|
11589 Posts
On June 23 2013 08:12 cDgCorazon wrote:
This is why I never talk about my town reads.
Anyways, I'm not entirely sure if I should claim seeing as I'm getting lynched tomorrow.
Cora, can you explain this further? Why would you tell the thread you have a role and not actually claim it?
|
11589 Posts
On June 23 2013 23:55 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2013 17:13 yamato77 wrote:On June 23 2013 08:12 cDgCorazon wrote:
This is why I never talk about my town reads.
Anyways, I'm not entirely sure if I should claim seeing as I'm getting lynched tomorrow. Cora, can you explain this further? Why would you tell the thread you have a role and not actually claim it? Show nested quote +On June 23 2013 21:16 marvellosity wrote:
I'd argue the blue-claim is more him being a dejected arse.
You don't get off this easily. I've never seen a town player be as oblivious as to half-claim in the thread like this. It sounds to me like you're contemplating fake claiming.
|
11589 Posts
As for the secret vote, I still feel that it is important to consider. Obviously it was a mafia-aligned ability, as I thought, so we may have to more carefully establish our consolidation onto the lynch than before. If you vote for someone most of town doesn't want to lynch, you need to think about that lest we have a situation like day 1 where I was in danger of being lynched hours from deadline.
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 05:12 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 05:09 yamato77 wrote:On June 23 2013 23:55 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 23 2013 17:13 yamato77 wrote:On June 23 2013 08:12 cDgCorazon wrote:
This is why I never talk about my town reads.
Anyways, I'm not entirely sure if I should claim seeing as I'm getting lynched tomorrow. Cora, can you explain this further? Why would you tell the thread you have a role and not actually claim it? On June 23 2013 21:16 marvellosity wrote:
I'd argue the blue-claim is more him being a dejected arse.
You don't get off this easily. I've never seen a town player be as oblivious as to half-claim in the thread like this. It sounds to me like you're contemplating fake claiming. I'm an unlynchable, unkillable Mafia GF/Mayor who has unlimited vigilante bullets and unlimited nightly checks. Oh, and I'm 3P and I win with town, but only if half of the players are dead and one of the mafia players has used a buzzword that the hosts won't tell me. Oh shit, you found me.
Do you want to die?
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 05:16 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 04:59 Hapahauli wrote:@ CoraI will say that GK has a really good point about your "read" on Ange. Finally there's his last set of reads, which clearly make no sense from a town perspective. I simply can't visualize a townie making the Ange read in particular, given her contributions to getting scum lynched on DAY 1. All in all, this is a guy with a lot of activity who hasn't had a whole lot of stances on who's scum. He's content to suspect lurkers and be pretty wishy-washy on everyone else. Ange in particular he's gone from "possibly Ange" to "probably not Ange let's not consider lynching her even though I think she's scummy" in very short order when pressured about it. Like what kind of townie does that??? The Oats read I could possibly see a townie making, but everything else just doesn't make sense at all to me from a town perspective. Why would you be suspicious of the person who was the driving force behind the Godfather lynch? And even if you are suspicious, your quotes on her don't come across as very natural... Perhaps Ange, as it would be really easy for scum to cast doubt on me and push for my lynch D2. That got me really suspicious. So you mention that you're "really suspicious" of her right here, but then when someone confronts you about it, you immediately back down to a very non-committal stance: I'm not say Ange is 100% scum and that we should try to lynch her. I'm not even saying Ange looks very scummy and we should thing about lynching her. I'm just saying that it makes me a bit suspicious. And now it's a "bit suspicious". Perhaps I used the wrong wording in how suspicious of Ange I was. Her sub-par D1 play was only revived by the fact that she voted for DP at just the right time. Then she goes on about how I look bad for voting DP which is so ridiculously obvious. I'm still feeling on edge after the DP vote because I thought I was going to be a prime lynch candidate because of it. I considered (and still do, but to a lesser degree) myself to be lynch bait and when she mentioned my name I saw her possibly as scum jumping on the lynchbait. She shouldn't be hailed as an angel just because she voted for DP. Everyone still has to do their part in the town.
Ange is obviously town and you are a prime lynch candidate.
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 05:29 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 05:19 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 05:16 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 24 2013 04:59 Hapahauli wrote:@ CoraI will say that GK has a really good point about your "read" on Ange. Finally there's his last set of reads, which clearly make no sense from a town perspective. I simply can't visualize a townie making the Ange read in particular, given her contributions to getting scum lynched on DAY 1. All in all, this is a guy with a lot of activity who hasn't had a whole lot of stances on who's scum. He's content to suspect lurkers and be pretty wishy-washy on everyone else. Ange in particular he's gone from "possibly Ange" to "probably not Ange let's not consider lynching her even though I think she's scummy" in very short order when pressured about it. Like what kind of townie does that??? The Oats read I could possibly see a townie making, but everything else just doesn't make sense at all to me from a town perspective. Why would you be suspicious of the person who was the driving force behind the Godfather lynch? And even if you are suspicious, your quotes on her don't come across as very natural... Perhaps Ange, as it would be really easy for scum to cast doubt on me and push for my lynch D2. That got me really suspicious. So you mention that you're "really suspicious" of her right here, but then when someone confronts you about it, you immediately back down to a very non-committal stance: I'm not say Ange is 100% scum and that we should try to lynch her. I'm not even saying Ange looks very scummy and we should thing about lynching her. I'm just saying that it makes me a bit suspicious. And now it's a "bit suspicious". Perhaps I used the wrong wording in how suspicious of Ange I was. Her sub-par D1 play was only revived by the fact that she voted for DP at just the right time. Then she goes on about how I look bad for voting DP which is so ridiculously obvious. I'm still feeling on edge after the DP vote because I thought I was going to be a prime lynch candidate because of it. I considered (and still do, but to a lesser degree) myself to be lynch bait and when she mentioned my name I saw her possibly as scum jumping on the lynchbait. She shouldn't be hailed as an angel just because she voted for DP. Everyone still has to do their part in the town. Ange is obviously town and you are a prime lynch candidate. Way to follow thread sentiment yet again Yamato. Step up your play.
ROFL. Get real.
Lynched scum D1. GGNORE
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 06:26 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you thought I was actually thinking about LAL-ing D2, you're wrong. I want Oats dead and I will vote for him as soon as possible.
Also in my votepost, I did not mention the word "lurker". I used the word "subpar", which could include lurking, but also applies to players like Oats who have played an active yet scummy game. That one is interpreting my words in a way that makes your case.
D2, I'm worried about Oats getting lynched. I'm very sure he is scum and I want to see him die. Once he dies, we can focus our energy elsewhere. D2 will also allow for players who have played a quiet game to either step up or stand out.
This unfounded push on Oats is exactly why you're not town.
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 06:30 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 06:29 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 06:26 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you thought I was actually thinking about LAL-ing D2, you're wrong. I want Oats dead and I will vote for him as soon as possible.
Also in my votepost, I did not mention the word "lurker". I used the word "subpar", which could include lurking, but also applies to players like Oats who have played an active yet scummy game. That one is interpreting my words in a way that makes your case.
D2, I'm worried about Oats getting lynched. I'm very sure he is scum and I want to see him die. Once he dies, we can focus our energy elsewhere. D2 will also allow for players who have played a quiet game to either step up or stand out. This unfounded push on Oats is exactly why you're not town. Unfounded?
There's no good reason to believe that he's mafia.
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 06:41 Hapahauli wrote:
Somewhat.
He's being a lot more trolly this game which is throwing me off. The raw activity suggests he's town, but his refusal to substantiate anything is maddening.
Welcome to every game ever with Oats.
Anyway, work again. I'll see you guys in a while.
|
11589 Posts
I just got incredibly unlucky, basically. If I had masoned anyone but Marv, this game would have been WWWAAAAAAAAYYYYY different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
