop chop now, you've had plenty of time to fabricate one.
|
|
|
Can we all shut up about setup speculation until after the night action deadline. K thanks.
|
On November 09 2012 08:53 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2012 08:51 Acrofales wrote:
And for anybody doubting that roleblockers can be roleblocked, I have the answer in my PM from Hiro, but:
If A and B are roleblockers and C is some random joe, WHO is roleblocked in the following situation?
A roleblocks B
B roleblocks C
PS. The answer is: only B. Really? this is not how it has worked in previous games. Ie. NMMXXIV in which the manner in which roleblocks worked came up in detail.
Read the OP.
To clarify additionally, though this situation has never occurred in one of my games, if two roleblockers target each other on the same night, and one of them happens to also be carrying the nightkill for the mafia, the mutual roleblock will result in the night kill not being carried out.
With respect to jailkeepers, this might be a bit confusing, but basically if a jailkeeper targets a roleblocker and the same roleblocker targets the jailkeeper, the roleblocks go through but the protection does not. So for the purpose of that action, the jailkeeper will function like a normal roleblocker. (I may change this in future iterations of the game but this is how I've considered resolving this issue in all of my games so far)
|
On November 09 2012 09:04 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2012 08:53 DarthPunk wrote:On November 09 2012 08:51 Acrofales wrote:
And for anybody doubting that roleblockers can be roleblocked, I have the answer in my PM from Hiro, but:
If A and B are roleblockers and C is some random joe, WHO is roleblocked in the following situation?
A roleblocks B
B roleblocks C
PS. The answer is: only B. Really? this is not how it has worked in previous games. Ie. NMMXXIV in which the manner in which roleblocks worked came up in detail. Read the OP.
To clarify additionally, though this situation has never occurred in one of my games, if two roleblockers target each other on the same night, and one of them happens to also be carrying the nightkill for the mafia, the mutual roleblock will result in the night kill not being carried out.
With respect to jailkeepers, this might be a bit confusing, but basically if a jailkeeper targets a roleblocker and the same roleblocker targets the jailkeeper, the roleblocks go through but the protection does not. So for the purpose of that action, the jailkeeper will function like a normal roleblocker. (I may change this in future iterations of the game but this is how I've considered resolving this issue in all of my games so far)
Interesting. Thanks.
|
On November 09 2012 08:57 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2012 08:55 Release wrote:
I claimed VT. I'll claim VT again.
The purpose of the breadcrumb was to see whether i would be role blocked for wanting to vig kush. A side effect is that it drew RB away from other town (i was assuming that if i were RBed, it would be a mafia RB). What's your rolename. Chop chop now, you've had plenty of time to fabricate one.
10 minutes. What was the point of this?
Kush already provided enough flavor bullshit. Why you?
|
@release porky pig is a character name... so far there have been NO vt character names. What is up with that?
|
Why are you still pursuing flavor theory?
I've opposed flavor theory all game. Now you know why. And answer why you have been pursuing flavor theory all game (other than blue-hunting). I asked that a while ago and you still haven't answered.
|
Well release because you are the only vt with a character name is why. That doesn't seem odd to you?
also before I didn't see that wbg said the game isn't breakable with flavor lol
but then again "breakable" could mean a lot of different things.
|
Also your "vig claim" ----> DO NOT BUY.
That was a trap huh? Well if it was a trap you would have made it way more obvious. Because as it is it's literally impossible to find.
I think you put it there so you could call back on it and fake claim vig if you needed to. Except now that's not really a possibility since there has been so much night analysis and so many claims.
|
Didn't Prome claim VT with Marvin Acme?
|
Ah, I remember. You say marvin acme isn't really a character...
|
It would be nice to have some experience with these cartoons. I literally had to google mine to find out what it was.
|
On November 09 2012 09:17 kushm4sta wrote:
Well release because you are the only vt with a character name is why. That doesn't seem odd to you?
also before I didn't see that wbg said the game isn't breakable with flavor lol
but then again "breakable" could mean a lot of different things.
1) no. He said it's not breakable and i don't think it is.
2) Yes you did. It's been mentioned several times. At least twice by the host or the cohost in bold blue.
3) If they let us claim it, i don't think it would let us win the game. Hence why we can't post PM box pictures.
|
is that your only reason for pursuing flavor theory?
|
On November 09 2012 08:07 Acrofales wrote:
Yo risk, you here?
No I'm going to bed, I'm just checking the flip. Ask me anything and I'll answer it when I wake up.
|
"Very much would I feel annoyed if the you were the reason we lost after finding the Godfather of all people."
Doesn't strike you as an awkward sentence?
Ofc i would feel annoyed. We all would.
Who cares if we got the GF? He's scum. There's no point in mentioning the GF specifically.
|
On November 09 2012 09:24 Release wrote:
is that your only reason for pursuing flavor theory?
I first realized that WBG said that when I asked you "where did wbg say that" and someone linked it.
I have mostly dropped it but I only bring it up now because it's really odd that you are the only character VT.
It's odd but it's totally possible that a vt is named porky pig.
It's not the only reason I suspect you.
Also i love porky pig, best looney toons character
|
On November 09 2012 08:57 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2012 08:54 Acrofales wrote:On November 09 2012 08:52 DarthPunk wrote:
Also. There may still be a framer. I am not sure how likely that is in comparison to them having a roleblocker. But it is certainly an option. You people all fail miserably at logic. Or there are 4 scum. That seems way outside the realm of C9++ games, though. YOu do not have all the information and you are on the wrong track with your assumptions. I would not continue making these assumptions until you have all the information.
I am making very very FEW assumptions. However, I do happen to have rather a lot of experience with mathematical logic. However, writing the entire proof out was getting needlessly complicated. Here is the abbreviated version:
The cases in which Kush could be lying about being roleblocked are:
1. He is scum and thrawn is scum. This makes a 4-man scumteam, which is just really unlikely.
2. He is scum and thrawn is SK. For some reason, the SK decided to throw a fake greencheck out there just for the hell of it. If you believe that, then this scenario is okay.
3. Kush is SK. How does fakeclaiming RB'd make sense in this case? I don't see what purpose it serves.
4. Kush is scum and so is random person X, who is a framer. Mattchew roleblocked Prom on N1 and Zealos me (or vice versa). Once again, 4-man scumteam.
Those are the cases in which Kush could conceivably be lying. I am further assuming town don't lie about being roleblocked and town ALSO don't lie about having greenchecks.
Therefore, if we assume that:
A1. Scum is not a 4-man team
A2. Kush is not the SK FAKECLAIMING (you can believe Kush is the SK all you like, but you ALSO have to believe he fakeclaimed roleblocked)
A3. It is not so that Kush is scum AND thrawn is the SK AND thrawn fakeclaimed a greencheck.
Then Kush cannot be lying.
Kush not lying means there is an unclaimed roleblocker. That unclaimed roleblocker cannot be Release due to logic in a previous post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
