|
On April 13 2013 06:08 TheRavensName wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 06:06 Moloch wrote:
I still think no lynch is the best way to go today. The only reasonable argument against it that I've seen is JJD's about the chance we'll hit the roleblockers. What about the fact that theres only one person who cast the deciding vote as opposed to two?
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.
|
EBWOP
...and a better chance that the vote will be split
|
On April 13 2013 06:24 Moloch wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 06:08 TheRavensName wrote:On April 13 2013 06:06 Moloch wrote:
I still think no lynch is the best way to go today. The only reasonable argument against it that I've seen is JJD's about the chance we'll hit the roleblockers. What about the fact that theres only one person who cast the deciding vote as opposed to two? 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%...
|
On April 13 2013 06:31 Warent wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 06:24 Moloch wrote:On April 13 2013 06:08 TheRavensName wrote:On April 13 2013 06:06 Moloch wrote:
I still think no lynch is the best way to go today. The only reasonable argument against it that I've seen is JJD's about the chance we'll hit the roleblockers. What about the fact that theres only one person who cast the deciding vote as opposed to two? 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%...
It feels like 5v3 is better, but like I said, it increases the chance of town not agreeing. If one town hates somebody (Rainbows, for example), and votes for him and is obviously not going to change his vote, scum can jump on Rainbows and have four votes. The rest of the town, which has the right idea, then cannot topple the obvious scum vote because they'd lose the tiebreaker.
Yes, it feels better when you win by more, but it increases the chance of variability within the team and unexpected things happening. And 5.4% is high enough to have my attention. Hopefully the scum hit someone that I'm iffy on and it'll increase chances even more.
|
Or, even you, Warent. Rainbows has it out for you, and votes for you twice. It's pretty obvious he doesn't really want to vote for anyone else right now, so (theoretically) if TRN, JJD, and NW were scum (and had kept their vote on you), there's absolutely nothing the rest of the town could have done.
^ I'm not saying that's an accurate representation of people's alliances, but it's just an example.
|
moloch, twas my thinking as well.
But please just end this now. im guarenteed to have 3 votes by the end. Warent needs 3 votes first, preferably more.
|
No, Rainbows. Play to win! PLAY TO WIN.
|
we will win if we just vote warent.
a nolynch now if too risky and i could get hammered by scum
|
If we lynch Warent today and he flips scum, the game won't end today. It will keep going on until a) all scum are dead, or b) town have no chance to win.
So, whether we vote no-lynch or if you're correct about Warent, the game will keep going on for at least one more day.
|
well he flips, then we lynch raven and hes red. then its probably NW. if hes rber then i can shoot
|
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.
|
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
On April 13 2013 00:26 Rainbows wrote:
If the 3 scum are all between JJD / Smancer / NW / Moloch, well played.
I'm scared of this, myself xD
|
The only thing im paranoid about is that ppl suddenly 100% believe the claim
|
id actually prefer to lynch ravens, lol.
|
|
|
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 Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 00:26 Rainbows wrote:
If the 3 scum are all between JJD / Smancer / NW / Moloch, well played. 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.
|
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.
|
well fun fact im 100% sure on raven.
|
Fun fact nr2, I'm 100% sure I'm Town, and therefore I can be sure you are wrong about him as well.
|
Why is JarJar town Rainbows?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
