|
Canada543 Posts
On May 03 2013 05:54 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 05:52 Sharrant wrote:On May 03 2013 05:49 WaveofShadow wrote:How so yamato? Also wtf Sharrant you accuse me of not reading then you say this? On May 03 2013 05:35 Sharrant wrote:On May 03 2013 05:28 WaveofShadow wrote:Sharrant you're wrong, there are no scum vigis left; if there were they wasted their shots on Ace or something. There is no way in hell scum would be sitting on vigi shots this late in the game. Ace is 3p, deal with it. I agree we don't lynch him yet. Vote Hopeless and let's end this day because there doesn't seem to be anything left to say. Palmar is useless and this: Whether or not he's third party, it is not good town play to lynch him. He still may be town, and either way he's one of the stronger analysts in the game. I'd rather have the counsel of a man who knows he is doomed to lose, than potentially kill a townie AND waste time not killing mafia when Ace is already a completely solved situation. is dumb. Have you not noticed Ace's considerable lack of contribution since being RBed every night? He has no desire to help town anymore because he knows he's caught. Your constant hard defenses of him in the face of overwhelming evidence troubles me, Sharrant. It seems like you've lost your way somewhere in this game. ##Vote: Hopeless1der How are you failing at reading so hard? If a scum vigi shot on night 2 it would be exactly the same as if a serial poisoner acted on night one. Please keep up. Lynching him hurts town right now.I hate playing follow the cop, it's just boring. I'm waffling on lynching Hopeless right now, going to try and figure out if I want to lynch Yamato more or less. On May 03 2013 05:28 WaveofShadow wrote:Sharrant you're wrong, there are no scum vigis left; if there were they wasted their shots on Ace or something. There is no way in hell scum would be sitting on vigi shots this late in the game. Ace is 3p, deal with it. I agree we don't lynch him yet.Vote Hopeless and let's end this day because there doesn't seem to be anything left to say. Palmar is useless and this: Whether or not he's third party, it is not good town play to lynch him. He still may be town, and either way he's one of the stronger analysts in the game. I'd rather have the counsel of a man who knows he is doomed to lose, than potentially kill a townie AND waste time not killing mafia when Ace is already a completely solved situation. is dumb. Have you not noticed Ace's considerable lack of contribution since being RBed every night? He has no desire to help town anymore because he knows he's caught. Your constant hard defenses of him in the face of overwhelming evidence troubles me, Sharrant. It seems like you've lost your way somewhere in this game. ##Vote: Hopeless1der Because I clearly explained where the vigi (if the scum have another vigi) had fired, and you were saying that the scum wouldn't have withheld their shot. It made no sense in the context of the conversation. It's completely out of place. I said it's possible scum could have fired on n2 if they had a second vigi, killing grush, and it would appear just the same as if a third party had done it. You responded with "Sharrant you're wrong, there are no scum vigis left; if there were they wasted their shots on Ace or something. There is no way in hell scum would be sitting on vigi shots this late in the game. Ace is 3p, deal with it. I agree we don't lynch him yet." I find it highly unlike that a mafia shot was used on Grush.
As do I, but the whole reason we're having this conversation is because Palmar sait that Ace is confirmed as third party, however unlikely mafia shooting Grush is, only mafia know for certain whether Ace is third party or not. Thus it is very important.
And yeah, WoS, I just felt it needed to be reminded to everyone else again. Only the first bit was about you, the rest was to everyone else. Patience and repetition.
Hey, Palmar, what checks did you do, and what results did you receive? You checked BC (RB'ed), BC (guilty), VE (guilty) is there one I'm missing?
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 03 2013 06:04 Palmar wrote:
oh wait, you missed obviousone
So you've had 3 guilty checks so far, yes? One on one confirmed town, one on a cop checked town, and one on BC, yes?
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 03 2013 06:08 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 06:06 Sharrant wrote:On May 03 2013 06:04 Palmar wrote:
oh wait, you missed obviousone So you've had 3 guilty checks so far, yes? One on one confirmed town, one on a cop checked town, and one on BC, yes? yep
Ah, nevermind, I'll leave this until tomorrow.
It's probably not important anyhow.
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 03 2013 22:36 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
Guys. Seriously, there isn't a second scum vigi because I seriously doubt scum would have the balls to save their vigi for D5, and they've already had 3 strong power roles flip including a vigi. The setup would be pretty rediculously scum favoured if there was another scum vigi when town gets none.
Ace is confirmed 3rd party. Lynching him frees up our JK, which means he can protect townies rather than stop Ace from firing which means we get potentially more days and forces scum to guess who won't get protected so they can't shoot who they want to without risk.
Lynch Ace
I'm just going to afk now until Ace is lynched, unless someone actually brings up something I've missed which I highly doubt.
How can you be so bad at reading? How many times have I explained it now. If scum have a second vigi they fired it on night 2. It would look exactly like Ace was the serial poisoner. HOW MANY TIMES HAS THIS BEEN SAID? Honestly, it's so frustrating.
Lynching Ace right now gives the mafia an extra kill that we only have a chance to block, this isn't including things like a jail keeper may jail a doctor if we have one which means we potentially waste a lynch AND gain nothing for it.
I want to lynch Hopeless, and then if he flips red, you hang next. That should be all the mafia, then Ace can die.
If Hopeless isn't mafia, I'll look into everyone else again, but you're defending him by pushing the lynch off of him, giving mafia an extra night's worth of kills.
That's why I ninja voted Hopeless. If you're not mafia, Hopeless, I'm sorry. But Artanis is doing a good job of making you look like you are.
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 03 2013 23:20 TheRavensName wrote:
Also, you really think we have a jailer, a medic, 2 masons , and 3 cops? Thats crazy. No, our one protection role is wasted chillling on ace which means Mafia knows that they can kill whoever they want.
Quite frankly, no, I'm not convinced WE have 2 masons. I'm convinced there ARE 2 masons. Nor am I convinced we have 3 cops, but that's discussion for tomorrow.
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 03 2013 23:27 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 23:23 Sharrant wrote:On May 03 2013 23:20 TheRavensName wrote:
Also, you really think we have a jailer, a medic, 2 masons , and 3 cops? Thats crazy. No, our one protection role is wasted chillling on ace which means Mafia knows that they can kill whoever they want. Quite frankly, no, I'm not convinced WE have 2 masons. I'm convinced there ARE 2 masons. Nor am I convinced we have 3 cops, but that's discussion for tomorrow. Wait a minute. So according to this you think there's still a scum mason and vigi, and Palmar is lying therefore he must be one of those or 3p? AND you think Hopeless is mafia? Where does Ace fit into this? Your final 3 must be hopeless/palmar/ace then? I don't think this is discussion for tomorrow because clearly today isn't decided yet.
I don't understand your line of thought. Because I am not convinced of something, I must assume everything is false? No, I'm working through the most likely outcomes.
Yes, Palmar is a discussion for another day and I will not speak more of it.
I've never disagreed with Ace being third party, I've said often that I think it's the most likely, but is otherwise solvable without his death. To consider it confirmed, you are either making a stupid assumption, or you have information that only the mafia has.
I am not convinced of TRN's alignment, he could be town or scum mason. It is possible that scum have a vigi. It is possible Palmar is lying, a paranoid cop being one of the safest claims possible.
I do not have a final 3. There are a few people who have done a decent job of making themselves look townie, but beyond them everyone is suspect. That's what feels so frustrating at this point. Artanis could be defending either BC or Hopeless with his actions, but I'd rather lynch Hopeless today because of BC's connection to Palmar, and I want more time before I tackle that mess.
|
Canada543 Posts
Can't quote on phone
@wos
Three third party only possible with at least 2 survivors. Don't care about survivors for the most part. Only late game.
Okay, let's play this game. lynching ace is sub optimal play because:
Jailer cannot protect himself and you've already stated doctor is unlikely. Mafia has 1/townie chance to randomly kill the jailer. That's without taking into account that yamato claims to know who it is.if he is right (not sure who he suspects or if he's mafia) then jailer dies tonight. If they don't hit jailer, jailer has 1/player base-1 to stop the shot not with standing his ability to determine who the mafia is or guess their might kill.
Likely scenario: ace is , Lynched, jailer is shot. Day completely wasted, in same spot you are now, but with one less blue, still a potential but less likely 1 less green, and just as many mafia, but less lynches.
The worst case scenario of letting ace live is your plans most likely scenario.
This was addressed to everyone saying lynch ace.
|
Canada543 Posts
Role block should go through regardless of jailers death, unless set up is modified in a way I don't know. If jailer dies, lynch ace. No deaths will occur from ace unless jk spends a night not rbing him, or we leave him alive for a night after jk dies.
|
Canada543 Posts
Stutters, its in every damn thing I've said. I'm fairly sure he's third party. Read any quote. But possible he's town, and you can leave the lynch until jailer death, 2 mafia deaths, or a day
or two before lylo
|
Canada543 Posts
Whatever. I'm bored. I want it to be tomorrow already so we can actually get down to lynching Mafia.
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 04 2013 09:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2013 09:00 Artanis[Xp] wrote:On May 04 2013 08:53 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On May 04 2013 08:47 Artanis[Xp] wrote:
I have a strong townread on Yamato. He also brought up the idea of BC being 3rd party survivor when reading through the case. Seems like he actually thought it through and evaluated it.
That he randomly started pushing BC after Ace flipped 3P is concerning though. I haven't seen his thought process behind it. Ace was clearly 3p from an early stage in my books (called him on it like n1 or d2) I figured he was survivor though. Also you have seen the thought process of Palmar and I, we more or less narrowed it to 3 people. One of which (hopeless) I think you can easily understand. Yes, but don't forget Stutters (which you put as null) and TRN (whilst masoning Palmar is ballsy there's something off about a bunch of his posts to me). Getmoript has also played an awful game. How certain are we that the modconfirmed thing is truly modconfirmed? Read both Yamato and Giggles filter. One reads far more prominently townie to me. However I will admit I have had a huge scum read of yamato most of the game to the point I don't think I can seperate myself from it. However thread sentiment / agreement from most major players everyone can agree on were town before they flipped had ace down as likely 3p. I'll reread both filters tomorrow. It's true that everyone had Ace down as 3P, but that wasn't the thing that concerned me. The thing that did concern me was how Yamato changed reads from putting you as 3P to scum when it was incredibly likely that Ace would flip 3P and he knew that, so why did it change? You do raise the point of him pushing me as 3p survivor. Why would Town care which 3p is which? Town has to eliminate the player if they think said player is not town / playing against town win con. As such figuring out which potential 3p is what doesn't matter if they are likely shooting town. Only reason I can see someone caring which 3p someone is is if they are mafia hoping to get someone with night protection lynched to make sure a shot doesn't get blocked. It matters because Survivor can win with town so a survivor doesn't need to be eliminated. A SP/SK does need to be eliminated as it can't win with town. There's no reason to lynch survivor, there is a good reason to lynch SP/SK. I honestly cant see gemoript as scum. Marv would have no reason to have a seperate qt with geript if they were scum. They could easily interact via a scum qt just fine.
I actually read Geript as town from his filter, there's a few posts I pointed out long ago that read that way to me.
But since your only reason seems to be the QT thing, I'll give you a reason to mull over, and decide again.
Marv clearly wanted a backseat role this game, he barely intended to post. Basically a shadowing position. It crossed my mind that Marv was upset because he just wanted to talk one on one with Geript in their own QT, but was told by BH that he had to talk in the scum QT and he opposed having to interact/deal with more players. Marv intending to only act as a personal coach, was upset when asked to essentially be a team coach.
|
Canada543 Posts
Palmar, who did you check last night, what was the result?
|
Canada543 Posts
And thank you for the well wishes, Hopeless! :-)
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 05 2013 05:17 Bill Murray wrote:
happy birthday share ant
Thank you, Bill Murray!
I have a question for you, are you suspicious at all of Palmar right now? (Sorry if I've missed it if you've brought it up in recent conversation.)
|
Canada543 Posts
Whether or not it happened, to discount scum jailing one of their own on day as "very improbable" is unwise in my opinion. Jailer claiming would give us one confirmed townie, then a dead townie the following night and no protection from that point on. And it wouldn't give us another confirmed townie because scum no doubt put more than two seconds thought into their night one jail.
If they did that, they'd first come to your conclusion, and then realize that they only had probably 1/3 chance of hitting a role that would be hampered by a role block, and that they could use their own roleblock for town cred.
Now it doesn't matter whether they did that or not, because just the fact that they could have done that means that you can't confirm a second person from a jailer claim. Thus I urge the jailer not to claim.
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 05 2013 14:12 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2013 13:19 Sharrant wrote:
Whether or not it happened, to discount scum jailing one of their own on day as "very improbable" is unwise in my opinion. Jailer claiming would give us one confirmed townie, then a dead townie the following night and no protection from that point on. And it wouldn't give us another confirmed townie because scum no doubt put more than two seconds thought into their night one jail.
If they did that, they'd first come to your conclusion, and then realize that they only had probably 1/3 chance of hitting a role that would be hampered by a role block, and that they could use their own roleblock for town cred.
Now it doesn't matter whether they did that or not, because just the fact that they could have done that means that you can't confirm a second person from a jailer claim. Thus I urge the jailer not to claim. Yes, you can, because scum wouldn't jail their own N1. Stopping a cop/other jailer is so much more important than the "town cred" from a N1 roleblock.
Then how do you explain both of the people roleblocked on night one being alive? Surely if a vet would be considered confirmed town after such an action, the mafia would have had to kill him as quickly as possible, even if they were a mislynch possibility just based on the fact that the jailer could claim.
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 05 2013 20:35 Bill Murray wrote:
HMMM I KNOW WHO I WANT TO LYNCH
Who would you like to lynch, Bill?
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 05 2013 23:13 Palmar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2013 14:12 yamato77 wrote:On May 05 2013 13:19 Sharrant wrote:
Whether or not it happened, to discount scum jailing one of their own on day as "very improbable" is unwise in my opinion. Jailer claiming would give us one confirmed townie, then a dead townie the following night and no protection from that point on. And it wouldn't give us another confirmed townie because scum no doubt put more than two seconds thought into their night one jail.
If they did that, they'd first come to your conclusion, and then realize that they only had probably 1/3 chance of hitting a role that would be hampered by a role block, and that they could use their own roleblock for town cred.
Now it doesn't matter whether they did that or not, because just the fact that they could have done that means that you can't confirm a second person from a jailer claim. Thus I urge the jailer not to claim. Yes, you can, because scum wouldn't jail their own N1. Stopping a cop/other jailer is so much more important than the "town cred" from a N1 roleblock. Scum can withhold their jail thing to claim a roleblock.
That too.
Palmar: Who did you check last night, what was the result?
|
Canada543 Posts
On May 05 2013 23:23 Artanis[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2013 23:08 TheRavensName wrote:On May 05 2013 16:07 yamato77 wrote:On May 05 2013 14:20 Sharrant wrote:On May 05 2013 14:12 yamato77 wrote:On May 05 2013 13:19 Sharrant wrote:
Whether or not it happened, to discount scum jailing one of their own on day as "very improbable" is unwise in my opinion. Jailer claiming would give us one confirmed townie, then a dead townie the following night and no protection from that point on. And it wouldn't give us another confirmed townie because scum no doubt put more than two seconds thought into their night one jail.
If they did that, they'd first come to your conclusion, and then realize that they only had probably 1/3 chance of hitting a role that would be hampered by a role block, and that they could use their own roleblock for town cred.
Now it doesn't matter whether they did that or not, because just the fact that they could have done that means that you can't confirm a second person from a jailer claim. Thus I urge the jailer not to claim. Yes, you can, because scum wouldn't jail their own N1. Stopping a cop/other jailer is so much more important than the "town cred" from a N1 roleblock. Then how do you explain both of the people roleblocked on night one being alive? Surely if a vet would be considered confirmed town after such an action, the mafia would have had to kill him as quickly as possible, even if they were a mislynch possibility just based on the fact that the jailer could claim. The jailer wouldn't claim until a situation like this, and the chances of the jailer and the scum target both being alive, plus the scum jailer dead at this point in the game are relatively low. All of those things are required for this to be successful. You don't go in to a game, especially on N1 after a mislynch, assuming that your roleblock could somehow later on confirm a townie. You go in trying to stop a cop or a JK from getting off their night actions. It's not that difficult to understand. You're making this far too complicated. It's simple. Town JK roleblocked someone night 1, and he did it trying to protect them. That says nothing about their alignment. Scum used JK on someone night 1 trying to stop a night action, and that makes that person CONFIRMED not mafia. Sharrant kinda brings up a good point though. Why wouldn't they off whoever was protected then? Probably because both of them were far from confirmed town. Both Palmar and BC were under suspicion. Show nested quote +On May 05 2013 23:13 Palmar wrote:On May 05 2013 14:12 yamato77 wrote:On May 05 2013 13:19 Sharrant wrote:
Whether or not it happened, to discount scum jailing one of their own on day as "very improbable" is unwise in my opinion. Jailer claiming would give us one confirmed townie, then a dead townie the following night and no protection from that point on. And it wouldn't give us another confirmed townie because scum no doubt put more than two seconds thought into their night one jail.
If they did that, they'd first come to your conclusion, and then realize that they only had probably 1/3 chance of hitting a role that would be hampered by a role block, and that they could use their own roleblock for town cred.
Now it doesn't matter whether they did that or not, because just the fact that they could have done that means that you can't confirm a second person from a jailer claim. Thus I urge the jailer not to claim. Yes, you can, because scum wouldn't jail their own N1. Stopping a cop/other jailer is so much more important than the "town cred" from a N1 roleblock. Scum can withhold their jail thing to claim a roleblock. If they did, they did for a reason. I can't find a plausible reason. Nowhere did you or BC milk town cred out of the RB, unless I missed something. I therefore find it unlikely.
Neither have been particularly close to the gallows either, and neither of them are stupid players.
|
Canada543 Posts
Palmar, I can only wait patiently so long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
