|
On August 08 2013 16:47 Mocsta wrote:
I wrote lol afterwards dude.
When he wrote "this statement." I thought he shared hapa sentiment of me.
Regardless. Here's a q for u phagga.
U choose to outline me as scum. But then ask me to also chase hapa.
Why r u being so reactive? If u had concerns with me or any others. Why r u not leading the charge to ascertain alignment?
I choose to outline you as anti-town, not scum. Funny how you seemed to have missed that.
I'm reactive because I'm at work currently, which means I have only short time frames to quickly answer/ask. I am trying to follow up on the people on which I want to flesh out my reads some more, which are mainly Hapa and Oats.
On August 08 2013 17:29 Mocsta wrote:
Phagga
U do realise everything u have submitted in the thread is a +1 right?
Ur idea of a good plan....+1 to geript
Ur best scum lead.... +1 to hapa
Ur scum justification...,+1 to hapa
So if u want to use hapa logic so flippantly.. Is he a town read for u or not....
No, he is not, I don't know where to put him currently. That's why asked Hapa about you, I want to hear more from him. I hope to get some more quality time with this thread later to get some more questions out for him, as we seem to miss each other entirely due to timezones.
|
firstly.. scum and anti town is the same thing.. but that is semantics and the last in shall speak on the matter
secondly.. I am as time poor as u, am o ly on phone access yet that makes me scum and u a reactive "townie"... lol.. this is lol even before factoring your +1 contributions
lastly.. how can u support a firm anti town/null reads "case" without adding anything additional of merit...
I'm going to put it out there... did u change your position on hapa based on the jester rule clarification??
|
On August 08 2013 16:00 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 13:16 Oatsmaster wrote:
wait so hapa, you would play jester as townie as possible? No, but a Jester won't necessarily reveal his/her hand this soon. You have to balance being scummy with being laughably obvious. Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 13:11 geript wrote:On August 08 2013 12:59 Hapahauli wrote:
That's a huge misrepresentation of what I've been posting considering your "plan."
Like I said, every single role wants to claim VT. You seem to think that we should have the unlynchable claim, but that just makes them a target on N1. They can always claim if they're about to get lynched. I don't see the difference. If you dismiss the plan without explaining why you think it's bad then that's the same to me. Just because you don't understand my explanation doesn't mean I didn't explain it. As said twice before, there's simply no merit in having the unlynchable townie claim now. Why out a blue when we don't need to? He can claim at [i]any time. Best case scenario for town is to have him live to tomorrow and THEN claim. [/b]
But if the unlynchable claims D2, both Jester and scum can counterclaim. Where is the advantage of claiming tomorrow against claiming today?
|
On August 08 2013 18:03 Mocsta wrote:
firstly.. scum and anti town is the same thing.. but that is semantics and the last in shall speak on the matter
secondly.. I am as time poor as u, am o ly on phone access yet that makes me scum and u a reactive "townie"... lol.. this is lol even before factoring your +1 contributions
lastly.. how can u support a firm anti town/null reads "case" without adding anything additional of merit...
I'm going to put it out there... did u change your position on hapa based on the jester rule clarification??
When I say anti-town I mean either scum or jester, since are both anti-town roles IMO. I also thought there was at least one other person using it the same way. I hope that cleares it up.
Perhaps because I came to that conclusion by myself and Hapas read on you is not relevant for this?
Where did I change my position on Hapa? And no, the jester rule clarification only made it clear for me that it is of upmost importance to lynch scum on D1, since if we misslynch or nolynch, we have to rely on either the jester or scum on D2.
|
On August 08 2013 18:25 phagga wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 16:00 Hapahauli wrote:On August 08 2013 13:16 Oatsmaster wrote:
wait so hapa, you would play jester as townie as possible? No, but a Jester won't necessarily reveal his/her hand this soon. You have to balance being scummy with being laughably obvious. On August 08 2013 13:11 geript wrote:On August 08 2013 12:59 Hapahauli wrote:
That's a huge misrepresentation of what I've been posting considering your "plan."
Like I said, every single role wants to claim VT. You seem to think that we should have the unlynchable claim, but that just makes them a target on N1. They can always claim if they're about to get lynched. I don't see the difference. If you dismiss the plan without explaining why you think it's bad then that's the same to me. Just because you don't understand my explanation doesn't mean I didn't explain it. As said twice before, there's simply no merit in having the unlynchable townie claim now. Why out a blue when we don't need to? He can claim at [i]any time. Best case scenario for town is to have him live to tomorrow and THEN claim. But if the unlynchable claims D2, both Jester and scum can counterclaim. Where is the advantage of claiming tomorrow against claiming today? [/b]
Scrap that, I figured the answer out myself. With the rule clarification, Scum prefers a situation of 1-1-1 on D2 over a 2-1. If the unlynchable claims D1, he will get shot N1 because scum wants to make sure he hits town.
|
On August 08 2013 18:36 phagga wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 18:25 phagga wrote:On August 08 2013 16:00 Hapahauli wrote:On August 08 2013 13:16 Oatsmaster wrote:
wait so hapa, you would play jester as townie as possible? No, but a Jester won't necessarily reveal his/her hand this soon. You have to balance being scummy with being laughably obvious. On August 08 2013 13:11 geript wrote:On August 08 2013 12:59 Hapahauli wrote:
That's a huge misrepresentation of what I've been posting considering your "plan."
Like I said, every single role wants to claim VT. You seem to think that we should have the unlynchable claim, but that just makes them a target on N1. They can always claim if they're about to get lynched. I don't see the difference. If you dismiss the plan without explaining why you think it's bad then that's the same to me. Just because you don't understand my explanation doesn't mean I didn't explain it. As said twice before, there's simply no merit in having the unlynchable townie claim now. Why out a blue when we don't need to? He can claim at [i]any time. Best case scenario for town is to have him live to tomorrow and THEN claim. But if the unlynchable claims D2, both Jester and scum can counterclaim. Where is the advantage of claiming tomorrow against claiming today? Scrap that, I figured the answer out myself. With the rule clarification, Scum prefers a situation of 1-1-1 on D2 over a 2-1. If the unlynchable claims D1, he will get shot N1 because scum wants to make sure he hits town. [/b]
No wait, that's not necessarily true. If its 1-1-1 scum has to rely on the jester, while the jester might try to get the win for himself. If it's 2-1 it's up completely to the scum, which he might prefer.
Probably still a bad idea to claim unlynchable D1.
|
Ok, let me clarifiy this because that series of posts of mine looks confusing.
Depending on the situation at the end of D1 scum might prefer either 1-1-1 or 2-1. Since we don't know what it will be, it's a bad idea for the unlynchable to claim.
Whatever, best is to not let the game go to D2.
|
|
|
On August 08 2013 23:10 geript wrote:
##vote oatsmaster
I'm sure you will also explain us why?
And since you're here:
On August 08 2013 05:41 geript wrote:On phagga. He looks like he's absolutely trying to get lynched. He just keeps on making these obvious non-towny sentiments in the thread. Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 02:55 phagga wrote:
The reason I objected had to do with the fact hat I tried to figure out geripts intentions and that I think town should be kept on a need to know basis.
Why is this a non-townie sentiment. Please elaborate.
|
come on geript.
Ok hapa is scum. I BELIEVE.
##vote Hapa
|
Oats, and what are your reasons for voting Hapa?
Also, please answer these questions
|
On August 08 2013 17:13 phagga wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 16:30 Oatsmaster wrote:On August 08 2013 16:25 phagga wrote:
Hapa: What do you think of Mocsta? What do you make of his reaction to my accusation?
Oats: you said earlier that Hapa and me are the anti-town forces. Why do you think Mocsta is town? cause mocsta feels like town. Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 16:30 Oatsmaster wrote:On August 08 2013 16:25 phagga wrote:
Hapa: What do you think of Mocsta? What do you make of his reaction to my accusation?
Oats: you said earlier that Hapa and me are the anti-town forces. Why do you think Mocsta is town? cause mocsta feels like town. What makes you feel his town? Can you elaborate a bit? Can you point to something? I wrote some posts up why I think Mocsta is not town because he's not trying to figure things out, what do you say about that?
oh what.
Cause mocsta playing the game man, longest filter I think, trying to find out shit. I disagree with you on that point btw.
I dont think you gave a good reason for not claiming. And you keep repeating the same bad reason. No wonder Mocsta aint happy.
Reasons for Hapa after Geript gives reasons for me.
Although,
Hapa not invested in this game at all, and I dont think he is jester.
|
On August 08 2013 23:41 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 17:13 phagga wrote:On August 08 2013 16:30 Oatsmaster wrote:On August 08 2013 16:25 phagga wrote:
Hapa: What do you think of Mocsta? What do you make of his reaction to my accusation?
Oats: you said earlier that Hapa and me are the anti-town forces. Why do you think Mocsta is town? cause mocsta feels like town. On August 08 2013 16:30 Oatsmaster wrote:On August 08 2013 16:25 phagga wrote:
Hapa: What do you think of Mocsta? What do you make of his reaction to my accusation?
Oats: you said earlier that Hapa and me are the anti-town forces. Why do you think Mocsta is town? cause mocsta feels like town. What makes you feel his town? Can you elaborate a bit? Can you point to something? I wrote some posts up why I think Mocsta is not town because he's not trying to figure things out, what do you say about that? oh what. Cause mocsta playing the game man, longest filter I think, trying to find out shit. I disagree with you on that point btw. I dont think you gave a good reason for not claiming. And you keep repeating the same bad reason. No wonder Mocsta aint happy. Reasons for Hapa after Geript gives reasons for me. Although, Hapa not invested in this game at all, and I dont think he is jester.
Mocsta's mainly all over me now, and I welcome that he's actually doing something now compared to yesterday. I'll look forward to his posts once he is off phone.
Of course I repeat the same reason, because it's the ones I had for not claiming, lol. If you don't like the answer, perhaps you guys need to ask another question?
I do agree that Hapa is not very invested, but why do you think that Hapa is not the jester?
|
@Mocsta
On August 08 2013 14:58 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 14:40 Blazinghand wrote:
Rules clarification re: endgaming the jester
A jester endgamed by town loses.
A jester endgamed by scum gets a "partial victory" I suspect scum asked this question as i can't imagine town thinking about this.. I know I certainly didnt
Why would you not think about that question as town? Do you think this information is not important for town?
On August 08 2013 16:29 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 16:20 phagga wrote:On August 08 2013 16:12 Mocsta wrote:
So phagga. I can't vote for me. U gonna show some balls and start this? Why don't you push hapa if you think something is wrong with him? I vote when I feel sure I've found scum. Frankly I feel I have gone out of my way to express why I dont understand u.. and u keep backpedaling to your discourse with oats..that's shoddy to me and hence That's why I'm not interested in hapa currently. In fairness I'm restricted to phone posting at work . So I will make a deal with u. When I get home. I will summarise my grievance for u one last time via computer so I can quote etc
I'm still not sure if you are really trying to figure me out, but you are talking to me, so let's try to get rid of this topic once and for all. I went back through your posts. I found the last you posted regarding your grievance is this (emphasis is mine in all following quotes):
On August 08 2013 12:37 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2013 11:00 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Mocsta
Well there are several ideas being bounced around right now.for example, there's been some "Phagga is Jester" talk that I'd like to hear your thoughts on. As well as any other sCum-reads you might have. sure. Phagga has a consistent vibe in his posts which is a plus. however I'm still struggling to get why he was hesitant to claim when he supported the plan . This seems more to do with paranoia considering He also admits to looking carefully for the lynchproof which falls into my mafia mindset criteria.Im not sure whether a jester would be playing this reckless either. So for now I'm willing to consider phagga as non jester....Maybe mafia though. I do feel phagga has not sufficiently addressed why he was hesitant to claim either whether talking to myself or oats. Phagga. The crux of my problem is. U agree with the lynchproof plan yet did not want to contribute to it?? I just don't understand how u could withhold that information if the key to the plans success in it eyes was to have information??
I thought I already answered these questions with the following post to Oats:
On August 07 2013 21:26 phagga wrote:
Yes, I do.
When geript asked everyone to claim, my reaction was not "oh well, claiming VT is useless information, I might as well claim". I thought "Why does he want everyone to claim? What's the ieea behind it?". And for that thought my own role was absolutely irrelevant. All I wanted is to know why he thinks it's a good idea to claim.
Oats, what do you think of Mocsta so far?
I'm at work and have a meeting in 30 minutes, need to prepare. Will be offline for a few hours.
And earlier to you:
On August 07 2013 20:19 phagga wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2013 19:38 Mocsta wrote:
(1) Well i find it ironic u held back, yet quoted something akin to Geript plan
(2) Oats, hes typically spammy at start but usually has a purpose. I dunno .. from his limited posts so far I feel like hes trying to achieve nothing. Would like to see more from him.
(3) I dont like the plan; mainly becuase I dont get it.
What do u think of Geript plan? Considering u seem to agere with it?? can yoiu pleaes explain it to me. (1) Perhaps my post was just unclear? What I meant here is that I'm holding my thoughts on geripts plan back. Of course if I then later post them they look like geripts plan, because they are tied to his plan. Well, after he lined it out I thought the plan was ok. I was back then expecting the unlynchable to claim under any circumstance, although I see now why he doesn't (makes more sense to claim D2 if still alive). With that in mind, I expected the claims to give us some lead on who to lynch. At the same time I saw no real downside for town. Hence I thought the plan is worth trying out. Also, as I explained, I hoped that scum and/or jester might make a mistake with claiming, leading to confirmed townies.
I thought and still think that these two quotes answer your questions. If they don't please elaborate on what exactly is unclear.
|
Oats totes scum that's y I vote oats
|
On August 09 2013 00:01 geript wrote:
Oats totes scum that's y I vote oats
thats my line.
|
well hapa was talking about the optimal behavior of a jester and it doesnt feel like he is talking about his own role.
|
On August 09 2013 00:01 geript wrote:
Oats totes scum that's y I vote oats
Back  Drunker than expected... but hey.. beer/river views/cigars.. cant go wrong
Now, im a bit stuck on how to proceed as theres a few actions occuring simultaneously.
(1) I need to consolidate a post to phagga
(2) retort to phagga query to me
(3) figure out this vote on oats. + oats vote on Hapa
Personally, the vote on Hapa im not against. He seems to be idling by, at least for my expectation of his play.
==========================
Now oats... I thought his cavalier attitude was meta-indicative of town? So could you please expand on what strikes you as defaulting him to scum? I also ASSUME you mean mafia, as surely if you mean jester, you would not be voting him?
|
@Phagga.
For your first query:
On August 08 2013 14:40 Blazinghand wrote:
Rules clarification re: endgaming the jester
A jester endgamed by town loses.
A jester endgamed by scum gets a "partial victory" On August 08 2013 14:58 Mocsta wrote:
I suspect scum asked this question as i can't imagine town thinking about this.. I know I certainly didnt On August 08 2013 23:51 phagga wrote:
Why would you not think about that question as town? Do you think this information is not important for town?
Why would you not think about the question as town
Win-Con phagga...
On August 07 2013 15:51 Blazinghand wrote:
Miners' Win Con: Miners win when the Goon is dead. They lose if Night 2 starts, or if the Jester is lynched.
Why would I -let me remind you: town- be contemplating the jester wincon beyond to be lynched?
My focus is to lynch the goon, and avoid the jester.
(As a post-game thing.. I would be seriously shocked if it wasn't the jester that asked for clarification.. which then leads into WIFOM about timezones etc)
Do you think this information is not important for town
I think it just opens up WIFOM, so no.
Regardless of whether jseter wants a selfish victory, or shared... my focus is the same. Lynch the goon.
Do you beg to differ?
===============
(2)
Regarding grievances etc, This ties into my query post to you. Will start compiling soonish. Need to re-read again first.
|
Now I'm the one posting from phone.
Jesters wincon is relevant to town because it influences towns behaviour in 1-1-1 on D2. With the new information it means that town is in an almost unwinnable situation.
And I thought of that question too, but it got answered before I could ask it. So I disagree that a townie would not think of it
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
