|
Russian Federation140 Posts
On April 09 2013 00:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2013 04:43 Ghor wrote:
In that regard hopeless and risk still look equally bad to me cause they kinda dropped "casually" onto the sylencia lynch, and I would expect hopeless and CC to be more careful about sheeping their scumread's (me) case. This still bugs me, Ghor. Why did you blame people for dropping 'casually' onto the sylencia lynch when it was T-minus 5 minutes to deadline and it was going to be a no-lyncher? I think we had 4 people do it; Hopeless, and simultaneously almost: VE,Risk, and myself last minute. It's weird because you never mention VE at all (he was 'trying to be convinced' remember), but call the rest of us out for it. You also complain that we dropped casually, but wasn't that the goal of your case against Syl? To get us to vote him?
I don't know if I was biased there, but my feeling about you and risk especially was that you didn't care about your own scumreads at that point, and you (CC) sheeped my case while I was your scumread, I find your reasoning back then to not have been transparent. Coupled with you making a case on me about things that happened long ago when you were visibly active added enough for me to think you're scum, and you never responded to this point afaik despite it being mentioned multiple times.
The way VE went about it, unsure and not rash didn't give me the impression that he just wanted to get over with mislynching a townie quickly. And Sylencia did indeed look scummy.
Risk seemed to not be wanting to lynch Sylencia, but he didn't feel like defending him either and constantly mentioned both points in favor and disfavor instead of arguing why his only scumread at the point, hopeless, would be a better lynch. In retrospect he refers to Sylencia as townread when trying to claim townie points for it, but then again he referred to him as null read when justifying the hammer on him. Not to mention his OMGUS vote and overreaction after my case on him, coupled with not wanting to discuss things in the thread.
So much for making my reasons for my current stance clear.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
After this part, I went back through something and I'd like to play some advocatus diaboli with myself.
Before the D1 lynch, VE claimed that he wanted to lynch hopeless, and asked people to convince him to prefer Sylencia over Hopeless. Before slowly moving to Sylencia, he actually called hopeless scummy for something, but never voted for him or pushed his lynch afterwards (and a lot in town wanted to lynch hopeless)
On April 03 2013 06:51 VisceraEyes wrote:I feel like he got caught with his pants down trying to tiptoe around a risk.nuke lynch. He was indirectly supporting the risk.nuke wagon without adding his vote. Regardless of risk.nuke's alignment, that's a suspicious action out of Hopeless. If at the time he felt like risk.nuke was scum (which his whole association BS is supposing) then there's no reason for him to be indirectly supporting the wagon while trying to start a counter-wagon on someone else. Furthermore he lied about it in the thread. Observe. Show nested quote +On April 03 2013 01:32 Hopeless1der wrote:On April 03 2013 01:14 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Hopeless... On April 02 2013 10:49 Hopeless1der wrote:On April 02 2013 10:44 risk.nuke wrote:On April 02 2013 10:29 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
##unvote: VE
##Vote: Risk.nuke
It's like you brought up the Kenpachi rule just to see if someone else was willing to run with it and kill me. Wanting townies to do your work for you? Why would I fake a perfectly legit argument? On April 02 2013 09:50 risk.nuke wrote:On April 02 2013 09:47 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 02 2013 09:45 risk.nuke wrote:
VE, RoL. If you're going to tunnel-bitch-argue in the thread atleast argue about something remotely relevant. If you're going to criticize me for anything, you should answer questions posed of you first. Do you think RoL is scum for "contesting" my "claim" a la Kenpachi Rule? No I don't. Doesn't seem all that legit to me.
On April 02 2013 08:44 risk.nuke wrote:On April 02 2013 08:39 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 08:37 risk.nuke wrote:
Worst vote ever. On the contrary, best vote ever. I would argue that putting your vote on a townie is greatly suboptimal. Also, scumslip in that he knows CC is town. At this point in time risk had 3 votes on him. You kinda threw some shit at him and called him scummy. What was your intention with this post? I think risk is scummy but didn't want the day to end that soon. Also wanted to see if anyone agreed with my assessment of the supposed scumslip. Ghor is annoying as all hell and his intentions behind voting sylencia do not match with his scum read on risk.nuke. He wants sylencia to commit to some type of a read on risk and when he refuses to do so, calls him scum for it. No where does he validate why this is scummy. Combine that with what appears to be a trolling smurf hellbent on behaving like a caveman, and I think he's a good choice for lynch. Show nested quote +On April 03 2013 01:48 Hopeless1der wrote:On April 03 2013 01:46 VisceraEyes wrote:
Hopeless if you really felt that way your vote would be on risk.nuke. You're accusing Ghor of being risk's "scumbuddy" because he's not voting for risk. What the hell are you doing? Not voting for risk. You say Ghor is attacking Sylencia in lieu of pushing risk.nuke. What are you doing? Attacking Ghor in lieu of pushing risk.nuke. Your play is wholly and completely contradictory and scummy as sin. Do you have anything to say for yourself? My vote on ghor was to get him to answer my bloody question about his stance on risk instead of directing me to his filter. ##Unvote: Ghor
##Vote: risk.nuke When confronted about his vote on Ghor he says it was to get him to answer his question, but as you can see from the first post, he clearly says that he feels like Ghor should be considered for lynch today. Inconsistent. Scummy.
Which is something that I could see VE doing if he's hopeless' scumbuddy. And I don't see how he just completely skips the strong point he's made against hopeless to ask people to win him over to a sylencia lynch.
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
This looks like early "playful" interaction between scumbuddies.
Casual pressure vote, no serious questions, no serious answers. Risk doesn't feel threatened, CC is fine that he doesn't answer, so his own question doesn't seem to really matter to him.
More importantly, after risk gained two votes, he refers to CC's vote as being "fine, it's just a pressure vote" before Cheese even came back to the thread to unvote.
He had no way of knowing how Cheese would react to what had been posted about risk and visibly didn't take that vote as serious even before Cheese came back. He does say it's odd that Cheese was still voting him and completely disappeared after the initial phase, but when Cheese comes back, risk ignores him and proceeds to pushing for hopeless.
When Cheese came back, he even said he has no idea about why people voted risk, without commenting on the evidence or even acting consistently with the fact that he noticed risk lurking in early game already.
In summary, I sense a whole lot of acting and carelessness about finding each other's alignment between the two, despite acting like they're both an early focus of each other initially.
On April 02 2013 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 08:29 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 07:58 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 07:46 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 07:40 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Blah blah blah policy blah blah On April 02 2013 07:36 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 07:30 VisceraEyes wrote:
Okay, but policy-lynching them? That seems a little over-the-top in a 9 player game. Policy-lynching anyone in a 9 player game just seems like a bad idea. It's certainly something to factor in, but not killing someone over. In my experience, townies are more likely to lolhammer than scum are. Scum are generally much more careful in how they vote and if they hammer someone are much more likely to explain why thoroughly.
I don't support your policy. My problem is this: if we don't establish a HARD policy then we might end up in a really hairy situation where someone hammers a guy in a completely retarded way, and everyone will start defending him using the argument "but scum wouldn't be THAT dumb and suspicious". If everyone simply agrees with the policy then we will avoid stuff like that. Policy: Don't go full retard mode if you're town. Savvy? You'd think this would be common sense by now. Define retard mode. Isthat hammering someone too fast? Or something else? Do you agree with my points or not? Be sensible about your hammer vote and explain it yada yada yada. You're policy lynch proposal is bullshit, because half the thread wouldn't follow through with it. How someone goes about voting and hammering is what should be looked at, not just "lol he emotionally hammered the townzorz must be scum" Listen to the Mafia scumcast (Hapa had a bunch of stuff to say about British II in it pertaining to instant majority). Has a bunch of goodies in it. I never claimed that ignoring normal scum tells is the way to go but w/e. So you are saying that my policy is bullshit because noone would follow it but I think that is a very bad reasoning. Either you think my policy is bullshit because the reasoning is bullshit or you think the policy is good but that it will be hard for everyone to follow it and therefore quite useless policy ( or you simply agree with it but that doesn't seem to be the case ^^). I do think it is a useless policy if half of the players in the game simply disagrees with it. But in theory, if we could guarantee that everyone would follow the policy, would you agree with the points I made? No. I generally think policy lynches suck. And i dont think ive ever seen one work out for the best. Meanwhile ##vote: risk.nuke because said hi but doesnt wanna be nice and talk with us.
On April 02 2013 08:37 risk.nuke wrote:
Worst vote ever.
On April 02 2013 08:39 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On the contrary, best vote ever.
On April 02 2013 08:44 risk.nuke wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 08:39 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 08:37 risk.nuke wrote:
Worst vote ever. On the contrary, best vote ever. I would argue that putting your vote on a townie is greatly suboptimal.
On April 02 2013 08:46 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Sooo risky, what say you to lazers policy shenannies?
On April 02 2013 08:52 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 08:48 risk.nuke wrote:
You want me to spoil the ending and hand you the key to the test? Well i sure don't feel like studying.
On April 02 2013 20:21 risk.nuke wrote:
Glad you're capable of discussing anything at all without me.
Cheesecakes early vote on me was a pressure-vote. It was completely fine, What's weird and not fine is he doesn't follow it up or does anything when the person he pressure-voted gains additional votes.
People are asking me about the Kenpachi rule, I actually thought more people knew about it. Ghor, It was discussed in a post game I played one or two years ago, I don't think there were statistics but I remember people praised it's accuracy (before it got outed) Either way I know the post detailing the kenpachi rule was edited out because I tried to find it once.
I'll talk about Hapa after breakfast.
On April 02 2013 22:28 iamperfection wrote:Perfect count Risk.Nuke ( 3 ): Mr. Cheesecake, VisceraEyes, RebirthOfLeGenD VisceraEyes ( 0 ): RebirthOfLeGenD Sylencia ( 0 ): AxleGreaser Mr. CheeseCake ( 1 ): Sylencia Not Voting ( 5 ): AxleGreaser, Risk.Nuke, Ghor, Hopeless1der, LazerMonkey With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch. This is instant majority lynch. If you see a mistake please notify us.
On April 03 2013 00:42 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Jesus you guys are active while I'm asleep. ##UnvoteI don't think we should lynch Risk today. How I got +2 to my pressure vote is beyond me. In regards to Sylencia's vote, cool -- Good to see you're paying attention. Nothing was happening so I slapped down a vote on Risk. 20 minutes passed and nothing from him so I went to bed. Now we have shit to work with. What alarmed me the most was RoL's vote. He explains it here. Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 16:40 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
No, I explained with my vote why I had been doing it. I expanded on my reasoning in my last post. The last post showed risk.nuke continuing to do what I originally outlined. Like I said, it was like he was looking for someone to pick up the slack of the kenpachi tell. This seems a far cry to think someone is scum. Oh, it looked like he was waiting for someone to sheep the Kenpachi tell... really? I'm not a fan "it looked like he was doing something potentially scummy" instead of "yeah, this is scummy" I can't clearly read a thing Axle posts, at least Ghor I understand... Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 22:32 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 22:27 AxleGreaser wrote:On April 02 2013 22:15 Lazermonkey wrote:
Howdy folks!
@Axle: I take L-1 as one vote from lynch, am I correct?
Regarding risk: I'm not confident in voting him at the moment. While I agree that the "kenpachi-incident" makes him look kinda bad, he defended himself in a way I'm not sure scum would. I'd say that this could just as well be a strange town play rather than scum and it really comes down to WIFOM to figure out which one it is. + Show Spoiler + TBMK: in general use, L-1 = Lynch -1 = 1 more vote to Lynch. We are currently at L-2. So if you are "not confident in voting him at the moment.".... what do ? I'd actually not talk about my (potential)scum read just yet. I want a certain interaction to be happening first. Most probebly, that will occour later today. Lazer I want you to answer this question. Why do you use the parenthetical (potential)? How is somebody your potential scumread... scum have potential scumreads, town just have scumreads or town reads. Were you just waiting for somebody to slip up so you could call them out?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
The time is ripe guys, let's lynch risk or CC already. If one flips scum, we know what to do with the other.
You have my seal of approval for the hammer.
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
On April 09 2013 01:57 Lazermonkey wrote:
I'd say that it is terribly dangerous to make pre-flip accusations. If you try hard enough, you can find connections between any players in the game and pointing out how they would make sense if they are both scum.
Ghor, do you really have no preferance between risk and CC?
I'm currently rereading the whole thread and half through. I see a lot of potentially scummy stuff, that's the problem.
Currently I'm at the part where Axle pressures hopeless: www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=18187743
and I'm considering his scumread of hopeless together with the fact that Axle was NKd, which would usually be a weird choice, but he wanted to kill hopeless.
Lazer can you dig through that part as well and give me an opinion of hopeless? He actually did lots of scummy stuff early and most of his risk case, shortly after Axle's case is pretty laughable imo.
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
Not so fast, let's discuss hopeless a little more now that there's 4 of us in the thread.
He has not been contributing anything lately even when his scumread risk is up for lynch. No attempts at persuading people, Axle who thought he was scum got NKd, a guy who is considered Chezinuish, and he said a lot of heavily inconsistent things regarding me early.
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
Hopeless what are your reads currently?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
A few observations about the votecounts:
- risk and CC always vote for the same stuff. But CC has risk as scum.
- Risk and CC tried to switch last minute to Sylencia, but apparently didn't play a role in the lynch. Why didn't they summarize their points against Hopeless before the lynch?
- Hopeless is a jumpy voter, a case bitch.
On April 04 2013 07:00 Hapahauli wrote:HOST COUNT risk.nuke ( 0): Mr. Cheesecake, VisceraEyes, RebirthOfLeGenD, Hopeless1der VisceraEyes ( 0 ): RebirthOfLeGenD Sylencia ( 5 ): AxleGreaser, Ghor, Lazermonkey, Ghor, Hopeless1der, AxleGreaser, VisceraEyes Mr. Cheesecake ( 1 ): Sylencia, RebirthOfLeGenD Ghor ( 0 ): Hopeless1der , Hopeless1derHopeless1der ( 2 ): VisceraEyes, risk.nuke, Mr. Cheesecake, Ghor, Hopeless1der, AxleGreaser Not Voting ( 1 ): Sylencia With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch.
Sylencia has been lynched.
On April 08 2013 14:43 Hapahauli wrote:Sleepy Count: VisceraEyes ( 1 ): RebirthOfLeGenD, LazerMonkey hopeless1der ( 0 ): risk.nuke risk.nuke ( 2 ): hopeless1der, Ghor, RebirthOfLeGenD RebirthOfLegend ( 2 ): LazerMonkey, VisceraEyes, Hopeless1der Mr. Cheesecake ( 0 ): VisceraEyes, risk.nuke, LazerMonkey Ghor ( 2 ): Mr. Cheesecake, risk.nuke, LazerMonkey Not Voting ( 0 ): With 7 alive it takes 4 to lynch. If you see a mistake please notify us. This is instant majority lynch.
On April 09 2013 02:17 Lazermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 02:02 Ghor wrote:On April 09 2013 01:57 Lazermonkey wrote:
I'd say that it is terribly dangerous to make pre-flip accusations. If you try hard enough, you can find connections between any players in the game and pointing out how they would make sense if they are both scum.
Ghor, do you really have no preferance between risk and CC? I'm currently rereading the whole thread and half through. I see a lot of potentially scummy stuff, that's the problem. Currently I'm at the part where Axle pressures hopeless: www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=18187743and I'm considering his scumread of hopeless together with the fact that Axle was NKd, which would usually be a weird choice, but he wanted to kill hopeless. Lazer can you dig through that part as well and give me an opinion of hopeless? He actually did lots of scummy stuff early and most of his risk case, shortly after Axle's case is pretty laughable imo. If you have the time, I'd suggest you to skim through of his other town games. hopeless is a known lynch bait and for that matter I feel very uncomfortable with lynching him just because his play is lacking. Anyhow, I don't feel like killing hopeless today.
You were comfortable killing Sylencia though. Why defend RoL and hopeless as lynch bait but not Sylencia?
I feel really troubled about guessing who's scum currently. Why doesn't anyone bring a few strong points to the table? I feel like most of town tries to shoot fish in a barrel. I need some help in here 
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
How can the difference between D1 and D2 be so huge for hopeless? The differences in cases and activity are just massive, since people stopped discussing him for lynch he has not been doing anything, compared to D1 where he was under pressure.
I feel he does deserve a lynch. There's so much looking scummy from many players but he has just shown that he lurks without interest when he's not under pressure. He also doesn't seem to care about who gets lynched or try to be a part of discussion or influence the thread when he's not up for lynch. I think that's indicative of him being scum. He also lurks and doesn't seem to want to answer.
##Vote hopeless1der
It would be much easier to find scum if more people were active -_-
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
+ Show Spoiler +On April 09 2013 02:35 Lazermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2013 09:12 Ghor wrote:
RoL, why do I just have no idea what your alignment is? I went through Bang Bang, Storm Mafia, LVIII. Were you town in BB and SM?
Can you give me an opinion on Lazermonkey and what you think of him being the only one calling you lynch bait when everyone else has no fucking clue or thinks you're scum? While I'm obviously not RoL (duh -.-), I want to expand a little bit on this as it is the main reason I'm voting VE. RoL were for all of D1 and during the beginning of D2 a lurker. When he actually started to post during D2, the first thing he did was to vote VE without any reasoning what so ever and then asking if everyone else were happy with killing VE. This is bad town play. But also terrible terrible scum play. VE should be good enough to know this. but yet he votes RoL. And I'm not calling RoL town for this, in fact he could be scum with VE. But that's not the point. The point is that VE was not voting or suspecting RoL during the time he lurked but only when he derped, trying to justify a vote for RoLs bad play, even though it's not indicative of RoL being scum.
I've seen scum play obviously anti-town or "too scummy to be scum" as well. That defense is a little wifomy. Check out Dandel Ion in British Mafia II, he was trolling and not giving a fuck about the game all day.
We need to find out who's actually disinterested in finding scum. Who looks too sure too quickly about his reads.Who wants to hammer fast. Who's only active when under pressure.
If scum plays well they can simulate these points but given that the thread was so dead I don't think they have felt the need to put much effort into the game unless you poke them with threats. And that's what we should be doing now.
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
Cheese there's one thing I absolutely don't understand. Hopeless looks even more terrible than during the last day and you and risk don't care at all about him. That looks irrational, his commitment and interest into the game dropped a lot since he's not up for lynch, he wants to hammer fast, and he doesn't seem to care about who gets lynched.
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
You have VE as scumread, shouldn't it make you skeptical that he only soft-pushed hopeless during D1 while seeking for reasons to switch to sylencia?
On April 09 2013 00:39 Ghor wrote:After this part, I went back through something and I'd like to play some advocatus diaboli with myself. Before the D1 lynch, VE claimed that he wanted to lynch hopeless, and asked people to convince him to prefer Sylencia over Hopeless. Before slowly moving to Sylencia, he actually called hopeless scummy for something, but never voted for him or pushed his lynch afterwards (and a lot in town wanted to lynch hopeless) Show nested quote +On April 03 2013 06:51 VisceraEyes wrote:I feel like he got caught with his pants down trying to tiptoe around a risk.nuke lynch. He was indirectly supporting the risk.nuke wagon without adding his vote. Regardless of risk.nuke's alignment, that's a suspicious action out of Hopeless. If at the time he felt like risk.nuke was scum (which his whole association BS is supposing) then there's no reason for him to be indirectly supporting the wagon while trying to start a counter-wagon on someone else. Furthermore he lied about it in the thread. Observe. On April 03 2013 01:32 Hopeless1der wrote:On April 03 2013 01:14 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Hopeless... On April 02 2013 10:49 Hopeless1der wrote:On April 02 2013 10:44 risk.nuke wrote:On April 02 2013 10:29 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
##unvote: VE
##Vote: Risk.nuke
It's like you brought up the Kenpachi rule just to see if someone else was willing to run with it and kill me. Wanting townies to do your work for you? Why would I fake a perfectly legit argument? On April 02 2013 09:50 risk.nuke wrote:On April 02 2013 09:47 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 02 2013 09:45 risk.nuke wrote:
VE, RoL. If you're going to tunnel-bitch-argue in the thread atleast argue about something remotely relevant. If you're going to criticize me for anything, you should answer questions posed of you first. Do you think RoL is scum for "contesting" my "claim" a la Kenpachi Rule? No I don't. Doesn't seem all that legit to me.
On April 02 2013 08:44 risk.nuke wrote:On April 02 2013 08:39 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 08:37 risk.nuke wrote:
Worst vote ever. On the contrary, best vote ever. I would argue that putting your vote on a townie is greatly suboptimal. Also, scumslip in that he knows CC is town. At this point in time risk had 3 votes on him. You kinda threw some shit at him and called him scummy. What was your intention with this post? I think risk is scummy but didn't want the day to end that soon. Also wanted to see if anyone agreed with my assessment of the supposed scumslip. Ghor is annoying as all hell and his intentions behind voting sylencia do not match with his scum read on risk.nuke. He wants sylencia to commit to some type of a read on risk and when he refuses to do so, calls him scum for it. No where does he validate why this is scummy. Combine that with what appears to be a trolling smurf hellbent on behaving like a caveman, and I think he's a good choice for lynch. On April 03 2013 01:48 Hopeless1der wrote:On April 03 2013 01:46 VisceraEyes wrote:
Hopeless if you really felt that way your vote would be on risk.nuke. You're accusing Ghor of being risk's "scumbuddy" because he's not voting for risk. What the hell are you doing? Not voting for risk. You say Ghor is attacking Sylencia in lieu of pushing risk.nuke. What are you doing? Attacking Ghor in lieu of pushing risk.nuke. Your play is wholly and completely contradictory and scummy as sin. Do you have anything to say for yourself? My vote on ghor was to get him to answer my bloody question about his stance on risk instead of directing me to his filter. ##Unvote: Ghor
##Vote: risk.nuke When confronted about his vote on Ghor he says it was to get him to answer his question, but as you can see from the first post, he clearly says that he feels like Ghor should be considered for lynch today. Inconsistent. Scummy. Which is something that I could see VE doing if he's hopeless' scumbuddy. And I don't see how he just completely skips the strong point he's made against hopeless to ask people to win him over to a sylencia lynch.
Opinions please?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
Lazer, you asked me my preference between risk and CC earlier, can you give me your own opinion on the two?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
On April 09 2013 03:36 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 03:35 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Stupid logic to me. Anyway, I'd like to wrap this lynch up soon. If we have another "FUCK, LAST MINUTE HAMMER" situation things will not turn out well.
Hopeless, I said speak, not vote! I have revised my read on ghor to town. risk is still scum and I want him dead today.
How is your read on me of relevance?You wanted to lynch RoL earlier, what about that read?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
What do you mean, lynch RoL out hypocrisy? Can you give me quick reads of everyone else?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
Holy balls VE, you've been away for a looong time. Where did your former scummy points against hopeless go and is he currently your scumread?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
On April 09 2013 05:35 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
SOMEONE DROP THE FUCKIN' HAMMA
Risk still lurkin' after so many got the discussion back into rolling, I suppose I'll treat it as definitive surrender.
Gogogo
##Unvote
##Vote risk.nuke
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
One thing first, medic protection pls ^_^
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
And if I still die and risk flips red, remember this one:
On April 09 2013 01:25 Ghor wrote:This looks like early "playful" interaction between scumbuddies. Casual pressure vote, no serious questions, no serious answers. Risk doesn't feel threatened, CC is fine that he doesn't answer, so his own question doesn't seem to really matter to him. More importantly, after risk gained two votes, he refers to CC's vote as being "fine, it's just a pressure vote" before Cheese even came back to the thread to unvote. He had no way of knowing how Cheese would react to what had been posted about risk and visibly didn't take that vote as serious even before Cheese came back. He does say it's odd that Cheese was still voting him and completely disappeared after the initial phase, but when Cheese comes back, risk ignores him and proceeds to pushing for hopeless. When Cheese came back, he even said he has no idea about why people voted risk, without commenting on the evidence or even acting consistently with the fact that he noticed risk lurking in early game already. In summary, I sense a whole lot of acting and carelessness about finding each other's alignment between the two, despite acting like they're both an early focus of each other initially. Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 08:29 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 07:58 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 07:46 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 07:40 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Blah blah blah policy blah blah On April 02 2013 07:36 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 07:30 VisceraEyes wrote:
Okay, but policy-lynching them? That seems a little over-the-top in a 9 player game. Policy-lynching anyone in a 9 player game just seems like a bad idea. It's certainly something to factor in, but not killing someone over. In my experience, townies are more likely to lolhammer than scum are. Scum are generally much more careful in how they vote and if they hammer someone are much more likely to explain why thoroughly.
I don't support your policy. My problem is this: if we don't establish a HARD policy then we might end up in a really hairy situation where someone hammers a guy in a completely retarded way, and everyone will start defending him using the argument "but scum wouldn't be THAT dumb and suspicious". If everyone simply agrees with the policy then we will avoid stuff like that. Policy: Don't go full retard mode if you're town. Savvy? You'd think this would be common sense by now. Define retard mode. Isthat hammering someone too fast? Or something else? Do you agree with my points or not? Be sensible about your hammer vote and explain it yada yada yada. You're policy lynch proposal is bullshit, because half the thread wouldn't follow through with it. How someone goes about voting and hammering is what should be looked at, not just "lol he emotionally hammered the townzorz must be scum" Listen to the Mafia scumcast (Hapa had a bunch of stuff to say about British II in it pertaining to instant majority). Has a bunch of goodies in it. I never claimed that ignoring normal scum tells is the way to go but w/e. So you are saying that my policy is bullshit because noone would follow it but I think that is a very bad reasoning. Either you think my policy is bullshit because the reasoning is bullshit or you think the policy is good but that it will be hard for everyone to follow it and therefore quite useless policy ( or you simply agree with it but that doesn't seem to be the case ^^). I do think it is a useless policy if half of the players in the game simply disagrees with it. But in theory, if we could guarantee that everyone would follow the policy, would you agree with the points I made? No. I generally think policy lynches suck. And i dont think ive ever seen one work out for the best. Meanwhile ##vote: risk.nuke because said hi but doesnt wanna be nice and talk with us. Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 08:39 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 08:37 risk.nuke wrote:
Worst vote ever. On the contrary, best vote ever. Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 08:44 risk.nuke wrote:On April 02 2013 08:39 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 08:37 risk.nuke wrote:
Worst vote ever. On the contrary, best vote ever. I would argue that putting your vote on a townie is greatly suboptimal. Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 08:46 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Sooo risky, what say you to lazers policy shenannies? Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 08:52 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On April 02 2013 08:48 risk.nuke wrote:
You want me to spoil the ending and hand you the key to the test? Well i sure don't feel like studying. Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 20:21 risk.nuke wrote:
Glad you're capable of discussing anything at all without me.
Cheesecakes early vote on me was a pressure-vote. It was completely fine, What's weird and not fine is he doesn't follow it up or does anything when the person he pressure-voted gains additional votes.
People are asking me about the Kenpachi rule, I actually thought more people knew about it. Ghor, It was discussed in a post game I played one or two years ago, I don't think there were statistics but I remember people praised it's accuracy (before it got outed) Either way I know the post detailing the kenpachi rule was edited out because I tried to find it once.
I'll talk about Hapa after breakfast. Show nested quote +On April 02 2013 22:28 iamperfection wrote:Perfect count Risk.Nuke ( 3 ): Mr. Cheesecake, VisceraEyes, RebirthOfLeGenD VisceraEyes ( 0 ): RebirthOfLeGenD Sylencia ( 0 ): AxleGreaser Mr. CheeseCake ( 1 ): Sylencia Not Voting ( 5 ): AxleGreaser, Risk.Nuke, Ghor, Hopeless1der, LazerMonkey With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch. This is instant majority lynch. If you see a mistake please notify us. Show nested quote +On April 03 2013 00:42 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Jesus you guys are active while I'm asleep. ##UnvoteI don't think we should lynch Risk today. How I got +2 to my pressure vote is beyond me. In regards to Sylencia's vote, cool -- Good to see you're paying attention. Nothing was happening so I slapped down a vote on Risk. 20 minutes passed and nothing from him so I went to bed. Now we have shit to work with. What alarmed me the most was RoL's vote. He explains it here. On April 02 2013 16:40 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
No, I explained with my vote why I had been doing it. I expanded on my reasoning in my last post. The last post showed risk.nuke continuing to do what I originally outlined. Like I said, it was like he was looking for someone to pick up the slack of the kenpachi tell. This seems a far cry to think someone is scum. Oh, it looked like he was waiting for someone to sheep the Kenpachi tell... really? I'm not a fan "it looked like he was doing something potentially scummy" instead of "yeah, this is scummy" I can't clearly read a thing Axle posts, at least Ghor I understand... On April 02 2013 22:32 Lazermonkey wrote:On April 02 2013 22:27 AxleGreaser wrote:On April 02 2013 22:15 Lazermonkey wrote:
Howdy folks!
@Axle: I take L-1 as one vote from lynch, am I correct?
Regarding risk: I'm not confident in voting him at the moment. While I agree that the "kenpachi-incident" makes him look kinda bad, he defended himself in a way I'm not sure scum would. I'd say that this could just as well be a strange town play rather than scum and it really comes down to WIFOM to figure out which one it is. + Show Spoiler + TBMK: in general use, L-1 = Lynch -1 = 1 more vote to Lynch. We are currently at L-2. So if you are "not confident in voting him at the moment.".... what do ? I'd actually not talk about my (potential)scum read just yet. I want a certain interaction to be happening first. Most probebly, that will occour later today. Lazer I want you to answer this question. Why do you use the parenthetical (potential)? How is somebody your potential scumread... scum have potential scumreads, town just have scumreads or town reads. Were you just waiting for somebody to slip up so you could call them out?
|
Russian Federation140 Posts
On April 09 2013 05:39 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
VE, you have been sheeping votes, never provided original play, demanded others contribute and convince you to kill sylencia or hopeless. In the end after saying you wouldn't kill Sylencia you are the one who hammers him.
Scummy.
However, if you choose to hammer Risk right now I will not accuse you have sheeping and will legitimately try to reevaluate not just you, but every player and the game in its entirety.
You have my solemn word!
This is a pretty weird thing to say, you know. We don't even know if risk will flip red and it almost feels like you're offering VE a townread just cause he'd lynch him, no matter what alignment he is?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
