|
On June 22 2017 23:18 beentheredonethat wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2017 23:15 ruXxar wrote:On June 22 2017 23:09 beentheredonethat wrote:On June 22 2017 21:57 ruXxar wrote:On June 22 2017 21:00 beentheredonethat wrote:On June 22 2017 20:35 raynpelikoneet wrote:On June 22 2017 19:06 beentheredonethat wrote:On June 22 2017 18:55 Blazinghand wrote:
I was the hammer. Rayn made in hammering Impoasbkle. Everything else is window dressing. TW and SL didn't hammer. I did. Get the facts straight "votes in hammer range on town: Tumblewood, sicklucker, Blazinghand" Tumblewood provided the hammer, sicklucker lifted it, you banged it on the table. I think I have my facts straight here and you're trying to misrepresent my case. Why do you do this? You don't have your facts straight. Take my face and ram it onto how it is correctly as town!rayn would do it and also call me bad as town!rayn would Rayn and BH are right. You are misrepresenting how the voting went down, and final vote count is absolutely not represenatitve of what the situation looked like. Therefore your analysis is pretty much void. The ones who put the deciding votes on a wagon are hammer votes. This is what I am analyzing. And I put all three of them into possible scum range. Do you disagree? The hammer votes was BH and Rayn. Anyone who was reading the thread at the time can confirm that. Well then BH Who's all defensive about himself voting Grack, like "I did it and I stand by having done so" and who's pointing to himself as being the hammer. Is that scum being aware of how bad he looks who's trying to bring up points before town can bring it up?
I don't see how that is scummy.
You saw how hard I pushed grack and I would've done it again if I could.
I even said the same thing as BH after the day one lynch.
I dislike BH for a few reasons, but that's not one of them.
|
The other thing is that you are trying to create a narrative on information that is taken out of context.
The way you're trying to apply them does not reflect the events that actually went down.
Things such as:
- "grack lynch went unopposed". It was actually really close.
- "rayns vote is irrelevant". It was actually very crucial and I would say even more important than BHs vote.
|
When you say things like that, it makes it very tempting for me to dismiss the rest of your analysis too, when it seems very clear that you are not actually following the game.
Or at least interpreting in a way that I very strongly disagree with.
|
I have a creepy feeling that something is going on with Rayn and BH vs rels..
The way they ganged up on rels didn't feel natural at all.
It felt really forced.
Maybe I'm just being paranoid.
I'll have to look more into it.
|
I read rayns filter again.
dont want to lynch him today.
|
On June 23 2017 06:16 Blazinghand wrote:
did ruxxar just vote SL
I sure did.
|
There was a point during day 2, where I asked him for his read on the situation after day 1 EOD.
He said his reads had not changed and produced the same list of reads as he had day 1 before EOD.
There was something very scummy about that.
Disformation also said that he had a deja vu of what HF had said earlier.
I think SL is trying to play on my emotions by buddying up to me and going along with my scum reads.
At one point he even claimed that I was copying HIS scum reads.
As if... not once did I consider his reads to have any merit.
The fact that his reads aligned with mine was really frustrating, because it meant having him alive would help further the goal of lynching my scum reads.
Now I feel it turns out, he did that on purpose to get on my good side.
Especially with how he lately claims I'm 100% town.
This is at odds when SL later says to Rels "rels, you must lynch everyone on the annul vote except me".
I've gotten to the point where I think SLs scum reads are all fake.
I want him dead.
|
Potential mafia team is SL, Rayn, BH
|
|
|
I'm going to guess that he checked me, that's why he was so certain I was town.
|
On June 23 2017 08:05 Fecalfeast wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2017 08:04 ruXxar wrote:
I'm going to guess that he checked me, that's why he was so certain I was town. Parity cop doesn't learn alignments
What does it do then?
|
Wait... I think I remember now.
role cops are given one check a night, and then host tells them if they are same or different alignment.
|
Are parity cops given a check at the start of the game?
As in, when night 1 rolls arounds, to they pick their 1st or 2nd target?
|
On June 23 2017 08:12 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2017 08:10 ruXxar wrote:
Are parity cops given a check at the start of the game?
As in, when night 1 rolls arounds, to they pick their 1st or 2nd target? On night 1, they pick their first target, and get NO result. on night 2, they pick their second target, and get ONE result. Sicklucker died with ONE result.
Thanks.
|
Can parity cop choose himself as a target?
|
On June 23 2017 08:15 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2017 08:13 ruXxar wrote:
Can parity cop choose himself as a target? Depends on the game, but it's actually better to just pick targets from among the town. after all, you can eventually build a chain like this: N1: Adam, result nothing N2: Adam and Bob have the SAME alignment N3: Bob and Charlie have DIFFERENT alignment N4: Charlie and Dave have SAME alignment then, during N4, Adam dies and flips town. this tells you that Bob is GREEN and Charlie and Dave are RED it's very common for a pcop check person to get shot or lynched at some point, or for someone to be obvscum or town int eh chain
Thanks again 
|
On June 23 2017 08:18 Fecalfeast wrote:
Tw es ruxx bh
Imo
I say we vote you and chez.
|
On June 23 2017 08:26 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2017 08:23 Chezitwo wrote:On June 23 2017 08:20 Blazinghand wrote:OK SO THEORY. AS we know, SickLucker crumbed his N1 and N2 checks here, which was SAME on FEFE and Chezitwo. However, pay attention to how he wrote it: On June 22 2017 19:19 sicklucker wrote:On June 22 2017 18:05 disformation wrote:
so lets start again:
town:
fefe
chezitwo
if ppl scumread any of those two i would like to see reasons/cases I have a red check on both of them I don't know about you folks but I pretty much immediately ignored this. I assumed it was a troll or a joke, not a serious claim in any way. In fact, he doesn't claim they're both the same alignment, he claims they're both Red checks. Now imagine FeFe and Chez are townies. If FeFe and Chez are both Green, and Mafia sees SL, who to them is just some townie, claim he has redchecks on them, why would they shoot him? Who cares, he's some weirdo doing weird things. BUT THATS NOT WHAT HAPPENEd MAFIA SHOT HIM. Which means, when they saw SL say "i have redchecks on FeFe and Chez" they probably started freaking out because fefe and chez are actually mafia. Their Rb, Xat, is dead; so they can't just wait one more day for town to maybe lynch SL, cause then SL will die and leave us THREE checks (remember, they think he's a cop at this point). So they HAVE to shoot him right away even though he's like the top lynch target. Mafia has no reason to rolecheck SL, he was considered suspicious and likely to get lynched. But, if FeFe and Chez ARE IN FACT MAFIA, then Mafia had a REALLY good reason to pay attention to this off-handed statement and freak out and shoot SL! I think that SL crumbed so we'd know he got "same" on FeFe and Chez. But I ALSO think that the way he was shot could only really happen if FeFe and Chez are Mafia and Mafia freaked the fuck out this makes as much or more sense than the rolecop theory now one of FeFe or Chez could still be town here, as an un-self-aware miller; and mafia think "ok, chez/fefe is one of us, but fefe/chez is a miller" and this still confirms, in their minds, that SL is a REGULAR COP with two red checks they couldn't afford to let him live. Not only is this just factually wrong and mafia probably wouldn't be stupid enough to think that SL wouldn't claim with 2 redckecks it is also definitely NOT more likely than the rolecop theory. hmm, do you really think so though, like remembe,r this means MAfia rolecopped SL during N1 or N2. And then, during Day 3, when it was a faceoff between SL, the guy they "know" is Parity cop, and Grack, the guy they think is just some guy, why does the Grack wagon get so much more support than the SL wagon? there were like TWO dudes on SL at the end, but at some point it was very close. I feel mafia would have pushed to get SL lynched right away. on top of that, this innocuous "I have two redchecks" troll remark seems normal to town but to mafia has to be a HUGE red flag when those two redchecks are on two mafia right (remember, mafia didn't know he was parity cop, thought he was regular cop, in this hypothetical)
Doesn't this counter the point you're trying to make?
If they knew he was parity cop, wouldn't they try to vote him out?
|
On June 23 2017 08:27 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2017 08:24 Chezitwo wrote:
Like, BH is painting a world were SL has 2 fucking redchecks and doesn't claim even when he is almost lynched. That is absolutely ridiculous. no the point isn't that he had 2 redchecks. you're literally lying about what I'm sayhing. The point is, SL had a "same" check between you and FeFe. right? I mean, what other crumb is there? it HAS to be that, unless you can find a different crumb? So his "I have redchecks on FeFE and Chez" is his crumbing that he had a SAMECHECK on you guys. But Mafia didn't KNOW that it was a samecheck, mafia thought it was two redchecks
I disagree with this point.
If SL had two redchecks as role cop he would've absolutely claimed already.
So the only reasonable assumption for mafia to make, is either:
1) is that he is a parity cop.
2) he is bluffing.
|
On June 23 2017 08:37 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2017 08:36 ruXxar wrote:On June 23 2017 08:27 Blazinghand wrote:On June 23 2017 08:24 Chezitwo wrote:
Like, BH is painting a world were SL has 2 fucking redchecks and doesn't claim even when he is almost lynched. That is absolutely ridiculous. no the point isn't that he had 2 redchecks. you're literally lying about what I'm sayhing. The point is, SL had a "same" check between you and FeFe. right? I mean, what other crumb is there? it HAS to be that, unless you can find a different crumb? So his "I have redchecks on FeFE and Chez" is his crumbing that he had a SAMECHECK on you guys. But Mafia didn't KNOW that it was a samecheck, mafia thought it was two redchecks I disagree with this point. If SL had two redchecks as role cop he would've absolutely claimed already. So the only reasonable assumption for mafia to make, is either: 1) is that he is a parity cop. 2) he is bluffing. Why would mafia assume "2x redcheck on 2 mafia" -> "parity cop"?
Because "If SL had two redchecks as role cop he would've absolutely claimed already."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
