EPTOn April 17 2011 03:13 chaoser wrote:
this is why rol said to use two browsers -_-
this is why rol said to use two browsers -_-
why did you post in here with your regular name? And if your not in this game, then why are you posting here period?
Experiment Mafia I - Page 5
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
claudius1
28 Posts
why did you post in here with your regular name? And if your not in this game, then why are you posting here period? | ||
|
sleepy1
37 Posts
| ||
|
OriginalName
Canada1140 Posts
On April 17 2011 03:13 chaoser wrote: this is why rol said to use two browsers -_- I was too im just uncoordinated at this kind of thing >_> | ||
|
sleepy1
37 Posts
On April 17 2011 03:13 chaoser wrote: this is why rol said to use two browsers -_- EDIT: I AM OBSERVING, SORRY WILL NOT BE POSTING AGAIN Ok, only smurf accounts should post in this thread, and people, please check your accounts before you post | ||
|
doc1
30 Posts
On April 17 2011 03:17 sleepy1 wrote: Ok, only smurf accounts should post in this thread, and people, please check your accounts before you post Another good way is to disable remember me and make sure to log in on your smurf so if you post as you read as SOME PEOPLE obviously do then your at least on the right account. | ||
|
caligula1
39 Posts
*sigh* | ||
|
augustus1
20 Posts
On April 17 2011 02:44 tiberius1 wrote: SLIP If you didn't have a role, you'd know that not everyone has roles. This theory would never occur to somebody who doesn't have a role. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a blue/scum! Actually it wasn't a slip. I was aware when I typed it that people would make that assumption. I even considered posting Or maybe none of us have roles. Either way it leads to an assumption. Scrolls up and checks account name...... | ||
|
caligula1
39 Posts
On April 17 2011 02:25 augustus1 wrote: I never said you advocated mass claiming. That was asked previously and nobody answered. Was simply the first of two points I was making. The second one was addressed towards you. The only way to win this game is through analysis. Roles are nice and all but we are all blindfolded. Night mechanics will make it very difficult to determine who is doing what. Hell for all we know everybody has a role. No one thinks massclaiming is a good idea and I have no idea why you are laboring the point. About the rest of the argument lets go back to the start: On April 16 2011 22:59 augustus1 wrote: How does a medic "happen"? If you read the OP you will see that the medic is not informed if they do a successful protect. Nor is the person they protected. Actually I'm thinking right now the scum team just outed itself. Happy and Caligula. What is the relevence of the bolded part. I was pointing out that an extra death or one less death would have an impact on when we should use the reveal. You came out of nowhere with this bizarre statement about me not reading the OP. My response was to point out that it will be obvious if the medic protects successfully as no one will die. Then you make this comeback: What? Thats your response? On April 17 2011 00:28 augustus1 wrote: I understand how the roles work I understand how KP works. I also understand how scum like to create pointless arguments on day 1 to fill a game full of bs. Role claiming in this setup at this time makes no sense. Role claiming before being lynched is fine. But it is basically useless information. Medic gets lynched. Medic claims before nightpost. Scum hit vet. Does that verify the medics claim??? Apply that to vig, medic, vet. Any number of scenarios can arise in night actions to make it appear they were telling the truth. It's all WIFOM. If you are a vig and claim your shot before the day post you would be confirmed if there are 2 kills and 1 was your claimed target. If you are cop and post your targeted person before the day post and the day post shows that player you are confirmed. You are also likely dead. For all we know if we had a medic they died 2 days ago. Now throw in a role blocker. Night actions and results can in no way shape or form be used to determine if somebody has truthfully made a role claim. You're scum. ##Vote: Caligula1 See the italicized section? THAT IS ALL SPAM. IT MEANS NOTHING. No one disagrees that mass roleclaiming is bad, but you continue to insist on bringing it up as a relevent part of your argument. Now, give me a proper reason for voting me or unvote. | ||
|
grumpy1
31 Posts
On April 17 2011 02:58 tiberius1 wrote: Ok, lets pretend that my posted that exact post except I didn't say to check myself. Are you still suspicious? personally, I would be because a plan that relies on judging people's relative force of personality in a group that doesn't take into effect your own effect on that group is fucking stupid. A surveying example: If we were measuring the tallest mountains in the world, wouldn't you want to know what elevation you're measuring from? Perhaps you're at sea level, or maybe you're at -1000 sea level. Things like that can seriously screw up surveying. Unless you can actually climb the mountain and measure it yourself (ie rolecheck/killing in a reveal flip game) you need to know precicely where you stand with regards to your target. Same thing goes for this game. If I were to come up with a plan that basically says "Everyone who has tried to post an idea so far is possibly mafia," wouldn't you be suspicious if I didn't acknowledge that I could be the mafia trying to fit in? I'm posting an idea after all. My own plan implicates me by ommission. You should be suspicious of me, since my theory demands that you do so. Now that i've come up with a solid plan and idea this early in the game, the chances of me being mafia have risen dramatically. I'm not, of course, but you have no way of knowing that. By drawing attention to myself in this way I'm forcing you to play it safe, which is the way that you should be playing anyway. I'm not going to let this game devolve into xxxviii. What the hell is all this? You've got an entire essay here that could exist in two sentences. Overreaction much? It's common sense that scum have something to be guilty about. Thus, they tend to feel a need to defend / implicate themselves even when all eyes aren't necessarily scrutinizing their posts. Would I be as suspicious of your post if you didn't implicate yourself? No. Does that matter? No. | ||
|
happy1
83 Posts
On April 16 2011 22:59 augustus1 wrote: How does a medic "happen"? If you read the OP you will see that the medic is not informed if they do a successful protect. Nor is the person they protected. Actually I'm thinking right now the scum team just outed itself. Happy and Caligula. Interesting leap of logic. On April 17 2011 00:28 augustus1 wrote: + Show Spoiler + I understand how the roles work I understand how KP works. I also understand how scum like to create pointless arguments on day 1 to fill a game full of bs. Role claiming in this setup at this time makes no sense. Role claiming before being lynched is fine. But it is basically useless information. Medic gets lynched. Medic claims before nightpost. Scum hit vet. Does that verify the medics claim??? Apply that to vig, medic, vet. Any number of scenarios can arise in night actions to make it appear they were telling the truth. It's all WIFOM. If you are a vig and claim your shot before the day post you would be confirmed if there are 2 kills and 1 was your claimed target. If you are cop and post your targeted person before the day post and the day post shows that player you are confirmed. You are also likely dead. For all we know if we had a medic they died 2 days ago. Now throw in a role blocker. Night actions and results can in no way shape or form be used to determine if somebody has truthfully made a role claim. You're scum. ##Vote: Caligula1 Weak vote imo On April 16 2011 22:48 tiberius1 wrote: Happy, are you advising that we mass claim DESPITE the mod telling us it would be a bad idea? Are you serious? If scum has one roleblocker, they can block medic protection and then kill the cops. Why would you advocate this? It seems to me like an extremely scummy idea. I'm not saying you're scum (yet), but explain what you're trying to say please. ...No, I'm pretty sure I've stated in my first or second post that Mass Claim is idiocy. On April 16 2011 23:35 augustus1 wrote: We do not get a confirmation of alignment. We get a mafia headcount and the alignment of the person we are going to lynch. We can do that once. Say we get a count of 1 back after 3 lynches. We know one person lied. Whoopy. The 2 that didn't lie are just as dead. All we know is we still have 1 scum left. We don't know how many blues or greens are left. That's why I say we should use the ability N2-look at the math I ran. Do you have a better 'optimization'? On April 17 2011 01:53 tiberius1 wrote: ..actually, thinking this through, I'm absolutely wrong. There is no reason for BOTH mafia to come out into the light of day DAY 1. That's just asking for one of them to be lynched, and since theres no reveal theres no reason to do that for cred. Its a free scum lynch for us. Therefore, we can probably assume that there will be no bussing from scum until we decide on a night to reveal mafia count. However, if we were to assume that no mafia has put themselves forward yet this game as a major power player, we'd be idiots. So I think that one of the two of cal/aug (include me to make 3 if you're REALLY unsure) is probably mafia. I guess we got some targets for checks tonight. me/cal/aug Assumptions get you killed. Interesting that you throw yourself in to who you believe is scum. Reasoning behind this? On April 17 2011 02:02 tiberius1 wrote: I guess I'm arguing that mafia isn't horrible and is lurking right now, but I think that in a game RoL is hosting and has so much on the line for, mafia is probably decent players given their % count of the town. I do hope no one decides to engage Lurk Modus. I will make them regret such a decision myself. On April 17 2011 02:44 tiberius1 wrote: SLIP If you didn't have a role, you'd know that not everyone has roles. This theory would never occur to somebody who doesn't have a role. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a blue/scum! Mountain out of a molehill; if you believe its a scumslip where's your vote? On April 17 2011 04:04 caligula1 wrote: + Show Spoiler [Minimized] + On April 17 2011 02:25 augustus1 wrote: I never said you advocated mass claiming. That was asked previously and nobody answered. Was simply the first of two points I was making. The second one was addressed towards you. The only way to win this game is through analysis. Roles are nice and all but we are all blindfolded. Night mechanics will make it very difficult to determine who is doing what. Hell for all we know everybody has a role. No one thinks massclaiming is a good idea and I have no idea why you are laboring the point. About the rest of the argument lets go back to the start: On April 16 2011 22:59 augustus1 wrote: How does a medic "happen"? If you read the OP you will see that the medic is not informed if they do a successful protect. Nor is the person they protected. Actually I'm thinking right now the scum team just outed itself. Happy and Caligula. What is the relevence of the bolded part. I was pointing out that an extra death or one less death would have an impact on when we should use the reveal. You came out of nowhere with this bizarre statement about me not reading the OP. My response was to point out that it will be obvious if the medic protects successfully as no one will die. Then you make this comeback: What? Thats your response? On April 17 2011 00:28 augustus1 wrote: I understand how the roles work I understand how KP works. I also understand how scum like to create pointless arguments on day 1 to fill a game full of bs. Role claiming in this setup at this time makes no sense. Role claiming before being lynched is fine. But it is basically useless information. Medic gets lynched. Medic claims before nightpost. Scum hit vet. Does that verify the medics claim??? Apply that to vig, medic, vet. Any number of scenarios can arise in night actions to make it appear they were telling the truth. It's all WIFOM. If you are a vig and claim your shot before the day post you would be confirmed if there are 2 kills and 1 was your claimed target. If you are cop and post your targeted person before the day post and the day post shows that player you are confirmed. You are also likely dead. For all we know if we had a medic they died 2 days ago. Now throw in a role blocker. Night actions and results can in no way shape or form be used to determine if somebody has truthfully made a role claim. You're scum. ##Vote: Caligula1 See the italicized section? THAT IS ALL SPAM. IT MEANS NOTHING. No one disagrees that mass roleclaiming is bad, but you continue to insist on bringing it up as a relevent part of your argument. Now, give me a proper reason for voting me or unvote. I like this post. Now that we got things rolling, ## Unvote ... ## Vote Sleepy1 Sleepy, why am I voting you? | ||
|
augustus1
20 Posts
On April 17 2011 04:04 caligula1 wrote: No one thinks massclaiming is a good idea and I have no idea why you are laboring the point. About the rest of the argument lets go back to the start: Happy appeared to be. On April 17 2011 04:04 caligula1 wrote:See the italicized section? THAT IS ALL SPAM. IT MEANS NOTHING. No one disagrees that mass roleclaiming is bad, but you continue to insist on bringing it up as a relevent part of your argument. Now, give me a proper reason for voting me or unvote. I'm not the one beating pointless to death you are. If you want to believe that you can make some psychic determination of alignments by claims made by dead people feel free. All of my spam outlines scenarios that prevent any type of real analysis based upon night actions. Of course you don't need to know the alignments of everybody. | ||
|
happy1
83 Posts
On April 17 2011 04:40 augustus1 wrote: No one thinks massclaiming is a good idea and I have no idea why you are laboring the point. About the rest of the argument lets go back to the start: Happy appeared to be. [/QUOTE] Hardly. Reread my posts. | ||
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
On April 16 2011 22:41 caligula1 wrote: happy - that looks sound. Unless vig/medic or something else happens I would agree with that I assume what you mean is that the person being lynched should claim before being lynched. Not that there should be any mass claim. Are we allowed vote for a no lynch? No. There must always be a lynch. | ||
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
| ||
|
tiberius1
55 Posts
On April 17 2011 04:32 grumpy1 wrote: What the hell is all this? You've got an entire essay here that could exist in two sentences. Overreaction much? It's common sense that scum have something to be guilty about. Thus, they tend to feel a need to defend / implicate themselves even when all eyes aren't necessarily scrutinizing their posts. Would I be as suspicious of your post if you didn't implicate yourself? No. Does that matter? No. Just because your playstyle dictates that players that come up with good plans are automatically green doesnt mean that mine does, especially for a plan like mine which is recursive and logically demands that I include myself in it. But whatever, you're acting the most scummy this game. And happy, I wanted to see how he would respond to my calling out his slip. he claimed to have intended it all along, which is somewhat suspicious... if i were a townie and I had posted that i would simply not respond to it since I'd want scum to think that i was blue and waste a kill on me. But not everybody thinks like I do.  However I don't think hes scum because scum, if they ARE lurking/not overly participating (which he is) would absolutely love my idea because it means that town is searching among themselves for scum and we'd be wasting our time. So grumpy is probably town. | ||
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
| ||
|
tiberius1
55 Posts
#vote sneezy1 because he literally hasn't posted yet and I want to apply a little pressure. | ||
|
happy1
83 Posts
augustus1 - 12 Posts (Neutral) tiberius1 - 7 Posts (Don't like the 'calling targets' for power; other than that, Neutral) happy1 - 7 posts (Comissar) caligula1 - 6 Posts (Leaning Town) grumpy1 - 4 posts (Neutral; Mulling over his reaction still. Feel there's something I missed.) bashful1 - 3 posts (Neutral) bashful1 - 3 posts (Neutral) ------------------- dopey1 - 2 posts (Not liking them; bears watching) doc1 - 2 posts (Leaning scum) sleepy1 - 1 post (Possible Lurking in Sight; Post less spam) sneezy1 - 0 Posts claudius1 - 0 Posts Everyone below the line needs to contribute more. Bolded needs to prove they should live. | ||
|
grumpy1
31 Posts
On April 17 2011 04:55 tiberius1 wrote: Just because your playstyle dictates that players that come up with good plans are automatically green doesnt mean that mine does, especially for a plan like mine which is recursive and logically demands that I include myself in it. But whatever, you're acting the most scummy this game. Why am I most scummy? Come at me, bro. All that's been brought against me in particular is that in my first post of the game happy "felt the tone was off". (for the record, I think happy is most likely to be town out of everybody) Your "plan" came down to "here's two players having an argument, we should have a DT (never mind that there might not be a DT, and it'll be hell confirming one) check one of them". Offering yourself up for a check doesn't add anything to your plan and only further confused the issue. Basically, it didn't feel like a plan, it felt like you were suggesting that you should be checked because you strongly suspected two other people, which made no sense at all. | ||
|
sneezy1
17 Posts
everyone not lurking: neutral, leaning town lurkers: leaning scum Shortened your analysis of everyone for you happy. Because sneezy's nice like that. | ||
| ||
