|
On May 16 2013 10:46 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2013 05:17 Vivax wrote:
This is a scumslip, the host explicitly said that it's possible that the angels know our movement speeds already. You showing this level of security as to immediately call me scum in spite of that fact, is proof that you are either not reading the thread with your due diligence, or scum with the information that angels don't know our movement speed, given your overall play I'm strongly leaning on the latter.
I'm expecting your explanation for this, and I want reads from you on every player who posted something substantial in the thread. It's possible. Which means maybe yes, maybe no. If yes, then angels gain nothing and town gains something. If no, then the angels and town both gain something, but angels gain more because they can use the info to win whereas town only needs to coordinate. However, in the second scenario, townies are able to lie/stay silent to protect themselves. If my movement speed was 5, for instance, I could say I had 2-3 movespeed to attract nearby angels. I see something I'm not supposed to, I can use all 5 the next night and dart around like the wind. Again, assuming the angels know nothing. Really it's all chance. And I don't think it's worth a night experimenting with it. So I'm going to back away from this and agree to disagree. At the very least we will voice our movements before the deadline for clarity's sake. Anything else, like you said, is open to discussion. ##unvoteTime for some thoughts on Ghost's recent post. Show nested quote +I chimed in my two cents, and then I was off to scum hunt. Unfortunately, it seems that no one is around whenever I'm here. I find a bunch of problems with this alone. Being alone while scumhunting makes my mafiadick hard. It means I can focus on what's already present in the thread with a clear mind, without having to worry about changing conditions. A lot of my reasoning goes out the window when the thread updates. I don't know why you'd have a problem with it and resort to lurking. Show nested quote +Sentinel's play has been bad this game as well, but IIRC, I always think that. Explain me why you vote for Vivax and not myself. That's a shitty vote to throw around. Game plan for myself is to organize my thoughts because that's what I'm lacking right now. I'm going to draft up another spreadsheet to consolidate my reads tomorrow and then start making calls from that.
Why did I vote for Vivax and not for you? Boils down to my gut.
My notes for Sentinel are this: "meh. disoriented, not scummy". Reading the thread, I got the impression that you were someone who was just trying to figure out what was going on. You weren't acting against the town, you were just confused. What exactly what it was that made me think that? I dunno. I doubt I could point to any collection of posts that would show you how I arrived at that conclusion.
Vivax didn't give me that vibe. I pointed out my thoughts on him when I voted him.
It seems passionate and poorly thought out. He's not trying to figure out Sentinel's alignment, or really thinking about what's going on; he's trying to push him onto the defensive and start an easy lynch. It kind of looks like he immediately dropped it, but it is kind of hard to tell at this point in the game.
That's quite a bit different from the vibe that I was getting from you.
|
On May 18 2013 09:14 Blazinghand wrote:
sorry, balls air etc
What's that supposed to mean.
|
Just noted that Zephh brought up that maybe Oats is a blue who knew his piece as part of his role. Possible, but I feel unlikely. A blue should (being the operative statement here) have stuck around to try and prove his use to the town. As a power role, they have responsibilities to make sure that they're not dead. That's not his reaction to this situation. Instead, he makes a few less than helpful comments and leaves the thread entirely. Either he's a blue who's rage quit, or he's a scum that got caught.
Also, I would still be happy to lynch Sharrant as well. His (her? idk) last post was completely worthless. Scum like to talk about setup stuffs far past when it's appropriate because they can't actually scumhunt.
|
Sorry I've been gone. Busy weekend. You've got the rest of the day to ask me anything. Catching up on the thread.
|
On May 18 2013 19:41 Blazinghand wrote:So we had a big switch at the end, but before then we had a few votes sitting still on deconduo. With 10 players on Vivax and only Sharrant voting on deconduo, we can be sure that scum made a decision to bus Vivax. About an hour out, the votecount was 3 on Vivax and 4 on deconduo. Scum was probably not expecting a Vivax lynch. I'm willing to bet we'll find one scum between deconduo, sentinel, sharrant, zeph, (all the people voting non-vivax). In the end, they all moved to vivax, with fuba and fferyllt moving to deconduo briefly before moving back. Fferyllt's vote on Vivax I think is legit. He was trying to get ANY lynch for the day, deconduo or vivax, and vivax was on his radar earlier. mfkuba though I don't like, but I think he's legit for mainly for this post (link) in which he begins the post talking about lynching vivax, then notes that there's a deconduo mass-swap going on and swaps to deconduo to avoid no-lynching. When he sees we're swapping back to vivax, he goes back to avoid a no-lynch. I think the fact that he was planning to write a case against vivax then got caught up in the voteswapping is a sign of a town motive. F I'm left with dec, sent, sharr, zeph who all moved onto vivax between 1:20 out and the lynch deadline. Zeph I'm setting aside as town due to his townlike setup speculation and his aggression towards oats regarding some kinda weird movemeng mechanic speculation. He's clearly trying hard. If he's scum he gets to live another day. I cant see it tbh. sharrant's interactions with marv convinced marv, and for now that's good enough for me. It's also worth noting that despite being one of the guys pushin this (imo) wrongheaded oats lynch, he's listening to and talking to oats and trying to glean info. sentinel didn't need to come back to the thread, ask to be sold, and be sold. that being said he's said a lot of stuff that's struck me his game as weird. maybe but not a top priority. I rule out the oats/vivax bus theory, I just don't see vivax going for that. I could see a long bus coming from deconduo (dont' think of him as town just because he was the other wagon) and also from ghost, whose case imo is weak/bad I really find a lot of weird interactions between ghost, deconduo, and vivax during day 1. What's with deconduo (who has posted very little) dropping this zero-followup case on ghost? When he was called out for it he eventually did some weak followup, but his entire action today has been pushing an oats slip theory despite thinking he's caught and oats-ghost scumteam. Where's the additional information? Where's the case? He just dropped his vote in here and bailed. I think ghost's interactions with vivax and decon during day 1 are weird but maybe I can just chalk that up to ghost being weird. he calls out vivax with his first real post (link) and is basically on vivax (sort of) for the rest of the game. now colour me crazy but I don't see him doing that to a scumbuddy. Not if there was a hcance of it really picking up steam for a day 1 mislynch. Really what it comes down to me is I think we were choosing between scum deconduo and scum vivax lynches yeterday. I think deconduo is scum. Giving out a townread on zeph was easy money for him, and the fact that he makes no mention of oats, doesn't write a case, and just claims the guy slipped hard and votes him and runs, makes deconduo scum in my book. I don't see the oats bus. I don't see scum sharrant interacting with marv so openly. I don't see either of these wagons. The real wagon that needs to be pushed today is deconduo. Show nested quote +On May 18 2013 09:40 deconduo wrote:
I agree that oats' play day one wasn't particularly scummy. However that slip us way too blatant for us to ignore as a mistake. First of all oats would have to not read up on how the movement works,secondly the hosts would have to not inform him that he moved illegally and finally the hosts would have to willingly put his move through. If he is a blue that knows his position, why hasn't he at least soft claimed instead of disappearing off the face of the earth. The fact of the matter is, he's lynching a someone for whom, as far as he knows, is town player for sending in a weird night action. You can't have this as your justification for lynching oats.
![[image loading]](http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4010/4416673228_a2f3d48814.jpg)
|
On May 18 2013 19:50 Blazinghand wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I'm also going to be completely clear here: lynching oats because he sent in night actions phrased in absolute rather than relative directions is shit play and I WILL NOT HAVE IT. Fuck, what if you're the fuckign co-host of this game and you recieve some guy who says "I want to move 2 squares north then 2 squares east while facing north" are you really going to PM the guy back saying "hey man I want you to rephrase that"? Well, maybe, but let me put it this way:
are you willing to stake AN ENTIRE LYNCH on this speculation, OVER your read?
DECONDUO: you admit you think oats d1 play, and I quote, "wasn't particularly scummy" but you still want to lynch him. This is not acceptable, and coupled with your scummy play indicates you are scum.
GHOST: you intially had some concerns about Oats D1, but you admit that such concerns are assuaged by my meta read of Oats. Do you think I'm wrong, or is your vote on him just because of the wording of his movement, as you imply here? (link)+ Show Spoiler +FUBA: you interacted with oats several times d1, and you even questioned whether it was wise of him to vote vivax. Is your voting him now based entirely on his wording of his movement, as you imply here? (link)SENT: you say (link) that if not for the movement thing, Oats would be "above the level of suspicion". Is it really just the movement claim that changes you from utterly unwilling to lynch Oats to voting him?
Honestly, I never bothered to read the game that he referenced. I was trusting in BH's integrity as a player. Only an idiot would give me the wrong conclusion before telling me to come to my own. And, yes, I did vote for him (at that point) strictly on the wording of his answer. His answer implies a certain mindset; one that knows more than us. His actions since then have reinforced my views on him.
|
|
|
On May 19 2013 09:23 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:Ghost prematurely buses Vivax when I accuse him, taking advantage of his mistake to distance him in case Vivax gets lynched (as he did). Show nested quote +It seems passionate and poorly thought out. He's not trying to figure out Sentinel's alignment, or really thinking about what's going on; he's trying to push him onto the defensive and start an easy lynch. It kind of looks like he immediately dropped it, but it is kind of hard to tell at this point in the game.
Until someone convinces me that leaving Vivax in game is a good idea,
##vote vivax And ends his post in a manner that makes it look like he's certain Vivax is scum (which he is) off of one paragraph of reasoning. When Oats slips he posts this: Show nested quote +On May 17 2013 11:04 ghost_403 wrote:On May 17 2013 11:01 Oatsmaster wrote:On May 17 2013 10:38 Zephirdd wrote:On May 17 2013 10:01 Oatsmaster wrote:
I moved 3 steps up and looked up.
That makes me B right? How did you send your PM to the hosts? This is important. Anyone reading this, do not answer. Oatsmaster, how did you send your PM? How did you want to move? I sent my PM, 'move 3 steps up and look up.' I wanted to move here. I wanted to move here. That's a curious thing to say. And then launches into his analysis of the players. Note that in his 11:17 post, he doesn't mention this oddity, but instead builds a sizable case on Sharrant. But then Zeph during this time points out the scumslip and ghost chucks his case out the window to get on the Oatsmaster wagon. Only then does he begin to build a case on the one alleged scumslip, writing with the conviction that Oats is scum. He doesn't stop to consider the alternatives, and I know this because his case severely weakens when Zephirdd presents a counterargument, and disappears after Oats' justification. This is why we lynch ghost_403
I don't write cases out of necessity or convenience, I write cases because I think that people are scum. The idea that I'm going to start writing a case, see something lynch worthy, and then just forget about it is stupid. I thought Sharrant was scum, I wrote down my thoughts, and then I posted them so that other people could read them and chime in. Given that, I did exactly what I was supposed to do there. I finished my thought, which no one really directly disagreed with, and then punished Oats for what I thought was a scumslip.
And as far as Zephh's counterargument, I disagree with it. I have no idea what movement mistake you guys are talking about and I don't care. Oats statement is a classic Freudian slip, showing that he looks at the game a little bit different than us. His reactions since then make me believe that he is not blue, he is scum.
|
On May 20 2013 23:33 Oatsmaster wrote:explain why you want to lynch me including information/posts that are in the thread since you left.
If anyone other than Oats is interested in my thoughts on this, I'm happy to answer. I believe that I've made myself clear on this, but I'm happy to clear this up for anyone else.
|
Oh, and
##vote oatsmaster
Taking any and all movement requests. I'm H, for reference.
|
@oats: Since you seem to be a bit dense on this, let me spell it out for you. There is literally nothing I can say to change your view of your alignment. I'm not going to waste my breath on that. It's everyone else I have to convince. So if they want me to spell it out, I will.
Now, why don't you tell me who you'd like to lynch next. You've been awfully vague on that.
|
And what if I don't? Then what?
|
Sentinel I get, but why fuba? What do you make of his flashlight getting extinguished Night 1?
|
Well, my role PM says nothing about turning off my flashlight. This implies that someone else did it. It seems like turning off someone else's flashlight isn't something a townie would do, which means that scum turned off his light.
Only two conclusions there: (1) scum targeted one of their own for nefarious and inexplicable purposes, or (2) scum targeted a townie because that's what scum do.
Are you thinking about this game at all? And you still haven't told me why you think he's scum.
|
Random thoughts:
I'm still not quite sure what to make of Dec's roleclaim. It does fit in well with the lore, but it seems surprisingly underpowered. Especially with the Doctor's ability to confirm people as town via his screwdriver. I have a lot of questions about this.
Zepph is town. If he's not, I'm giving him the game.
Sentinel has been playing badly all game thus far. He's been remarkably flip-floppy on nearly everything. Super unimpressed by his play.
fuba has completely blended into the background. I haven't made any notes on him since the beginning of the game. Rereading his filter, the only thing really of note is the fact that his flashlight went out. I have no idea what to make of that.
In general, I get a townie vibe from phagga. He hasn't posted too much, but he shows honest effort in the thread and really tries to figure out what's going on. I'm guessing that his lack of direct contributions to the thread is simply due to his schedule.
And I think Oats is scum.
If dec isn't dead tonight, spend a lot of time looking at him tomorrow. There's something off there.
Not gonna be back before the deadline. In the unlikely event that you guys change your minds, I'm moving 4 left tonight.
{gg gl hf}
|
|
|
gg everyone! That game was a ton of fun. Gj dec, that was a great bluff. I'm not sure I would have tried to lynch you this game.
Huge thanks to the hosts, this game was a ton of fun. Not enough Daleks, but otherwise great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
