| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 00:57 JarJarDrinks wrote: Oh, you want to bring up dead guys last contributions? I got one: Yes very cute. That would bring his track record to three miss lynches in a row. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
| ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 11 2013 06:25 Obzy wrote: At this time, Warent is 100% scum IMHO, and it will take a miracle for me to not vote him. Like literally there would have to be a ray of light fall upon my car in the middle of a storm as i drive home and fucking jesus would levitate down and gently rest his hand on my car's side-view mirror as I stop, stupified, and say "Please don't lynch Warent." - in perfect english, mind you - and then fly away surrounded by doves and a choir of angels If that doesn't happen I'm voting Warent. You never know, though! And again, nothing of substance. He didn't like that I analyzed his claim and found much better motives from a scum perspective then from a town perspective. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 01:34 Rainbows wrote: If anyone thinks fakeclaiming vig day 1 is a good scum move, epecially for someone who apparently is decent at scum, lol. If having all of this suspicion on me was a good thing, lol. If Raven is town, lol. Instead of putting it in spoilers I'll just copy paste it here again. Motives for the claim from a scum perspective: Rainbow was set to be Lynched at the time, had he not claimed - he would probably go. If he is scum; fake claiming at that point is one of his best moves. These are the different outcomes: a) Claiming fails, he get lynched: No difference. b) There is a real vigi in the game who counter claims - it words against words - rain get lynched and mafia knows who the real Vigilant are. c) There is a real vigi in the game who counter claims: The counter claimer gets lynched - the real vigil is gone d) The lynched is stopped, someone else (town) gets lynched and the real vigi shots rainbow. Shot now used on someone who would have been lynched had he not faked claimed. Town loses one, scum loses one, and one power role loses its power. e) The lynched is stopped, there is no vigi in the game. Rain comes out looking like the good guy. So why not claim for example medic? On the surface claiming vigi seems to be one of the stupidest fake claims "because he will just get shot" and is thus more likely to be believed. But when looked at more closely it is motivated. Very good motives to fake claim vigi if you are set to be lynched. None of a-e would be worse for scum than a straight up scum lynch. To all townies out there: IF you have another possible outcome, enlighten me. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 01:39 Rainbows wrote: That's a terrible scum move dude. A real vigi wouldn't counterclaim and just SHOOT me. I also wasn't that much in danger of being lynched; I could have turned it around if I wasn't so god-forsakenly pissed off. Fakeclaims are ones that are like 1-2 hours before the lynch to get an emotional swing from town or a counterclaim out. Outcome D d) The lynched is stopped, someone else (town) gets lynched and the real vigi shots rainbow. Shot now used on someone who would have been lynched had he not faked claimed. Town loses one, scum loses one, and one power role loses its power. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
Well, we need the rest of you guys to speak up. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
##Vote: Rainbows | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 06:24 Moloch wrote: It doesn't matter if town wins by two votes or one vote. Having the extra person gives more chance townies will suspect each other (since there's more of them), and the vote will be split - giving scum a better opportunity to lynch a townie. Remember, if we miss this lynch, we've lost the game. Just feels like 5vs3 is a bit better though. The difference between 3/8 and 3/7 is only 5.4%... | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 06:49 Rainbows wrote: we will win if we just vote warent. a nolynch now if too risky and i could get hammered by scum What he probably meant was that he would win. If you lynch me. His reasoning for voting me simply aren't there. I'm tired of pointing that out. Sure I could have been wrong about him, but they way he is doing this now? No. he has to scum. TRN is not scum, otherwise he would have just voted me. Smancer defended me earlier so he can't be scum. If you honestly believe that Rainbow (and jarjar - they are obviously working together) are both friendly, then you have to be scum together with nobody and fish. That would be epic, but I don't think it's the case. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 07:33 Fishgle wrote: hi guys. sorry i always appear right before lynch time, but this is when i get home from class. Warent your whole case is ridiculous. You, TRN, and NW are scum. You've been defending them the whole game, TRN has unsuccessfully tried to get the Vigilante lynched (but you havent worried too much because you have a roleblocker anyway). You're trying to get either rainbows or jarjar lynched. I've already pointed out how obvious it is that mafia set-up JarJar to be killed. And Rainbows is the vigilante, ffs. ##Vote: Warent I'm scared of this, myself xD Third scum confirmed I suppose. Scum likes to try to get away with empty rhetoric while avoiding actual arguments based on content. "My case is ridiculous, that was very specific", Okey good sir, why is my case ridiculous? I've never defended NW that's a lie. And er, why would someone EVER read scum on NW over JarJar? That alone should make the rest of you town guys: Smancer, Nobody and Moloch realize that these three are full of shit. Read Fish filters, first day all he does is pointing suspicious towards confirmed townies basically, without committing. Having a careful approach, not to spammy. Earlier today he said he didn't want to lynch someone without good proofs. DId he provide you with any: "my WHOLE case is now ridiculous, hey look at that!" So anyway the one scum among fish, moloch, obz and Smancer was fish. This means they managed to spread themselves out on three different target on day 1. Fish earlier vote was an attempt to actually vote for Rain day 1 (makes it less suspicious, he has his vote on him until we started to go after Rain for real), JarJar jumped in and provided a horrible case against kirby to divert attention. Smancer provides a case against jampi and Fish can conveniently sheep onto that one. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 07:38 Rainbows wrote: id actually prefer to lynch ravens, lol. Raven can't be scum. Then he would just vote me and win. Simple as that. So you have been full of shit from day one. Today you had to make an effort yesterday you didn't. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
| ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
| ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
##Vote: JarJarDrinks | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 08:32 Fishgle wrote: @Warent Your defense of Smancer is "Smancer defended me, so he can't be scum". "TRN is not scum otherwise he would have voted for me" - it seems to me scum has been getting mis-lynches off the whole game with little direct effort. Why would he jump in now, since you already have enough votes anyway. Plus, he's your scum buddy, so... I've already told you why I'm not voting for jarjar, even if he does look scummy. It looks like a set-up. As for nobodywonder, sorry you're right, you haven't ever directly defended him. But he's as likely to be scum as jarjar is. Just as you are questioning why I'm choosing NW over jarjar, i'm curious as to why you do the opposite. I think warent is scum, guys. But if you guys insist, i'll vote for a no-lynch. It's a stupid idea, tho. The only way we'll have chance of winning this is if we kill off their roleblocker so that rainbows can get his nightkill off. Fish: Your defense of Smancer is "Smancer defended me, so he can't be scum". Huge difference now compared to the other days, when I flip green it's game over. Scum does not need to think about the future. game with little direct effort. Why would he jump in now, since you already have enough votes anyway. Plus, he's your scum buddy, so... Er, right. No he did earlier. I don't need to convince you of anything anyway. Nw is using logic and providing reason, he had his vote on me and started to think - "hey this might actually be wrong". | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
On April 13 2013 08:39 Fishgle wrote: day 1 vote count JarJarDrinks (3) Saraf, jrkirby, jampidampi - first 3 to die Or perhaps the easy explanation? They were on the right track. | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
| ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
| ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
Vote: No-Lynch | ||
|
Warent
Sweden205 Posts
It's hard to get it right!  | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
PiGosaur Monday
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Online Event
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
|
|
|
EPT
