|
United States4714 Posts
I won't deny your point about red/nisani. Their arguments and reasons they used to vote for you are not good. However I make no apologies for my reasons for voting for you. In my experience when playing against extremely good mafia players one of the main tactics they use is to lead the town away from productive scum hunting. I mean you are really think 10 pages of you/syllo/sandroba/curu arguing game mechanics helped the town? Did you learn much about their possible alignments from it?
It appears to me that the last 3 pages where people began actually voting and giving their reasons has given us 50x the information that your 8 hour argument did.
|
United States720 Posts
Actually I am so blind.
On July 26 2011 11:15 deconduo wrote:
All alignments, including any possible godfathers, were RNGd/assigned by me and eiii. If mafia have godfathers they were pre-determined.
My vote is clear.
##Vote: jackal58
|
On July 26 2011 11:54 Mig wrote:
And BC I fully understand your reasoning behind your arguments. I don't care that much about them. What I care about is why it wasn't obvious to you after a few pages that the discussion was just going in circles. So instead of ending it so the town could discuss more productive things you continued the pointless argument. As far as I am concerned you took away 8 hours that the town could have been using to actually look at potential suspects.
because the more you argue the more likely someone if they are scum will slip up? That is a fairly common tactic used to lure people out. Also factor in people were actually seeing merit in some of my points near the end when no one saw merit in them originally. Also, no one raised a better subject. People wanted to tunnel kita or jackal, but it all stemmed at that point from how to use a dt's check. That was unproductive as well. It was actually a topic in which mafia could easily blend in, instead a topic that is not easy to blend in was pushed and people had to voice actual opinions on it.
Look at the people pushing to lynch me? Redff used arguments I HAVE ALREADY REFUTED as his logical grounds for lynching. Yet he still wrote a giant block of text of shite i've already debunked. Awesome.
You are also pushing that I die based on an assumption our dt is legit. So was red, wait, how would you actually know hes a town aligned dt? extra information that you have eh? nice to know.
How about inform the town how you know the actual alignment of SS and then we progress forward. Before you deny your claim of it.
On July 26 2011 10:17 Mig wrote:
C) Pushed hard for our dt, that killed a scum, to not use his checks. We obviously shouldn't blindly follow the checks but there is very little downside to at least having him check people. Even if we don't act on them, it can serve as an amazing breadcrumb. If supersoft dies and flips town we would know all his checks were true. Incredibly anti town to not at the very least have SS use his checks.
##vote BloodyC0bbler
As for who SS should check, BC should 100% not be checked. If he is mafia he is 99% the GF. So the next best candidate for a check is kita.
|
United States4714 Posts
If you want to lynch me because I said our dt instead of the dt go ahead lol.
|
On July 26 2011 12:02 Mig wrote:
I won't deny your point about red/nisani. Their arguments and reasons they used to vote for you are not good. However I make no apologies for my reasons for voting for you. In my experience when playing against extremely good mafia players one of the main tactics they use is to lead the town away from productive scum hunting. I mean you are really think 10 pages of you/syllo/sandroba/curu arguing game mechanics helped the town? Did you learn much about their possible alignments from it?
It appears to me that the last 3 pages where people began actually voting and giving their reasons has given us 50x the information that your 8 hour argument did.
I lead them away from productive scum hunting? There was none. Stop bullshiting. You also completely ignored the fact post restrictions were brought up by me, you also failed to mention how next to no one was even discussing the potential possibility of SS being non town, you fail to mention how other members showed similar issues near the end of the argument. Those people may still believe its better to use the dt but you get the point. Positive discussion was generated that you are now trying to downplay. Also the most recent 3 pages gave information on you, red, nisani and SS. The 8 hour discussion gave information on everyone who participated. Perhaps you should learn to read every post rather than skimming and concentrating only where you participate. All the last few pages have done is throw dirt at 4 people.
|
On July 26 2011 12:07 Mig wrote:
If you want to lynch me because I said our dt instead of the dt go ahead lol.
I am actually throwing a FoS at you for using it. It is actually a common mistake for people who have extra information to infer it in a manner such as you did. As it is more natural to type "our dt" if you know his alignment.
|
United States4714 Posts
What information did you gather about the alignments of the people you argued with? I would like to hear it.
The discussion we are having now is productive. Arguing actual cases against people makes them take sides, generates connections and forces people to come up with actual reasoning and analysis behind their cases. Anyone regardless of alignment can argue game mechanics. I read all 10 pages of the discussion and I took very little of value away from it.
On July 26 2011 12:09 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
I am actually throwing a FoS at you for using it. It is actually a common mistake for people who have extra information to infer it in a manner such as you did. As it is more natural to type "our dt" if you know his alignment.
It is also a common mistake for people who don't know alignments but are simply biased about what alignment they think the person is to make. But if you want to make a case against me based on me using the word "our" instead of "the" instead of actually analyzing whether I am mafia from my motivations and posts go ahead.
|
On July 26 2011 12:16 Mig wrote:What information did you gather about the alignments of the people you argued with? I would like to hear it. The discussion we are having now is productive. Arguing actual cases against people makes them take sides, generates connections and forces people to come up with actual reasoning and analysis behind their cases. Anyone regardless of alignment can argue game mechanics. I read all 10 pages of the discussion and I took very little of value away from it. Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:09 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
I am actually throwing a FoS at you for using it. It is actually a common mistake for people who have extra information to infer it in a manner such as you did. As it is more natural to type "our dt" if you know his alignment. It is also a common mistake for people who don't know alignments but are simply biased about what alignment they think the person is to make. But if you want to make a case against me based on me using the word "our" instead of "the" instead of actually analyzing whether I am mafia from my motivations and posts go ahead.
You can want to hear many things. Until I decide to make a case against them or not you won't get it. This isn't some magical pm game where I can bounce ideas off someone and it not leave that environment. Any thought put in the thread can be potentially used to screw someone unjustly later. So until I find someone scummy enough to pursue my thoughts will stay with me.
As for common mistake? Its human nature to use words that infer information you do or don't have. You opted for one that suggested insight to someones role. I am sure you will be more careful in the future.
|
BC start quoting with SS then so he can inspect you.
|
United States4714 Posts
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him.
|
On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him.
Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them?
I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names.
|
On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him. Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them? I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names.
Are you serious? What more against Jackal do you need?
|
On July 26 2011 12:50 Amber[LighT] wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him. Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them? I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names. Are you serious? What more against Jackal do you need?
Him defending himself to be honest. I'm kinda tired of seeing others do it for him.
|
United States4714 Posts
On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them?
I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names.
I am not asking you to give me your town reads or slight scum reads. I asked how anyone was supposed to know you were town. When you spend all of your time A) defending yourself and B) talking game mechanics it seems like you are playing a very self oriented game. You have taken a stand on no one. And apparently there isn't a single person in the game you feel is suspicious enough to warrant an analysis. Yet despite these things you claimed it was very obvious that you were town.
I could have placed my vote on you and then disappeared. I am discussing with you because I am gathering information to hopefully make the best decision possible. Right now I don't see anything that makes me want to put my vote onto someone else.
I will agree it is shady that no one else is commenting though. Amber/kita/etc surely someone else out there must have an opinion.
|
On July 26 2011 13:01 Mig wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them?
I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names. I am not asking you to give me your town reads or slight scum reads. I asked how anyone was supposed to know you were town. When you spend all of your time A) defending yourself and B) talking game mechanics it seems like you are playing a very self oriented game. You have taken a stand on no one. And apparently there isn't a single person in the game you feel is suspicious enough to warrant an analysis. Yet despite these things you claimed it was very obvious that you were town. I could have placed my vote on you and then disappeared. I am discussing with you because I am gathering information to hopefully make the best decision possible. Right now I don't see anything that makes me want to put my vote onto someone else. I will agree it is shady that no one else is commenting though. Amber/kita/etc surely someone else out there must have an opinion.
I say its obvious as my town play is very unique and fairly obvious. Go compare it to almost every game I've been town. I am not here to explain my role to people. It is obvious. I am not being obtuse, I am not shutting down conversation. I am embracing it and being fairly open. As i said to curu either. If you intend to push someone to their death you better be damn sure of your convictions. If town misslynches its on the first few people who really pushed it on that misslynch. I am not about to sit here and go "so and so is scummy for lurking" when almost everyone is doing it.
Also, very self oriented game? I have done nothing but try and push what I view is the best course of action. And rather than just push it, I explain it. Yep sounds very mafia like.
|
On July 26 2011 12:54 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:50 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him. Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them? I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names. Are you serious? What more against Jackal do you need? Him defending himself to be honest. I'm kinda tired of seeing others do it for him.
How does Jackal defend himself from his role PM though? That's what I don't get. Unless there's another reason to be voting for him, or you really think he faked parts of it.
Care to explain your stance on him a little bit for me?
|
On July 26 2011 06:14 supersoft wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 06:05 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 06:03 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:56 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:51 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:44 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:40 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:33 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:27 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 04:58 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
[quote]
use a dt check on SS first. Don't trust someone whos suspect to give real feedback. Make him earn his damn check. You do not reward roleclaimers ffs. How contradictory. You think that having SS use his rolecheck is rewarding him (not town, just him) for roleclaiming, but then say we should wait for another DT to check supersoft to confirm him as town or not. Here's how that fails: -Framers -Fake DT claim to take out Day DT -Continual Role block after today on SS -Having to have an actual DT claim to confirm him So, you don't want to reward roleclaimers, but then want another DT to claim to confirm a known DT, who's alignment is unknown? That makes no sense at all. The best thing to do, is to use his check, and have him announce his result to town. The catch is we don't act just based on his check. We can check a lynch candidate if we want, but that gets dangerous if he's scum, though another 1-1 trade wouldn't be that bad. The other thing we do is check someone suspicious, who isn't necessarily getting lynched today and having him announce his check, and just leave it until we can confirm him. Then if he gets popped, we know all his checks and results, and if we can act on them, and if he gets confirmed another way, well we know all his results too. I'd actually suggest checking you or DB, and then leaving it for now. As well, why would we check people asking to be checked, and why would anyone be dumb enough to ask for a DT check on them without already being suspicious anyways? If they're asking to be checked, they're town or a covered role. Town wouldn't want to waste a DT check on themselves, as compared to suspicious people. Use the tool to hunt mafia, not to confirm town. An innocent check doesn't prove innocence, but the only way we're getting a red check back at this point is millers or a day-framer. Day 1 has the least chance of anything interfering with the check, and is the best time to use it. I'd rather have 1 check in, than have none and SS gets shot tonight. Check the bolded part. In almost every case of someone asking or begging for a dt check they are town or covered role. Most people do this to confirm themselves and thus starting a blue circle that can rofl stomp mafia. It is very common practice for people to want to be cleared as to move through a game with 0 harassment from anyone. No mafia would willingly throw himself up for a dt check as it would screw him in the end. You say no townie would want it used on them, but that would again, leave you a pool of 0 people to check. you are then down to the idea of "we want you checked you let yourself get checked or lynched" which is a horrible way to play. Seriously, you all are talking about role use being the huge factor in catching people. I now say, everyone go back read pick your power 3 and realize playing lets analyze roles, or someones role means they are legit, etc.... and realize roles do not say shit about the players alignment. Who cares if SS's check is an alignment check if you don't know his alignment. Have a watcher/tracker check him. If he visits anyone at night at this point in time he is mafia. have a dt check him. Dt's could breadcrumb results, or the like. Seriously, before a plan is proposed you sort it out, you make it ideal, you account for multiple situations. So far the only situation proposed by you lot is SS is likely town for shooting a red. Likely town does not mean town. What? So, instead of using a check, and just leaving it, until we have a second DT out themselves or breadcrumb and die, you're saying never use the check? Did I understand that correctly? Please tell me how what you're trying to say is optimal play. How is not having a check better than having one? The only situation proposed by you, is that we don't use the check at all. That's asking a claimed and outed DT to not check people or reveal his checks, until another DT checks him. In what world does that make sense? Ask yourself how you would play this out in a normal game. If a DT claimed, would you ask him to not check anyone until another DT checked him and claimed it? That sounds really dumb to me. In a normal game, on day 1, if someone claimed dt and said x was red, I would kill the dt first. Every time. In a setup where mafia, third parties, or town can be a dt, I will never trust the claimant ever on day 1. Nor should anyone else. Ok, so where's the part where we're trusting him by having him use a check on an agreed upon target? That's what I'm wondering about. You're saying that by letting him check, we're implicitly trusting him to be town, but that is not the case. We can let him sit in unconfirmed limbo for now, but why not use his check? It doesn't hurt us to use his check, the same way that killing the DT actually tells us whether the check is true or not. By giving him a check we give legitmacy over time to his supposed alignment. Say he is mafia, he checks kita, kita flips town, he gives us a town. That makes him look better as he complied to the check. Say both kita and SS are red, he says kita is town it still gives both a look of legitmacy. One for complying for the check. Its subtle and its insidious. Someone who is not confirmed you do not let slowly insinuate they are. Had you guys outlined you planned on trusting his check with a grain of salt I would be less worried than i am now. Of course we'd take it with a grain of salt, I'm taking everything in this game with a grain of salt, because if I trusted everything I read, I'd be pretty silly. That's also why I'm saying we can also check people who aren't major lynch targets yet, and then just ignore the results until someone else confirms SS, he gets shot by mafia, or we even flip him ourselves with a vig. Now I am seeing the first person with some sense -_-. Wiggles, go back and originally read the use of his role and you will see NO ONE advocated what you did just now. You will see it otherwise and should realize my discontent. What you just proposed is more cautious than everything else in relation to using his role to this point. hey bc, wanna check?
Bc ignored this post.
On July 26 2011 06:42 BloodyC0bbler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 06:38 Curu wrote:
You don't know if he suffered his penalty or not Wiggles. It might just be he's roleblocked for tonight, who knows.
BC, would you submit to having supersoft check you? Nope. As much as being confirmed town benefits town as a whole, it gets me shot by third party / mafia or some asshole townie who thinks they are being a hero. Instead I will risk getting shot anyway, but the likelyhood of a third party shot or red goes down whereas the option of a townie shooting me is higher. Any med with half a brain will realize I have been trying to make people think and not be stupid and might protect me.
Then posts this.
K so if he inspects you you will be confirmed town, but increases the chance to be shot at by scum/blacks. Then you say that you would like medic protection, surely if you are confirmed town you are more likely to get medic protection? Quote supersoft so you can be alignment checked. If you keep ignoring this issue then i will get you lynched.
|
On July 26 2011 13:21 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 12:54 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 12:50 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 26 2011 12:46 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 12:37 Mig wrote:
So right now the only thing anyone knows about you is that you want jackal lynched based on role flavor, you like to argue game mechanics and you do not want SS to check you. You said several times in the 10 page argument that it should be obvious that you are town. How exactly can anyone know you are town? You haven't done an analysis on a single person the entire game. And now that I ask for information you deny it, claiming you will make a case against someone once you find one scummy enough. You are more than willing to spend a lot of time defending yourself but I don't see you doing any scum hunting or even discussing any of jackal's recent behavior or the arguments people like syllo made defending him. Did you not notice how i mentioned earlier I was willing to swap to someone I felt better about but hadn't yet? No that would require you reading my posts. However, the game is about catching scum, not about someone giving their opinion on who feels more town than another player, or who feels slightly scummier than x. Without more information its like randomly drawing a bad choice from a selection of meh choices. How many people in this game are even talking? How many are even weighing in on the conversation at hand, who has outright dodged comments directed at them? I am fairly transparent where it matters. The game is not lets find townies, its lets find red. As of now I don't have any strong enough reads to properly push a lynch target. This is an issue that has been stated multiple times by multiple people. You only list off people you are confident enough at the time to lynch, not randomly spout names. Are you serious? What more against Jackal do you need? Him defending himself to be honest. I'm kinda tired of seeing others do it for him. How does Jackal defend himself from his role PM though? That's what I don't get. Unless there's another reason to be voting for him, or you really think he faked parts of it. Care to explain your stance on him a little bit for me?
How about he posts? instead of lurk insanely hard he could be doing anything productive.
As for the stance, it seems very odd to call out a player (he called out ON) for lying based on his role pm. His stance was one of "he is lying my pm says he is disguised as town" which would infer red. That entire claim got ON killed. He flipped town. Jackal then vanished into unknown land. Someone got shot over this entire situation yet the people who ask questions or FoS the guy responsible are getting questioned more heavily than the person responsible. TL towns are awesome.
|
On July 26 2011 13:28 redFF wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 06:14 supersoft wrote:On July 26 2011 06:05 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 06:03 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:56 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:51 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:44 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:40 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On July 26 2011 05:33 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 05:27 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
[quote]
How contradictory. You think that having SS use his rolecheck is rewarding him (not town, just him) for roleclaiming, but then say we should wait for another DT to check supersoft to confirm him as town or not. Here's how that fails:
-Framers
-Fake DT claim to take out Day DT
-Continual Role block after today on SS
-Having to have an actual DT claim to confirm him
So, you don't want to reward roleclaimers, but then want another DT to claim to confirm a known DT, who's alignment is unknown? That makes no sense at all.
The best thing to do, is to use his check, and have him announce his result to town. The catch is we don't act just based on his check. We can check a lynch candidate if we want, but that gets dangerous if he's scum, though another 1-1 trade wouldn't be that bad. The other thing we do is check someone suspicious, who isn't necessarily getting lynched today and having him announce his check, and just leave it until we can confirm him. Then if he gets popped, we know all his checks and results, and if we can act on them, and if he gets confirmed another way, well we know all his results too.
I'd actually suggest checking you or DB, and then leaving it for now.
As well, why would we check people asking to be checked, and why would anyone be dumb enough to ask for a DT check on them without already being suspicious anyways? If they're asking to be checked, they're town or a covered role. Town wouldn't want to waste a DT check on themselves, as compared to suspicious people. Use the tool to hunt mafia, not to confirm town. An innocent check doesn't prove innocence, but the only way we're getting a red check back at this point is millers or a day-framer. Day 1 has the least chance of anything interfering with the check, and is the best time to use it. I'd rather have 1 check in, than have none and SS gets shot tonight. Check the bolded part. In almost every case of someone asking or begging for a dt check they are town or covered role. Most people do this to confirm themselves and thus starting a blue circle that can rofl stomp mafia. It is very common practice for people to want to be cleared as to move through a game with 0 harassment from anyone. No mafia would willingly throw himself up for a dt check as it would screw him in the end. You say no townie would want it used on them, but that would again, leave you a pool of 0 people to check. you are then down to the idea of "we want you checked you let yourself get checked or lynched" which is a horrible way to play. Seriously, you all are talking about role use being the huge factor in catching people. I now say, everyone go back read pick your power 3 and realize playing lets analyze roles, or someones role means they are legit, etc.... and realize roles do not say shit about the players alignment. Who cares if SS's check is an alignment check if you don't know his alignment. Have a watcher/tracker check him. If he visits anyone at night at this point in time he is mafia. have a dt check him. Dt's could breadcrumb results, or the like. Seriously, before a plan is proposed you sort it out, you make it ideal, you account for multiple situations. So far the only situation proposed by you lot is SS is likely town for shooting a red. Likely town does not mean town. What? So, instead of using a check, and just leaving it, until we have a second DT out themselves or breadcrumb and die, you're saying never use the check? Did I understand that correctly? Please tell me how what you're trying to say is optimal play. How is not having a check better than having one? The only situation proposed by you, is that we don't use the check at all. That's asking a claimed and outed DT to not check people or reveal his checks, until another DT checks him. In what world does that make sense? Ask yourself how you would play this out in a normal game. If a DT claimed, would you ask him to not check anyone until another DT checked him and claimed it? That sounds really dumb to me. In a normal game, on day 1, if someone claimed dt and said x was red, I would kill the dt first. Every time. In a setup where mafia, third parties, or town can be a dt, I will never trust the claimant ever on day 1. Nor should anyone else. Ok, so where's the part where we're trusting him by having him use a check on an agreed upon target? That's what I'm wondering about. You're saying that by letting him check, we're implicitly trusting him to be town, but that is not the case. We can let him sit in unconfirmed limbo for now, but why not use his check? It doesn't hurt us to use his check, the same way that killing the DT actually tells us whether the check is true or not. By giving him a check we give legitmacy over time to his supposed alignment. Say he is mafia, he checks kita, kita flips town, he gives us a town. That makes him look better as he complied to the check. Say both kita and SS are red, he says kita is town it still gives both a look of legitmacy. One for complying for the check. Its subtle and its insidious. Someone who is not confirmed you do not let slowly insinuate they are. Had you guys outlined you planned on trusting his check with a grain of salt I would be less worried than i am now. Of course we'd take it with a grain of salt, I'm taking everything in this game with a grain of salt, because if I trusted everything I read, I'd be pretty silly. That's also why I'm saying we can also check people who aren't major lynch targets yet, and then just ignore the results until someone else confirms SS, he gets shot by mafia, or we even flip him ourselves with a vig. Now I am seeing the first person with some sense -_-. Wiggles, go back and originally read the use of his role and you will see NO ONE advocated what you did just now. You will see it otherwise and should realize my discontent. What you just proposed is more cautious than everything else in relation to using his role to this point. hey bc, wanna check? Bc ignored this post. Show nested quote +On July 26 2011 06:42 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 26 2011 06:38 Curu wrote:
You don't know if he suffered his penalty or not Wiggles. It might just be he's roleblocked for tonight, who knows.
BC, would you submit to having supersoft check you? Nope. As much as being confirmed town benefits town as a whole, it gets me shot by third party / mafia or some asshole townie who thinks they are being a hero. Instead I will risk getting shot anyway, but the likelyhood of a third party shot or red goes down whereas the option of a townie shooting me is higher. Any med with half a brain will realize I have been trying to make people think and not be stupid and might protect me. Then posts this. K so if he inspects you you will be confirmed town, but increases the chance to be shot at by scum/blacks. Then you say that you would like medic protection, surely if you are confirmed town you are more likely to get medic protection? Quote supersoft so you can be alignment checked. If you keep ignoring this issue then i will get you lynched.
Then be prepared to be killed in retribution. I will flip town, I have no need to be checked to know this, and anyone with a damn brain could see my alignment as well. Factor in a dt who isn't confirmed town's check isn't actually useful in clearing anyone. Would it make you feel better? possibly, but thats not very smart of you.
|
Also the post was ignored because Quoting it would put me one step closer to that check you want so bad. I did comment in other posts my stance on the situation. Don't have to quote someone to answer their question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
