|
On August 02 2015 03:42 Damdred wrote:
You know noob you are really going about this the wrong way, literally youa re attacking every person whos somewhat trying to figure the game out.
I don't know what you mean. I'm posting all of the observations about how the Day played out. The ones that support my intended lynch target, AND the ones that don't. I'm presenting all of the evidence as it actually stands, and not just the evidence that motivates people to lynch the player I think they should. And you're complaining?
|
On August 02 2015 04:07 Damdred wrote:
he moved to save himself now, why would mafia sulf then move back to his partner instead of staying on you after I said hey lets get back on mages and sulf, myself scott moved back and killed mages.
No shit, how many times do I have to say that I don't think Sulfurus is Mage's partner? And how LONG have I been saying that? I've been saying that since Night ONE.
|
On August 02 2015 04:10 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2015 04:05 n00bKing wrote:On August 01 2015 23:09 disformation wrote:
also: why is n00bKing voting for the hero who saved him? He stopped saving me, and moved his vote TO me. I had specifically said that the only way I would vote Sulfurus was for self-preservation. And that otherwise, I thought Mage was our guy. And then Sulfurus tried to kill me. I was in the vote lead, and I moved for self-preservation, just as I had said I would. You are saying the reason Sulfurus voted you was NOT self preservation ?
No?
|
On August 02 2015 04:18 Damdred wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2015 04:11 n00bKing wrote:On August 02 2015 03:11 Damdred wrote:
So yeah so much for noob helping us solve the game here I gues? What are you talking about? I told you the scum team on Day 3, before Mage ever flipped. And whaddya know? He flipped Red, just like I said. Btw did you scum read nm d2? or when did you decide that?
When did I begin scum reading NM, or when did I decide that Breshke was his partner? I began scumreading NM during Night 1. I didn't decide Breshke was his partner until late in Day 3, after seeing how Mage responded to having the vote lead, and answered my question of whether he was the Cop or not.
Damdred wrote:If I die during th enight for some reason, make sur enoob answers the questions that were posted.
Maybe you should make you that YOU answer the questions that were posed to YOU.
|
On August 02 2015 06:14 scott31337 wrote:
Looks really bad for n00b here - d1 after Rels votes and Barakos is probably toast they go for the phat bus. We know now mafia NM bussed here.
That's not a bus. That's just him tacking on at the end of a lynch that is already decided. Breshke is in a bussing spot. NM was not. Like I said, this was the one and only STRONG Town indicator for Mage. But it was outweighed by the numerous Scum indicators.
On August 02 2015 06:14 scott31337 wrote:D2 he knows TT is town and is toast so he doesn't vote for him and tosses his vote so he doesn't look as bad. NM afk votes me (wasted vote too)
Don't sign up if you're not even going to try to play. To say that I "didn't vote for him" is a gross understatement. I worked very hard to defend him, and it was WORKING. Don't give me that crap about knowing he was toast. Votes didn't go back onto Ticktock until after you claim. Until that moment, I had successfully saved him. And I had been townreading Ticktock before that Phase ever even STARTED. "Knew he was toast so he didn't vote for him." That's such bullshit. I had been declaring Ticktock a townread before you ever even came into the game.
On August 02 2015 06:14 scott31337 wrote:D3 NM wagon probably pure as fuck
A wagon that I drove, and that doesn't go anywhere without my arguments. Because we sure know Damdred's posts on the subject were not interesting. He couldn't even convince HIMSELF that Mage was the correct lynch at EoD without my insistence.
|
I'm in the thread now too
|
On August 02 2015 07:18 Damdred wrote:
Hes probably just given up or decided to no shoot and spread dissent on rels or myself (which was what he was doing) and forgot to role block it happens.
uhhh, nope. I've been a role with night actions in over a dozen games. Never once forgotten to turn my action in.
|
On August 02 2015 07:39 ruXxar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2015 07:37 n00bKing wrote:On August 02 2015 07:18 Damdred wrote:
Hes probably just given up or decided to no shoot and spread dissent on rels or myself (which was what he was doing) and forgot to role block it happens. uhhh, nope. I've been a role with night actions in over a dozen games. Never once forgotten to turn my action in. The mechanical play is to lynch you, then lynch scott if you are town. Do you agree?
Makes sense to me.
|
On August 04 2015 08:10 geript wrote:
Somewhere around here, Ruxxar got into a big fight with n00bKing and MoosyDoosy stepped in to townshield his read. There's nothing wrong with any of this. However, how n00bKing approached the situation was not how a towny would whatsoever. He didn't want to really explain things and the explanations he gave were really piss poor.
I mentally checked out of this game after Barakos left us high and dry on Day 1. I have never had a Mafia teammate just completely bail on a game like that, and it instantly killed about 85% of my motivation.
At some point, Rels said something about how only NocturneMage could still counterclaim Scott. And I said no, Breshke could too, because he was afk at the end of Day 2 as well. And Rels pointed out that actually, Breshke had been around, and had made multiple posts at the end of Day 2. That's when people should have realized I wasn't reading the thread. By Day 2, I was not paying attention to any posts that didn't have my name in them. If you weren't talking TO me or ABOUT me, your post is getting skipped. lol
I also kept waiting to get caught on BS I was talking about the meta of other players from other games. I especially talked a lot about how I had just gone and re-read Sulfurus' filter from this game or that game, and noticed this difference or that difference. None of that re-reading actually happened, I was just making things up, from a combination of memory and whatever I wanted people to think at the time.
So I'm sure you're right that my posts didn't match for how a Townie would be thinking. But...I wasn't thinking. I was just typing whatever came to mind. Especially once the filters disappeared. If Barakos killed 85% of my motivation, losing the filters killed the other 15%. I would have actually gone through with making a scum case on Breshke, showing the association case that makes him Mage's teammate, but...not without the filters. I just typed a couple of things I could remember, found a quote or two, and that's it.
Damdred kept saying he could tell that I didn't care whether I was lynched, and that he thought it was a Town mindset. He was absolutely correct that I didn't care whether I was lynched, it just wasn't for the reasons he imagined.
On August 04 2015 08:10 geript wrote:
D3 had a bunch of random things happen; not all of which I remember. But n00bking made a major mistake by not being on the nocturnemage wagon or not securing the sulfurous lynch.
I did my part to secure the Sulfurus lynch. It was Mage's job to move to Sulfurus and make it 6-2 against Sulf, so that even 2 vote switches wouldn't save him. Since Mage didn't move, 2 vote switches would do it.
But I didn't leave until :59 went to :00 on my laptop, and NEITHER of those vote switches had happened. So I leave for my birthday dinner, come back 4 hours later, and see that like 5 more posts were made after the time my laptop read :00. But they are all timestamped :59 so they counted, and they included the 2 vote switches that saved Sulfurus after I left (though again, it would have taken 3 vote switches in that final minute, if Mage had moved to Sulfurus for self-preservation).
On August 04 2015 08:10 geript wrote:
Regarding N3. So mafia chose to roleblock himself and apparently forgot that the rules stated that KP was hand delivered.
Noooooooo. The rules do NOT say that. The rules don't actually say one way or the other. But this is a copy & paste of the ruleset from Newbie XII, where we had it specifically clarified that the KP is factional, and not delivered by an individual. If you look toward the end of the Scum thread for this game, you'll find the discussion between myself, GB and LS on this topic, and where I discover the reason why this setup is supposed to use factional KP. The Mafia is forced to attack every Night in this setup, they aren't allowed to withhold the KP, and that's to prevent a scenario where the Town keeps No Lynching and the Mafia keeps not attacking, and the game runs forever. But if the Mafia roleblocks the attacker, it would violate this principle and hence, the KP is supposed to be factional. That's probably why it was factional (using an identical ruleset) in Newbie XII. And I expect that if LS were to immediately run another game using this ruleset, he would edit the Rules so that they clearly state the KP is factional.
LS had made one mention of choosing our attacker, earlier in the Scum QT. But I hadn't seen it (again, I checked out of the game at the end of Day 1).
On August 04 2015 08:10 geript wrote:
Even still, mafia should've roleblocked the cop and shot him; he'll be dead and you can claim whatever the fuck you want (although claiming the RB there is pretty dumb because it will convince no one).
I agree claiming the RB is dumb. So there is no reason to roleblock the Cop, since that is indeed who I chose to kill. There is no reason to roleblock ANY of the Town players. So I roleblocked myself for fun, because who cares? There's no one else to roleblock. I even gave my reasoning for the RB in the Scum QT. It says "cuz why not?" since there is no Town player that it does me any good to roleblock. It was never my intent to claim the block. There's just no reason not to roleblock myself, since I "know" from the previous game (which used an identical setup) that the KP is delivered factionally.
When LS prevented the KP, I argued against his REASONING. But I didn't get angry about it, since...I had checked out of the game at the end of Day 1.
|
On August 04 2015 09:07 ruXxar wrote:
I want to also apologize if people found my play style offensive.
I harbor no I'll will towards anyone for what they said or did in the game(moosy plz I love u <3)
This might be my favorite post in the thread. Moosy demands your address so that he can come and murder you in your home. And you apologize and ask for forgiveness. :D
|
On August 05 2015 21:52 raynpelikoneet wrote:
n00bKing was mafia because he argued mafia would not roleblock Rels. Guess what, mafia DID do that, or Rels is mafia and they rb'd noone (which is basically the same thing). The question is no more did mafia do that, it's why mafia did that. There was already a conclusion, yet he ignored the thing that was 100% true and argued it is not true.
You apparently never read anything I wrote on the subject. I did not ever say that the Mafia would not roleblock Rels, and from the time he claimed the roleblock I basically shut down all efforts to attempt to get him lynched, because I argued that there would be no motivation for him to fake-claim the block, and we know that they didn't kill the same person they blocked, because no one died. And with you claiming Vet, it wouldn't make any sense for them to withhold the roleblock, instead of just blocking the kill target.
All I ever *actually* said is that Mafia has reason not to roleblock Rels if *I* am on the team. That's it. I never said they would avoid roleblocking Rels if the team had ANY other makeup. So either you BADLY misremember or you were just never paying any attention at all.
On August 05 2015 21:52 raynpelikoneet wrote: Also noone should be arguing anything about the factional/delivered KP. Because LS literally told the scumteam the KP is delivered. If the host says so, then it is so. If you don't like it it's your problem.
I think you may be literally alone on that one. This setup uses factional KP, and if this host used this setup again, he would make sure that the rules make that explicitly clear. If anyone else uses this setup again, they should also make sure that the rules make it explicitly clear that the KP is factional and NOT delivered. I have not (at any point) tried to say that the host ruined the game, with the confusion. But to say that "no one should be arguing anything" about it is just simply wrong. Arguing about it is how the correct answer in this setup (KP is factional, not delivered) was discovered, and that will prevent any misunderstandings in the future.
|
On August 06 2015 01:54 raynpelikoneet wrote:
I have no idea where it says "this setup used a factional KP".
Still not paying attention. It doesn't clearly say that the setup uses a factional KP. That was specifically clarified, however, in the last game that used this setup. And will be specifically clarified in the rules, in any future game using this setup. Because we reasoned out why it is that the setup needs to use factional KP. If we hadn't had the discussions of whether the KP should be factional or not in this setup, it might not have been discovered why the KP is supposed to be factional. Now we know that it IS supposed to be, and we know WHY it is supposed to be, so there will be no future misunderstandings.
|
On August 06 2015 01:59 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Maybe i explained myself badly.
You ignored the fact that actually happened and defended yourself purely based on "well you are all stupid i would never do that" when actually it is the most logical conclusion. You never went to the second most logical conclusion (still likely) that someone is trying to frame you as mafia.
I can't ignore the fact that it happened and also stop trying to get Rels lynched. When I stop trying to get Rels lynched, that is proof that I'm not ignoring that it happened. What you're saying is not possible.
And I see nothing logical about that second conclusion. Mafia would not roleblock Rels to frame me, because Rels being roleblocked makes me LOOK TOWN. That would be the worst frameup ever.
On August 06 2015 01:59 raynpelikoneet wrote:Basically you went on the subject with "i did not do this" instead of "what does this mean".
I participated in discussions where I theorized about why the Mafia team would have roleblocked Rels (or in other words, "what does this mean"). I'm not sure whether you don't remember them, or just didn't read them. I expect some of those discussions took place after you died, so that might help explain why you didn't check them out.
I'll mention again that I will NOT try to say that I played well in this game. I stopped thinking through my posts after Barakos bailed on the team and set us adrift, and just typed whatever came to mind. I'm sure there were logical inconsistencies (and other flaws) in my posts, because I wasn't making sure there weren't. And I was also claiming to be doing a bunch of reading and analysis that I wasn't doing, so that would lead to other problems as well.
So I'm sure I made mistakes. I just didn't make the mistakes you're talking about right here.
|
On August 06 2015 03:37 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2015 03:18 n00bKing wrote:On August 06 2015 01:54 raynpelikoneet wrote:
I have no idea where it says "this setup used a factional KP". Still not paying attention. It doesn't clearly say that the setup uses a factional KP. That was specifically clarified, however, in the last game that used this setup. And will be specifically clarified in the rules, in any future game using this setup. Because we reasoned out why it is that the setup needs to use factional KP. If we hadn't had the discussions of whether the KP should be factional or not in this setup, it might not have been discovered why the KP is supposed to be factional. Now we know that it IS supposed to be, and we know WHY it is supposed to be, so there will be no future misunderstandings. There is no "supposed to be".
Yes there is. This ruleset uses factional KP. And that wasn't just picked at random, there is a reason why this ruleset uses factional KP. Which helps explain why it was specifically clarified during the last game that the KP is factional. And through discussion in the Scum thread, we were able to determine what that reason is. So that now, no future host will erroneously ask the Mafia to select an attacker, when there is not an attacker.
On August 06 2015 03:37 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2015 03:26 n00bKing wrote:
And I see nothing logical about that second conclusion. Mafia would not roleblock Rels to frame me, because Rels being roleblocked makes me LOOK TOWN. That would be the worst frameup ever.
I kinda feel like you are talking in circles (like you were in the game aswell). So you are saying there is no other option in the game than that you are mafia based on the Rels being roleblocked, and now you are also, at the same time, arguing against it?
I don't know what you're trying to say. At no time did I ever indicate that Rels being roleblocked could make me Mafia, either in-game or post-game. Rels being roleblocked makes me look Town. Mafia would not do it to "frame me." Mafia would do it only for other reasons, which I discussed at length during the game.
|
On August 06 2015 04:19 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Well you were mafia.... soo....
soo....what?
On August 06 2015 04:19 raynpelikoneet wrote:Alsa well played, you apparently outplayed the host with your team and coach. Good job.
And now (thanks to my team and coach) no future host will repeat the same error made by this host. So you're welcome.
|
On August 06 2015 04:38 raynpelikoneet wrote:
If you have a reason to call out bad hosting or whatever do it after the game.
I made no mention of it in this thread until after the game. In fact, I didn't even bring it up in this thread after the game either, and only corrected something that geript had said about me "forgetting" that the rules say the KP is delivered. They do not say that.
On August 06 2015 04:38 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Or like, if you base your actions in game-onto what YOU think the game should be like instead of what it ACTUALLY is.
We're not talking about what I think. This isn't a matter of my opinion, or of someone else's opinion. Rather, as I said already:
"This ruleset uses factional KP. And that wasn't just picked at random, there is a reason why this ruleset uses factional KP."
And now that everyone understands that, there won't be any future misunderstandings. You're welcome.
|
On August 06 2015 05:00 raynpelikoneet wrote:
I hope you get what my problem here is.
Your problem is based on you thinking something happened that didn't. My coach and I did not confer, and then decide that because this ruleset uses factional KP, we were going to disregard that LS had earlier mentioned something about naming an attacker.
I have specifically said that I didn't notice that one post from LS in the scum thread. And that I assumed the KP was factional because it had been clarified as such in the last game using this same ruleset. So I never had the attitude of "screw you, I'm gonna do this to call attention to your bad ruling/mistake." I wasn't aware of his bad ruling/mistake, because I had mentally checked out of the game, and didn't notice his post. Only after the fact did GB, LS and myself have a discussion of how the KP is supposed to be delivered in this ruleset. And that's when I figured out the reasoning behind why the ruleset is meant to have factional KP. Make better sense now?
|
On August 06 2015 05:15 raynpelikoneet wrote:
People put all sort of things (even dumb) in their games because they do not think them through. If something is not clear, for future reference, ask the host about it. Not just make your own conclusions and act.
Why would it occur to me to think anything was unclear? I had JUST played another game under this exact same ruleset. And during that game, how the KP is delivered was specifically asked and answered: The KP is factional. So there's no reason for me to expect that anything needs further clarification. If you want to bash me for missing one post of a 391 post thread, then go right ahead. But why I acted on the conclusions that I had at the start of the game cannot be easier to understand.
|
On August 06 2015 05:34 raynpelikoneet wrote:
yes i know LS made a bad call
That's all I need you to say.
Thanks to the after-the-fact discussions between LS, GB, and myself, I was able to uncover WHY the call was wrong. And now that the why is understood, the bad call will not be repeated. And that's all that is important at this point: making sure that everyone is on the same page, so that the problem will not recur.
|
On August 06 2015 05:48 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Well to be honest you all SHOULD have been on the same page...
Meaning that you think we should all have been together, on the WRONG page? I meant that going forward, everyone will be on the same (RIGHT) page. Everyone will know that the KP is factional, and will know why. But I do appreciate like a dozen straight posts of you being annoying for no real reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
