|
+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Guys, really? Okay so I'm pretty much lynched because you people can't take a joke. So I'm leaving this as my legacy: People I think are mafia or atleast seem fishy:Brown BearShow nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? youngminiiShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 21:01 youngminii wrote:
Actually, I'm not going to overlook it. Why would you place a vote on me 'just in case'? Especially after you heard BC say I was a strong player (which citi.zen evidently disagrees with)? You have these two guys criticising my post when it's not even serious, you jump on this bandwagon and then put a placeholder vote on me just in case?
Does this not strike you as scummy at all? Overly scummy but scummy nonetheless? In fact, I think this is the scummiest post I have seen all game (not that long). However, I don't think you're really that bad at this game and even a mediocre scum wouldn't do that kind of mistake. Will need confirmation on other more experienced TL mafia players on your meta. You are entirely too defensive when a person puts a vote on you as a placeholder. Either you are scum or a very nervous blue. You also endorse no lynching on the first day to appear to be "pro-life" and "for the town". I really don't see your reasoning behind this because a random shot in the dark of inactives or suspicious players can in fact nab a red. And if it doesn't you only lose a green because a blue would at least roleclaim or try to join up with trust circles to avoid getting lynched in this manner. (Divided blues that don't make connections are really hindering the town). SiNiquityI had absolutely no evidence against you before but now you are starting to stink of scum at first you took my accusal of you as a joke and brushed it off, but when people started accusing me of being mafia you saw an opportunity and went into action to provide as much evidence as you could find against me by even looking into past games. Then you just completely shut your mouth and is now waiting for the situation to close to start talking again (afraid you'll say something to bring attention to you and me being the perfect scapegoat). Also your previous posts were really try-hard in my opinion. You contributed absolutely nothing by typing up lengthy posts that just summarized what everyone said. Besides that you clarified and discussed some rules of the game and such. You want to make it seem like you are contributing and keep a neutral and non aggressive stance like a reporter so no one would suspect you. This could just be your playstyle but it seems like a very cautious red one to me. LaXerCannonShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:30 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
If we randomly pick someone, we have a better chance of getting a blue then a red. Why don't we try voting for who we think is red? It's not like the game will automatically get easier for us as it goes on, since there aren't any clues. Also, at this point everyone's votes are spread out so we are nearly guaranteed an innocent lynch. Getting everyone to agree to vote for the random could be awfully tough.
IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list). We can take this step further by listing inactives in reverse order and numbering them from 1-X, use a number we obtain from the second paragraph and count through the list, looping when needed. I'm getting carried away here... I think lynching an inactive player is the best course of action. I also think we should get a list of players who are new to this mafia game so we know who they are. A new player who's scum can easily hide under that mask; I think it's best we can monitor them from the get go. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:33 LaXerCannon wrote:
##Abstain in case I can't find it within myself to wake up early tomorrow to post (no other time >_>) Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 11:38 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 10:13 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 09:59 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 09:51 Bill Murray wrote:
EVERYONE abstaining? I guess it'd no lynch. Didn't expect that to happen! Okay so everyone should abstain imo. If you have any objections to this idea, please raise it asap because we need everyone to switch their vote to abstaining. Even one vote = lynch and that will be very suspicious of the person who left their vote by 'accident'. ##Unvote Pyrr
##Vote Abstain I'm not sure I like it. The inactives will get modkilled, no one gets lynched, the mafia kills 2 more people, and then we're back at square one, no? On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS. Bad idea, there's no incentive for town to post -> silent town = dead town Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:13 LaXerCannon wrote:
playoffs are done for today! my next post will be in....around 16-18 hours. First LaxerCannon recommends lynching inactives but then goes ahead and abstains. Then he goes on again about how we should just line up inactives to lynch and doesn't change his vote. Then he vanishes. This is fishy for two reasons. First the obvious contradiction, and second, the effort to try and direct suspicion away from him. He keeps pushing the idea to lynch random inactive people while the town debates over a few suspects and really does nothing but push the town in the wrong direction: not analysing the game but killing off quiet people. Then he talks about playoffs and keeps endorcing random picking ideas. That is wayy too anti-town to be a blue. And if he's green he doesn't care about the game much. ------------------------------------------------------- this is all I have now and hope I at least contributed to the game before I die sorry about trying to have fun guys :/ j/k  ~peace
##Unvote: Hyperbola
Vote: LaXerCannon
blah. I don't want to abstain... but I don't know who to lynch  I vote LaXerCannon because his posts don't have any substance whatsoever. He tries to contribute, but doesn't give any astounding idea. His ideas are based on previous ideas that have been said, and doesn't say anything new. Then he distracts from the conversation.
Either Hyperbola is a mafia member that is trying every attempt to get out, by making false accusations, or he is a townie who make a mistake but is trying to amend it by giving analysis. I tend to lean towards the latter. Plus, Hyperbola is now being active, which is good. If he is a mafia member, his activeness may work against him because he will have to dodge a lot to make it seem like he is a townie. If he is a townie, well, good. An active townie a very very good. Hopefully, I made the right decision...
|
Forgive me, all. I have gotten about halfway through the thread, though I'm being dragged out now by a friend to go watch Inception. My vote will remain upon abstain, as I will not be back until about 3 hours after deadline.
|
On July 19 2010 08:38 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Guys, really? Okay so I'm pretty much lynched because you people can't take a joke. So I'm leaving this as my legacy: People I think are mafia or atleast seem fishy:Brown BearShow nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? youngminiiShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 21:01 youngminii wrote:
Actually, I'm not going to overlook it. Why would you place a vote on me 'just in case'? Especially after you heard BC say I was a strong player (which citi.zen evidently disagrees with)? You have these two guys criticising my post when it's not even serious, you jump on this bandwagon and then put a placeholder vote on me just in case?
Does this not strike you as scummy at all? Overly scummy but scummy nonetheless? In fact, I think this is the scummiest post I have seen all game (not that long). However, I don't think you're really that bad at this game and even a mediocre scum wouldn't do that kind of mistake. Will need confirmation on other more experienced TL mafia players on your meta. You are entirely too defensive when a person puts a vote on you as a placeholder. Either you are scum or a very nervous blue. You also endorse no lynching on the first day to appear to be "pro-life" and "for the town". I really don't see your reasoning behind this because a random shot in the dark of inactives or suspicious players can in fact nab a red. And if it doesn't you only lose a green because a blue would at least roleclaim or try to join up with trust circles to avoid getting lynched in this manner. (Divided blues that don't make connections are really hindering the town). SiNiquityI had absolutely no evidence against you before but now you are starting to stink of scum at first you took my accusal of you as a joke and brushed it off, but when people started accusing me of being mafia you saw an opportunity and went into action to provide as much evidence as you could find against me by even looking into past games. Then you just completely shut your mouth and is now waiting for the situation to close to start talking again (afraid you'll say something to bring attention to you and me being the perfect scapegoat). Also your previous posts were really try-hard in my opinion. You contributed absolutely nothing by typing up lengthy posts that just summarized what everyone said. Besides that you clarified and discussed some rules of the game and such. You want to make it seem like you are contributing and keep a neutral and non aggressive stance like a reporter so no one would suspect you. This could just be your playstyle but it seems like a very cautious red one to me. LaXerCannonShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:30 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
If we randomly pick someone, we have a better chance of getting a blue then a red. Why don't we try voting for who we think is red? It's not like the game will automatically get easier for us as it goes on, since there aren't any clues. Also, at this point everyone's votes are spread out so we are nearly guaranteed an innocent lynch. Getting everyone to agree to vote for the random could be awfully tough.
IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list). We can take this step further by listing inactives in reverse order and numbering them from 1-X, use a number we obtain from the second paragraph and count through the list, looping when needed. I'm getting carried away here... I think lynching an inactive player is the best course of action. I also think we should get a list of players who are new to this mafia game so we know who they are. A new player who's scum can easily hide under that mask; I think it's best we can monitor them from the get go. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:33 LaXerCannon wrote:
##Abstain in case I can't find it within myself to wake up early tomorrow to post (no other time >_>) Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 11:38 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 10:13 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 09:59 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 09:51 Bill Murray wrote:
EVERYONE abstaining? I guess it'd no lynch. Didn't expect that to happen! Okay so everyone should abstain imo. If you have any objections to this idea, please raise it asap because we need everyone to switch their vote to abstaining. Even one vote = lynch and that will be very suspicious of the person who left their vote by 'accident'. ##Unvote Pyrr
##Vote Abstain I'm not sure I like it. The inactives will get modkilled, no one gets lynched, the mafia kills 2 more people, and then we're back at square one, no? On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS. Bad idea, there's no incentive for town to post -> silent town = dead town Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:13 LaXerCannon wrote:
playoffs are done for today! my next post will be in....around 16-18 hours. First LaxerCannon recommends lynching inactives but then goes ahead and abstains. Then he goes on again about how we should just line up inactives to lynch and doesn't change his vote. Then he vanishes. This is fishy for two reasons. First the obvious contradiction, and second, the effort to try and direct suspicion away from him. He keeps pushing the idea to lynch random inactive people while the town debates over a few suspects and really does nothing but push the town in the wrong direction: not analysing the game but killing off quiet people. Then he talks about playoffs and keeps endorcing random picking ideas. That is wayy too anti-town to be a blue. And if he's green he doesn't care about the game much. ------------------------------------------------------- this is all I have now and hope I at least contributed to the game before I die sorry about trying to have fun guys :/ j/k ~peace
Vote: LaXerCannonblah. I don't want to abstain... but I don't know who to lynch I vote LaXerCannon because his posts don't have any substance whatsoever. He tries to contribute, but doesn't give any astounding idea. His ideas are based on previous ideas that have been said, and doesn't say anything new. Then he distracts from the conversation. Either Hyperbola is a mafia member that is trying every attempt to get out, by making false accusations, or he is a townie who make a mistake but is trying to amend it by giving analysis. I tend to lean towards the latter. Plus, Hyperbola is now being active, which is good. If he is a mafia member, his activeness may work against him because he will have to dodge a lot to make it seem like he is a townie. If he is a townie, well, good. An active townie a very very good. Hopefully, I made the right decision...
Haha, know what you mean. I'm torn too. However, I'm leaning towards trying to get out by "showing a last act of goodness" to convince others he wasn't mafia all along. All I know is that if he isn't mafia I'm going to be a sad panda.
|
##unvote hyperbola
##abstain
incase i forget to unvote hyperbola like i promised
|
On July 19 2010 08:43 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 08:38 Misder wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Guys, really? Okay so I'm pretty much lynched because you people can't take a joke. So I'm leaving this as my legacy: People I think are mafia or atleast seem fishy:Brown BearShow nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? youngminiiShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 21:01 youngminii wrote:
Actually, I'm not going to overlook it. Why would you place a vote on me 'just in case'? Especially after you heard BC say I was a strong player (which citi.zen evidently disagrees with)? You have these two guys criticising my post when it's not even serious, you jump on this bandwagon and then put a placeholder vote on me just in case?
Does this not strike you as scummy at all? Overly scummy but scummy nonetheless? In fact, I think this is the scummiest post I have seen all game (not that long). However, I don't think you're really that bad at this game and even a mediocre scum wouldn't do that kind of mistake. Will need confirmation on other more experienced TL mafia players on your meta. You are entirely too defensive when a person puts a vote on you as a placeholder. Either you are scum or a very nervous blue. You also endorse no lynching on the first day to appear to be "pro-life" and "for the town". I really don't see your reasoning behind this because a random shot in the dark of inactives or suspicious players can in fact nab a red. And if it doesn't you only lose a green because a blue would at least roleclaim or try to join up with trust circles to avoid getting lynched in this manner. (Divided blues that don't make connections are really hindering the town). SiNiquityI had absolutely no evidence against you before but now you are starting to stink of scum at first you took my accusal of you as a joke and brushed it off, but when people started accusing me of being mafia you saw an opportunity and went into action to provide as much evidence as you could find against me by even looking into past games. Then you just completely shut your mouth and is now waiting for the situation to close to start talking again (afraid you'll say something to bring attention to you and me being the perfect scapegoat). Also your previous posts were really try-hard in my opinion. You contributed absolutely nothing by typing up lengthy posts that just summarized what everyone said. Besides that you clarified and discussed some rules of the game and such. You want to make it seem like you are contributing and keep a neutral and non aggressive stance like a reporter so no one would suspect you. This could just be your playstyle but it seems like a very cautious red one to me. LaXerCannonShow nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:30 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 09:04 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
If we randomly pick someone, we have a better chance of getting a blue then a red. Why don't we try voting for who we think is red? It's not like the game will automatically get easier for us as it goes on, since there aren't any clues. Also, at this point everyone's votes are spread out so we are nearly guaranteed an innocent lynch. Getting everyone to agree to vote for the random could be awfully tough.
IF we wanted to do the random thing, we could tie it in advance to something numerical in one or both of the playoff games tonight. Like number of factories made by WeMade players, or that number divided by two, or taking the number of letters in each winning player's ID and looping back to 1 if it goes over 30. It wouldn't be random, but we could independently agree on it, and none of us could influence it in advance. We don't know the distribution of red/blue/green in the list so it is almost as good as random unless the reds get us to agree on a bad number (like maybe they get us to agree on something times 2, which would never land on the first person on the list). We can take this step further by listing inactives in reverse order and numbering them from 1-X, use a number we obtain from the second paragraph and count through the list, looping when needed. I'm getting carried away here... I think lynching an inactive player is the best course of action. I also think we should get a list of players who are new to this mafia game so we know who they are. A new player who's scum can easily hide under that mask; I think it's best we can monitor them from the get go. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 09:33 LaXerCannon wrote:
##Abstain in case I can't find it within myself to wake up early tomorrow to post (no other time >_>) Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 11:38 LaXerCannon wrote:On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 10:13 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 09:59 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 09:51 Bill Murray wrote:
EVERYONE abstaining? I guess it'd no lynch. Didn't expect that to happen! Okay so everyone should abstain imo. If you have any objections to this idea, please raise it asap because we need everyone to switch their vote to abstaining. Even one vote = lynch and that will be very suspicious of the person who left their vote by 'accident'. ##Unvote Pyrr
##Vote Abstain I'm not sure I like it. The inactives will get modkilled, no one gets lynched, the mafia kills 2 more people, and then we're back at square one, no? On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS. Bad idea, there's no incentive for town to post -> silent town = dead town Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:13 LaXerCannon wrote:
playoffs are done for today! my next post will be in....around 16-18 hours. First LaxerCannon recommends lynching inactives but then goes ahead and abstains. Then he goes on again about how we should just line up inactives to lynch and doesn't change his vote. Then he vanishes. This is fishy for two reasons. First the obvious contradiction, and second, the effort to try and direct suspicion away from him. He keeps pushing the idea to lynch random inactive people while the town debates over a few suspects and really does nothing but push the town in the wrong direction: not analysing the game but killing off quiet people. Then he talks about playoffs and keeps endorcing random picking ideas. That is wayy too anti-town to be a blue. And if he's green he doesn't care about the game much. ------------------------------------------------------- this is all I have now and hope I at least contributed to the game before I die sorry about trying to have fun guys :/ j/k ~peace
Vote: LaXerCannonblah. I don't want to abstain... but I don't know who to lynch I vote LaXerCannon because his posts don't have any substance whatsoever. He tries to contribute, but doesn't give any astounding idea. His ideas are based on previous ideas that have been said, and doesn't say anything new. Then he distracts from the conversation. Either Hyperbola is a mafia member that is trying every attempt to get out, by making false accusations, or he is a townie who make a mistake but is trying to amend it by giving analysis. I tend to lean towards the latter. Plus, Hyperbola is now being active, which is good. If he is a mafia member, his activeness may work against him because he will have to dodge a lot to make it seem like he is a townie. If he is a townie, well, good. An active townie a very very good. Hopefully, I made the right decision... Haha, know what you mean. I'm torn too. However, I'm leaning towards trying to get out by "showing a last act of goodness" to convince others he wasn't mafia all along. All I know is that if he isn't mafia I'm going to be a sad panda.
dont feel too sad sometimes people have to learn to not play bad the hard way, but we shall see
|
Hmmm whats the vote count as of now?
|
On July 19 2010 08:36 BrownBear wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 08:08 Hyperbola wrote:Brown BearOn July 19 2010 06:29 BrownBear wrote:
Ahhhh shti!
I am back, sorry. Is it too late to avoid modkill? On July 19 2010 06:30 BrownBear wrote:
###Vote: Hyperbola On July 19 2010 06:31 BrownBear wrote:
Whew, looks like I got back in time. Sorry about that. Time to go read the thread. Really dude? Jumping on a bandwagon before even reading the thread? My bad, didn't realize you could abstain. Should have done that, but at this point it's not like it really matters :/
So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious?
|
##Vote: Hyperbola
Not really convinced by him, and there's not really any other clear choice for me right now.
|
On July 19 2010 08:25 Foolishness wrote:
Switching my Vote from abstain:
##Vote BloodyCobbler
Just based on bad vibes so far. I am busy irl the past few days, but I will be active permanently by the first night for the rest of the game. If the first night goes by and I haven't made an active contribution feel free to hold me accountable.
The most interesting development thus far. Can't say I disagree but would be very uncomfortable voting for him purely on day one "vibes".
|
My take on this is we should take it easy Day 1 and just individually take note of inactives/suspicious individuals until we get our power roles in action tonight. Sure we may end up lynching one of the Reds and it does indeed help to lynch scummy players in order to lessen the number suspects in a future lynch but Random Lynching on Day 1 also allows Reds to gain a foothold in swaying the opinions of players in a future 50/50 situation (ex: Player X is active since Day 1 and seems to be pro-town but is in actuality a mafia. Both him and a Player Y, a cop, counter-claim each other with conflicting reports several days later and the town is given a 50/50 shot at lynching the right person but the other cop hasn't been speaking as much in fear of revealing the fact that he is a cop to the mafia through unintentional, implicit clues. The rest of the village trusts Player X because he seems to be more Pro-Town than Player Y.) and we risk the possibility of lynching one of our power roles early on. Just my 2 cents on why I voted to abstain from lynching.
|
|
|
Vote Count:
6] Hyperbola (Divinek, Pandain, SiNiquity, bumatlarge, BB, Subversion)
4] YoungMinii (XeliN, Amber[LighT, Roffles, Infizzleundibulumizzle)
2] DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, Pyrrhuloxia)
2] ketomai (citi.zen, lakrismamma)
2] Amber[LighT] (jayme, DarthThienAn),
2[ BloodyC0bbler (~OpZ, Foolishness)
2] LaXerCannon (Misder, citi.zen)
1] citi.zen (rastaban)
1] SiNiquity (Hyperbola)
1] Pandain (BC)
1] Infundibulum (youngminii)
5] abstain (LaXerCannon, tricode, SouthRawrea, Chaoser, protactinium, zeks)
Not voting and in risk of modkill: NOONE!!!!!
|
yes i think all the people who abstained, or kept their 'placeholder' votes should have to justify not choosing someone with any conviction
|
if youre wondering about infizzle check my quizzle under my nizzle
i have no idea what role hyperbola was, so i'll have to flip when i get home. i'll do a death post then, too. it is night, have fun pming,
don't post in the thread for 24 hours from 9pm EST . it is twilight until i do the death post, so have fun until then , then enter into pm land (if you want).
have a nice night fellas.
|
On July 19 2010 09:59 SouthRawrea wrote:
My take on this is we should take it easy Day 1 and just individually take note of inactives/suspicious individuals until we get our power roles in action tonight. Sure we may end up lynching one of the Reds and it does indeed help to lynch scummy players in order to lessen the number suspects in a future lynch but Random Lynching on Day 1 also allows Reds to gain a foothold in swaying the opinions of players in a future 50/50 situation (ex: Player X is active since Day 1 and seems to be pro-town but is in actuality a mafia. Both him and a Player Y, a cop, counter-claim each other with conflicting reports several days later and the town is given a 50/50 shot at lynching the right person but the other cop hasn't been speaking as much in fear of revealing the fact that he is a cop to the mafia through unintentional, implicit clues. The rest of the village trusts Player X because he seems to be more Pro-Town than Player Y.) and we risk the possibility of lynching one of our power roles early on. Just my 2 cents on why I voted to abstain from lynching.
it has been beaten to death why lynching someone is better than not lynching them. Your scenario doesnt entirely make sense as to why you would abstain though. Abstain or not someone can be active and be able to influence others. The only real power role we have to 'unleash' on night one is one random dt check and it's not like he's gonna come out and claim on day 2, so what should we all not vote on day 2 as well? Someone could gain this foothold you speak of on day 2 as well. Though i dont really see how that can be affected by your abstaining...I think you not voting hurts more than anything because people arent being forced to do anything. I just dont see where you're going with this at all.
But you must vote for someone so we know what you really feel. Abstaining gives almost no information when voting habits can be so crucial in finding information.
|
oh shit sorry didnt realise we werent allowed to talk at night please dont bring out the hose again
|
On July 18 2010 21:46 youngminii wrote:
There was only one thing that they did point out and that's the only thing that was directed at me, hence I responded to it.
Obvious blue advice? Really? Do you honestly believe that all 30 people in this thread know exactly how to play blue? Do you really think that each and every new person in here knows how to play their role perfectly? So in the case of all 30 people knowing the exact way to play without any discussions as to any plans we should just leave it at that and not discuss our options? You can't be that stupid, I refuse to believe it.
Obvious blue advice:
Just for some pre-emptive planning for the night: DTs check 'good' players, especially players that are unlikely to go inactive. Medics should protect whoever they want, generally you'd want to protect the person that seems the most towny and frequently posts. Of course, if you feel that you should be doing something else, you should trust your instincts.
I do not believe all 30 people in this game are perfect blue players, but then again most people aren't. On top of this, I never suggested such a scenario in the first place and you are putting words in my mouth. The question is why are you resorting to such arguing tactics? Do you need to make up my arguments for me so that you can counter them? I echoed citizen's previous statement that your blue "advice" is completely useless. There is a lot to learn about playing as a blue, but nothing in that bit of text offers anything new to anybody here. Seriously.
Also, what already answered questions? Back up your statements with evidence please.
I admit that here I was echoing citizen without reading back in the thread to see if he was correct. It looks lie this is a non-issue. you did ask about stuff that was clearly visible in the rules, but you also said you were tired and i miss stuff in the rules all the time so can't fault you on that. charge cleared.
How is telling the town to abstain not a good idea? I'm willing to accept criticism of my ideas, but I'm not willing to just sit back and watch as someone comes in, votes for me as a placeholder in case a bandwagon is formed on me (which I suppose is pre-emptive bandwagoning) and then says my ideas are not good. Information Instead of Analysis. In fact, IIoA is a big scumtell in my experiences in other mafia sites (not sure about TL since this site is actually quite a lot different).
Myself and several others have already explained the faulty logic of no lynch day 1. Basically, the crux of the argument is this: The Town does not have the luxury of time. This argument was also the basis of my criticism of the dt check-down-the-list plan. And i didn't try to start a bandwagon on you, if you would the kindly note the lack of persuasive language and overall tentative tone of that initial post i made, which was mostly about other players and not you specifically. Despite this, you've gone to considerable lengths to defend yourself from my single vote, which i thin at least 1 other player has pointed out.
And maybe i'm misunderstanding the term, but what does IIOA have to do with this?
I never said citi.zen said I was good. In fact, I implied citi.zen said I was quite bad. I don't critique citi.zen's play because as far as I can tell, people seem to believe his meta is good but if he continues to critique me, so be it. I don't care.
Citizen said you were good and that the mistakes in your post were unbecoming of your play style. You thought he was saying you are bad; i was correcting this.
Your 'just in case' is the same as bandwagoning, except you're doing it early. You think there might be a chance that people will start voting for me so you put your vote on me 'just in case'. Biggest hidden form of bandwagoning imo.
I had already said i'd be gone all day. Why would I vote for a player who i was sure wouldn't be lynched (like, say, Roffles)? I want my vote to count. Otherwise I might as well abstain, and I think i've made clear my feelings on abstaining.
My conclusion: You're either a really bad scum, really bad townie, or a fucking bad blue.
Cut the bullshit. I'm here to play mafia, not to read other players post "LOL UR BAD"
|
We are allowed to talk its not night yet its only twilight.
|
oh shit, sorry
*goes to bed*
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
On July 19 2010 10:12 Bill Murray wrote:
if youre wondering about infizzle check my quizzle under my nizzle
i have no idea what role hyperbola was, so i'll have to flip when i get home. i'll do a death post then, too. it is night, have fun pming,
don't post in the thread for 24 hours from 9pm EST . it is twilight until i do the death post, so have fun until then , then enter into pm land (if you want).
have a nice night fellas.
You should make a mention of that in the OP. Nowhere in there does it say that the thread is to be silent at night.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
