|
Oh lol, to be fair it can easily be interpreted both ways 
|
On March 24 2010 03:45 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 03:38 XeliN wrote:On March 24 2010 03:30 Fishball wrote:On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. To me, the tone OpZ used gives me the impression that he has the power to nuke. Doesn't feel scummy to me at this point of the game though. If you're Mafia, that would be a dumb way to get unwanted attention. You disagree with my observation on ~OpZ~ fine, i made it clear it was mostly intuitive based on how I tried to act when I was mafia, you then coming out and making what is essentially a slight accusation without actually doing so concerns me more. If I was mafia then yes it might be unintelligent to bring attention to myself early in this way, that is obvious. What concerns me more is did you type that just to state something obvious or did you just want to write the word "mafia" about another player? You totally misread my post. I'm not talking about you at all. I said "IF you're mafia", you wouldn't want unnecessary attention, which is what OpZ did.
That's a WIFOM.
|
On March 24 2010 03:46 haster27 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 03:45 Fishball wrote:On March 24 2010 03:38 XeliN wrote:On March 24 2010 03:30 Fishball wrote:On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. To me, the tone OpZ used gives me the impression that he has the power to nuke. Doesn't feel scummy to me at this point of the game though. If you're Mafia, that would be a dumb way to get unwanted attention. You disagree with my observation on ~OpZ~ fine, i made it clear it was mostly intuitive based on how I tried to act when I was mafia, you then coming out and making what is essentially a slight accusation without actually doing so concerns me more. If I was mafia then yes it might be unintelligent to bring attention to myself early in this way, that is obvious. What concerns me more is did you type that just to state something obvious or did you just want to write the word "mafia" about another player? You totally misread my post. I'm not talking about you at all. I said "IF you're mafia", you wouldn't want unnecessary attention, which is what OpZ did. That's a WIFOM.
I don't think that's a WIFOM, that's the kind of stunt L pulls all the time.
WIFOM would be me saying something like "or is it a WIFOM?"
in any case that's a scumtell, either way.
|
hey look a spam attack
whatsa matter, don't want people reading the lynch all nukers plan?
i want your input/agreement on it (i guess it is same as zona's now as he has amended his to revenge-lynch the first nuker instead of revenge-nuke)
talk, haster.
|
On March 24 2010 03:46 XeliN wrote:Oh lol, to be fair it can easily be interpreted both ways
I actually reread my post a couple times after you quoted me, as you didn't make much sense.
If I was actually "accusing" you, then MY sentence wouldn't make sense at all.
I still don't know how you interpreted the "other" way. Maybe something to hide  ?
On March 24 2010 03:46 haster27 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 03:45 Fishball wrote:On March 24 2010 03:38 XeliN wrote:On March 24 2010 03:30 Fishball wrote:On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. To me, the tone OpZ used gives me the impression that he has the power to nuke. Doesn't feel scummy to me at this point of the game though. If you're Mafia, that would be a dumb way to get unwanted attention. You disagree with my observation on ~OpZ~ fine, i made it clear it was mostly intuitive based on how I tried to act when I was mafia, you then coming out and making what is essentially a slight accusation without actually doing so concerns me more. If I was mafia then yes it might be unintelligent to bring attention to myself early in this way, that is obvious. What concerns me more is did you type that just to state something obvious or did you just want to write the word "mafia" about another player? You totally misread my post. I'm not talking about you at all. I said "IF you're mafia", you wouldn't want unnecessary attention, which is what OpZ did. That's a WIFOM.
I actually just googled WIFOM as I've never heard of this term before.
http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Wifom
So you're saying I was playing the WIFOM game or Xelin?
If you meant me, then no.
|
On March 24 2010 03:49 JeeJee wrote:
hey look a spam attack
whatsa matter, don't want people reading the lynch all nukers plan?
i want your input/agreement on it (i guess it is same as zona's now as he has amended his to revenge-lynch the first nuker instead of revenge-nuke)
talk, haster.
Yes, I do not see any problem with it, especially it doesn't have to worry about ToD and possibility of the nuker having more than one anti-missile defense. I do not believe I spammed that much though; most of my posts contain my opinion about how to play this game, and well, how do you expect me to respond when Caller is going all ##Nuke:haster27? 
|
On March 24 2010 03:54 haster27 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 03:49 JeeJee wrote:
hey look a spam attack
whatsa matter, don't want people reading the lynch all nukers plan?
i want your input/agreement on it (i guess it is same as zona's now as he has amended his to revenge-lynch the first nuker instead of revenge-nuke)
talk, haster. Yes, I do not see any problem with it, especially it doesn't have to worry about ToD and possibility of the nuker having more than one anti-missile defense. I do not believe I spammed that much though; most of my posts contain my opinion about how to play this game, and well, how do you expect me to respond when Caller is going all ##Nuke:haster27?
hey, you're the one who's ridiculing my gosu hosting skills
and thinking that I would host a chuiu game too, gosh
|
I'll respond if other people agree that it can't be interpreted in that way, otherwise your wrong.
screw it just to get this out of the way:
+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2010 03:30 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. To me, the tone OpZ used gives me the impression that he has the power to nuke. Doesn't feel scummy to me at this point of the game though. If you're Mafia, that would be a dumb way to get unwanted attention. Firstly you are quoting me, so when you wrote "If you're Mafia", I took it to be me. Think the misinterpretation lies in the word "that", I took it to refer to the post you quoted of mine//my voting and reasoning in voting for OpZ and not to what OpZ wrote.
If you still can't understand how I could misinterpret it then I'm just going to give up and call you an idiot ^^
|
Fishball// It refers to ~OpZ~. Because of the possibility that he chose to make that post thinking that others will defend him this way, we should not dismiss him as a Town because he is playing game unsubtly. Like I said in the post before, mod-kill policy forces Mafia to be active, so this should not be farfetched idea.
|
On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here.
I will respond to Elemenope's post in a moment, for whoever asked me to...Xelin voting for me made me want to respond.
You didn't respond to anything about my post. You just read my post and says he's trying to claim town. Now Xelin, I hate to tell you this, but your instinct is wrong. Also, your lynch idea as being the perfect retaliation to nuking? Wrong.
Let's look at this set up. 22 players. We don't know how many night kills, the number of mafia, if mafia have special roles/nukes. Now, if mafia had an ass load of nukes, it's already certain that we would have a very big problem. I don't think they will have all too many nukes, and firing a nuke is a huge problem.
I made an effort to outline a basic idea, and state we shouldn't just jump the gun on lynching. I also said I will not be forced around or follow a bandwagon. Only time I ever really bandwagoned was as mafia. I usually vote against the consensus, as last game when I voted you over BM.
Bandwagoning in this game is especially frightening because the days end after a majority, not on a set schedule. I intend to use what power I have to stop this from occurring. Bandwagons are costly in this game. Everyone needs to post how they feel, not just vote. We need to agree on a larger scale I feel before beginning.
Also, as for my change of play, the rules are TOTALLY different then most other games. We have nukes, we have a majority lynch that can occur the INSTANT a majority is reached. This means we have to think.
Also, check it, Fishball done laid into me last game.
|
On March 24 2010 03:59 XeliN wrote:I'll respond if other people agree that it can't be interpreted in that way, otherwise your wrong. screw it just to get this out of the way: + Show Spoiler +On March 24 2010 03:30 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. To me, the tone OpZ used gives me the impression that he has the power to nuke. Doesn't feel scummy to me at this point of the game though. If you're Mafia, that would be a dumb way to get unwanted attention. Firstly you are quoting me, so when you wrote "If you're Mafia", I took it to be me. Think the misinterpretation lies in the word "that", I took it to refer to the post you quoted of mine//my voting and reasoning in voting for OpZ and not to what OpZ wrote. If you still can't understand how I could misinterpret it then I'm just going to give up and call you an idiot ^^
It wasn't referring to anyone. It was an assumption.
Eg.
If you're blind, driving a car would be asking for disaster
If you're sick, you wouldn't want to go to school.
So did I say that you ARE blind/sick? No.
On March 24 2010 03:59 XeliN wrote:
If you still can't understand how I could misinterpret it then I'm just going to give up and call you an idiot ^^
Oh I'm pretty sure there are many ways to misinterpret this, for different reasons.
|
I'm not talking about interpreting it based on your own personal intention I'm talking about the actual word usage itself meaning it is possible for either interpretation to be correct.
Quit being a tard.
|
On March 24 2010 03:59 XeliN wrote:I'll respond if other people agree that it can't be interpreted in that way, otherwise your wrong. screw it just to get this out of the way: + Show Spoiler +On March 24 2010 03:30 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. To me, the tone OpZ used gives me the impression that he has the power to nuke. Doesn't feel scummy to me at this point of the game though. If you're Mafia, that would be a dumb way to get unwanted attention. Firstly you are quoting me, so when you wrote "If you're Mafia", I took it to be me. Think the misinterpretation lies in the word "that", I took it to refer to the post you quoted of mine//my voting and reasoning in voting for OpZ and not to what OpZ wrote. If you still can't understand how I could misinterpret it then I'm just going to give up and call you an idiot ^^
lol @ calling someone an idiot when you misinterpreted. that's really stupid. and rude. just say, oops, my bad, yo and move on. why so sensitive?
|
On March 24 2010 04:07 ~OpZ~ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. I will respond to Elemenope's post in a moment, for whoever asked me to...Xelin voting for me made me want to respond. You didn't respond to anything about my post. You just read my post and says he's trying to claim town. Now Xelin, I hate to tell you this, but your instinct is wrong. Also, your lynch idea as being the perfect retaliation to nuking? Wrong. Let's look at this set up. 22 players. We don't know how many night kills, the number of mafia, if mafia have special roles/nukes. Now, if mafia had an ass load of nukes, it's already certain that we would have a very big problem. I don't think they will have all too many nukes, and firing a nuke is a huge problem. I made an effort to outline a basic idea, and state we shouldn't just jump the gun on lynching. I also said I will not be forced around or follow a bandwagon. Only time I ever really bandwagoned was as mafia. I usually vote against the consensus, as last game when I voted you over BM. Bandwagoning in this game is especially frightening because the days end after a majority, not on a set schedule. I intend to use what power I have to stop this from occurring. Bandwagons are costly in this game. Everyone needs to post how they feel, not just vote. We need to agree on a larger scale I feel before beginning. Also, as for my change of play, the rules are TOTALLY different then most other games. We have nukes, we have a majority lynch that can occur the INSTANT a majority is reached. This means we have to think. Also, check it, Fishball done laid into me last game.
interesting
both you and caller have a knack for not reading the rules. mafia have 1kp per night, it is pretty clear in the op
Mafia have night kills just like in normal games. Mafia can kill 1 player per night no matter how many of them are alive.
so you say that lynching all nukers is wrong. then you say "look at the setup" but provide no concrete evidence as to what is wrong with it. so, i'm asking you,
What is wrong with the lynch all nukers plan?
|
And OpZ don't read too much into my choosing to vote you atm, we are not going to have much information on anyone this early on and I just intuitively sensed something off in what you posted, could be wrong certainly.
Also as to this "Also, your lynch idea as being the perfect retaliation to nuking? Wrong."
Firstly I don't think it is perfect, just better than the other option which seems to be Nuke a Nuker, but anyway, why is it wrong?
|
Versatile I'm not being sensitive, he's gone on to suggest that I have purposefully misinterpreted what he wrote for my own ends (the suggestion being I could be mafia because of it)
Also I am not wrong he is, what he wrote can be correctly interpreted in either way, it was too ambiguous.
|
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
On March 24 2010 04:18 XeliN wrote:
I'm not talking about interpreting it based on your own personal intention I'm talking about the actual word usage itself meaning it is possible for either interpretation to be correct.
Quit being a tard.
You guys should be nice... after all the people you are aggravating (potentially) have nuclear weapons ^_^
+ Show Spoiler +
Boom!
|
On March 24 2010 03:38 XeliN wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 03:30 Fishball wrote:On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. To me, the tone OpZ used gives me the impression that he has the power to nuke. Doesn't feel scummy to me at this point of the game though. If you're Mafia, that would be a dumb way to get unwanted attention. You disagree with my observation on ~OpZ~ fine, i made it clear it was mostly intuitive based on how I tried to act when I was mafia, you then coming out and making what is essentially a slight accusation without actually doing so concerns me more. If I was mafia then yes it might be unintelligent to bring attention to myself early in this way, that is obvious. What concerns me more is did you type that just to state something obvious or did you just want to write the word "mafia" about another player?
Slight accusation? He was saying if I was mafia it would be dumb to do as I did? I've done gotten what, 3 votes for that post? Lol. Why? Because I said I wouldn't be pushed around, or watch L create a bandwagon without hearing from a player?
|
On March 24 2010 04:07 ~OpZ~ wrote:
I will respond to Elemenope's post in a moment, for whoever asked me to
So how's that post coming along.
|
On March 24 2010 04:19 JeeJee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2010 04:07 ~OpZ~ wrote:On March 24 2010 02:04 XeliN wrote:
L being banned for 2 days in my eyes means he is not a viable candidate to be lynched, although the posts he has made already I disagree with but that might simply be because he's L and thats my general reaction to whatever he posts.
As to the idea of retaliation against a player who has an itchy trigger finger, we have the perfect form of retaliation. We lynch them. Or to put it more bluntly
Any player launching a nuke against another without at the very least providing coherent argument for doing so will be lynched. Furthermore the only instance whereby we would launch against a player who acts in this way would be if we already have a good candidate for lynching, then we will nuke or multiple nuke them (I am of the opinion that 2 ought to be enough)
To get things started off in the voting section I am going to be Voting ~OpZ~
His post earlier on both seemed different in style to the way he posted in the last game and also was riddled with subtle "I am town" choice of wording, something I consciously made an effort to do in the last game I was mafia so guess I'll go along with my instinct here. I will respond to Elemenope's post in a moment, for whoever asked me to...Xelin voting for me made me want to respond. You didn't respond to anything about my post. You just read my post and says he's trying to claim town. Now Xelin, I hate to tell you this, but your instinct is wrong. Also, your lynch idea as being the perfect retaliation to nuking? Wrong. Let's look at this set up. 22 players. We don't know how many night kills, the number of mafia, if mafia have special roles/nukes. Now, if mafia had an ass load of nukes, it's already certain that we would have a very big problem. I don't think they will have all too many nukes, and firing a nuke is a huge problem. I made an effort to outline a basic idea, and state we shouldn't just jump the gun on lynching. I also said I will not be forced around or follow a bandwagon. Only time I ever really bandwagoned was as mafia. I usually vote against the consensus, as last game when I voted you over BM. Bandwagoning in this game is especially frightening because the days end after a majority, not on a set schedule. I intend to use what power I have to stop this from occurring. Bandwagons are costly in this game. Everyone needs to post how they feel, not just vote. We need to agree on a larger scale I feel before beginning. Also, as for my change of play, the rules are TOTALLY different then most other games. We have nukes, we have a majority lynch that can occur the INSTANT a majority is reached. This means we have to think. Also, check it, Fishball done laid into me last game. interesting both you and caller have a knack for not reading the rules. mafia have 1kp per night, it is pretty clear in the op Show nested quote +Mafia have night kills just like in normal games. Mafia can kill 1 player per night no matter how many of them are alive. so you say that lynching all nukers is wrong. then you say "look at the setup" but provide no concrete evidence as to what is wrong with it. so, i'm asking you, What is wrong with the lynch all nukers plan?
It's a WASTE of time. Do you think mafia will have all kinds of nukes to just launch? To throw themselves out there and pray we don't retaliate? I agree retaliation is necessary, but ending the day right there to give them another kill, when it was most likely an idiot townie? Go look at Caller's game, the CIA agent was the last person to execute someone, and ended the game with it. It's already been stated how big of a gambit it is to just throw yourself out into the open. I agree with retaliating, but directly saying launch 3 nukes is bad, and simply ending the day is bad. The situation should determine the means of countering.
That is what my problem with the plans. So far, I like the lynch plan best, because it doesn't increase the ToD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.madcows.se/pics/nukeeffect.jpg)
