|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 22, 2012 13:13:34 GMT -5
Unofficial Vote Count for my own record and everyone else's as I type up my voting analysis:
askthepizzaguy (7 votes) - peekercpa (57), Nanook (89), SBrown (90), gnarlycharly (94), BillMc (97), Idle Thoughts (105), sinjin (119)
gnarlycharlie (4 votes) - Meeko (217), Lightfoot (229), Sister Coyote (233), Silver Jan (236)
Idle Thoughts (2 votes) - askthepizzaguy (41), Chronos (228)
Rysto (1 vote) - texcat (42)
sinjin (1 vote) - mahaloth (176)
Hal Briston (1 vote) - scathach (227)
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 22, 2012 13:36:26 GMT -5
That said, I am hurt that nothing I've said or done is something SBrown finds helpful. Mee-yow. I actually like you participating in the game- I wish you had done it this way the whole time rather than right before the lynch. But you still have done some pretty crazy illogical things that makes me just question what's going on in there. I still do not understand your Idle/Sinjin vote switching, then not switching. Now that you've chosen to come back and talk again- how would you view that behavior? Which one of the two do you find scummy and why? And did you feel your behavior was helpful at all or something pro-town? It's probably the biggest thing you've done for me to have a visceral reaction towards- it just seems like unhelpful behavior from anyone. It's sloppy, and seems careless, and it's like you don't really care about the responsibilities we have as a town to find scum and to lynch them if you're being so flippant about how you vote. You came back and talked a bit... but you never addressed that issue. Care to share?
|
|
|
Post by SBrOwn on Mar 22, 2012 13:38:40 GMT -5
That said... probably the best defense against you, Askthe, wasn't from yourself but by Chronos. I'm going to have to think about that one- because I've been suspicious of you for 2 days now and I keep going back and forth on it at the end- and I don't like that feeling- that other people are better at defending you than yourself. ~~ 11
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 22, 2012 13:43:42 GMT -5
Okay, so a few things that I've noted about the voting toDay. One: Silver Jan is suspicious of Lightfoot...and yet joins Lightfoot on the gnarlycharlie bandwagon? Two: The remaining survivors of the kill texcat, not Ed bandwagon are Rysto, Chronos, askthepizzaguy, and Dirx the Coyote. (There's also Ulla and Mahaloth, but they are most likely town.) Pizza is the lynch leader, and none of the other three have their votes on them. Also, Chronos did vote for pizzaguy, but then switched his vote to Idle. Three: As much as the pizzaguy wagon took off in the middle of the Day, this gnarlycharlie bandwagon took off in a number of hours, very close to End of Day. Four: peeker, Nanook, SBrown, and sinjin are all on the pizzaguy wagon: they are all people who voted for both Pleonast and Drain Bead. Five: The people I am suspicious of for switching up motives (Bill, Dirx the Coyote, Surburban) are on three different bandwagons: pizza, charlie, and not voting respectively. Hmm. Hmmmmmmm. Is the gnarlycharlie wagon an attempt to overtake a pizzaguy scum wagon? Is it dueling townie wagons and the scum don't care either way? Hmmmmmm. Are townies more likely to stick to their convictions? Or are scum more likely to do that in fear of getting caught being hypocritical? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. I honestly got a bit fat null read on gnarlycharlie right now. And my suspicions of pizzaguy are too strong to ignore. I'll put my money where my mouth is. Vote: askthepizzaguy (As a note: I really like playing with you pizzaguy, I find you fun and interesting and slightly reminiscent of RoOsh. But how you've played pings me as scummy, not because you're new, but because of what you've done. Hopefully you stick around and play more with us. )
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 22, 2012 13:56:46 GMT -5
Going to place a vote in a second, but quick note here. Cookies' karma is going up through the roof, something like 17 points in the past two days or something, right? I think it has gone up 2 or 3 points since the game started, but no more than that. The real question would be, who the hell cares?
|
|
|
Post by peekercpa on Mar 22, 2012 14:03:04 GMT -5
kind of skimming right now. my normal day off overtaken by spring break undertakings by others. i am happy with where my vote is and most likely will not move before EOD.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 22, 2012 14:13:59 GMT -5
OK, finally caught up, and I think I have a reasonably clear picture of what's een going on up 'til now. A few thoughts, in no particular order: I don't like the Pizza wagon. I agree that his play is sometimes confusing, often frustrating, and generally 'not the way I would play', but I think he's been that way in every game I've played with him. I have no particular reason to suspect he's Town, but nothing I've seen really suggests he's Scum. Ugh, what a time to get an error-bear. I'll try to reproduce the post I just lost, but this time I'm copying it elsewhere before I submit. I think I now have enough information to sort through the mess of role-blocking data we have. This Morning, Gadarene claimed to have been blocked. Presumably, this was done by a Scum role-blocker, since Gadarene is close to being confirmed Town, and so a Town roleblocker shouldn't have targeted him. Meanwhile, pizzaguy claims to have blocked sinjin, which she can neither confirm nor deny. Now, if pizzaguy is Scum, this claim would have run the risk that she would deny it, and so I don't think a scummy pizzaguy would have made that claim without some way of mitigating that risk. One way to do so would be if the Scum roleblocker ( pizza or otherwise) really had targeted sinjin, but that's inconsistent with Gadarene having been blocked. Another would be if they'd already investigated her and found her to have no powers, a possibility I admit I can't rule out. And the third way would be if sinjin is also Scum and going along with the deception. But given pizzaguy's apparent complete unfamiliarity with the concept of Scum throwing each other under the bus, I don't actually believe that a scummy pizza would have voted for a scummy sinjin. I think I'm actually falling afoul of Hanlon's Razor, here. Unvote askthepizzaguyAs to where I will put my vote: Regardless of pizza's alignment, I agree with him that Idle Thoughts' claim stinks. First of all, a power that can't be actively used or controlled at all, which can only trigger at most once in the whole course of the game, and which only has a random chance of doing anything even if it does trigger, is an awfully weak power. It is, in fact, the sort of thing which I would expect Storyteller to call "vanilla". Second, as claimed, the only thing it can do is kill, and so the "GENERIC" should read "Killing", not "Special". Third, there's a disconnect between the flavor and the power: The background suggests that Poison Ivy's power should come from the army of custom plants she's grown, not from her own personal biochemistry. And finally, it is, as pizzaguy pointed out, a very convenient power for a liar to claim to have, since it would keep him from getting Vigged, and explain why the Scum aren't trying to kill him. Vote Idle ThoughtsI like this argument by Chronos. I tend to not pay all that much attention to Idle's claims, since he tends to throw them out so quickly, so I may have failed to critique this one as closely as I should have. From the Night 2 thread: I am experiancing a level of pain that is not to be wished on anything with any legs I will try to make EON If I wake up dead... there are a few players that start with an S that have pinged me As a 'player that starts with an S', I'd like you to go into a bit more detail here... It seems that the case on gnarlycharlie is based almost entirely on his "do we see each other again on D2?" comment back on Day 1. Since that wasn't enough for anyone to vote fro him on Day 1 or Day 2, how come it's suddenly Scummy here on Day 3? The person that's pinging me the most right now is Meeko. I've been 'speed reading' through the game so far, so I don't have links to share, but he's just been posting som bizarre stuff, as has been pointed out on more than one occasion by others. The problem is, that's not necessarily a Scum tell from Meeko; that's quite possible just Meeko being his own uniques self. I have peeker, Gadarene and Total in the 'likely Town' column given the lack of any counter-claims or information suggesting they aren't what they say they are. vote Idle ThoughtsAlthough I'm fully 'caught up', I haven't had as much time as I'd like to fully mull over all of the past 3 Days' worth of information, and I'm not going to be able to do so in the time remaining Today. I think Chronos' post (quoted above) is the best single argument I've seen Today, so I'm following it.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 14:15:08 GMT -5
Now that you've chosen to come back and talk again- how would you view that behavior? Which one of the two do you find scummy and why? And did you feel your behavior was helpful at all or something pro-town? My methods involve a lot of unvoting in games, particularly in the early game. Sometimes scum react to being voted early if they gain an early lead, at least where I play. I am someone who views everyone as a potential suspect but puts several candidates in the more suspicious category; I'll bounce my vote onto another candidate if I see something they did as wrong. What happened in this case is Idle's claim is wrong, and he needs to die for it. However, Sinjin's reaction to me can read two ways. The first way is if Sinjin is townie, then everything is simply a coincidence. However, if Sinjin is scummy, then Sin is joining a wagon on me, giving terrible reasons for the vote, and during this period I saw several attitudes shift negative on me in the span of one night. What happened at night? If I just blocked a vanilla, then there's nothing new happening. But there's less death, and Sinjin and others are more aggressively pursuing me. As such, I believe I struck gold. But I can't vote for two people at once, and the Sinjin vote is more theoretical/hypothetical this could explain these people's behavior. Whereas Idle Thoughts' claim is concrete, bad in every way, and requires immediate reprisal. I'm reactionary and I reacted to Sinjin, but the better part of me told me to stay with Idle for the bullshit I can prove just by looking at his own claim. I just don't see it that way. Stationary votes aren't as helpful in my opinion, a more dynamic round reveals more intentions than a wagon and nothing further. I take my responsibilities seriously, but how I approach the game differs from your view. Because mafia is a game where the scum can be executing any particular strategy, they could be anyone, they could have any cover role, and because townies have a wide range of behaviors, no one strategy is always correct. Surely you see that I can differ with you on strategy and still have a point. I'll talk all day to people who talk TO me. Folks who just poo-poo on my play style and give it as a reason to vote me are the folks I don't bother with, because its a waste of energy. If someone doesn't understand why I do the things I do, they need only ask. So much could be accomplished by asking the pizzaguy. There's not much that needs commenting on if all I'm reading is how anti-town I'm being and how illogical I am. Rest assured, I've been a big part of many town wins, and there's usually some damned good logic behind what I do. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there. Also Pollux Oil: You're still cool. I like what you've done in the game so far. Please consider my words post-death because I've agreed with most of the reasoning you've presented in your posts and I like how you think. I wish I had you on side on this one, but I don't. That said, I think I can have you on side later. I invite you to pick up where I left off. Re: Gnarly- I have no reason not to vote for him to spare myself. But that would be a purely defensive vote and I dislike having my vote dictated to me. I will do it if the vote is close enough, but I strongly prefer to lynch Idle or Sinjin.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 14:23:35 GMT -5
I've played with gnarly and BillMc before, and I feel I have a better handle on those two, of those I've played with before. I've seen gnarly as town and as scum, worked with him as both, and BillMc I've nailed as scum before and seen him as town and worked with him as town. Neither one has said anything which strikes me as unusual for them.
I wish I had more. Town leans are also weaker than scum leans, because you still can't write off either player, but those are my town leans from the not-considered-cleared pile.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 22, 2012 14:36:12 GMT -5
I don't get the Gnarlie wagon at all really. I never found his original 'see you on D2' statement to be suspicious as a slip though, which may be why. I parsed it as snark, and, well Occam's Razor and all. Snark is more likely than scum cross-posting.
The components of the Pizza case, I at least understand, but still has a bit too much metagaming in some of the justification, and since I don't know him very well, I don't really have enough context to navigate through the metagaming. My visceral reaction is that he has a lot of experience and opinions about the game in general, but maybe he's kinda phoning this game in when it comes to votes and specific analysis because he hasn't imprinted/bonded yet with the lovable crew of mafia misfits that we are.
Chronos has done a complete 180 regarding LightFoot, which really pings me. He was gunning for her pretty hard on Day 2. Since then she has claimed her investigative power and voiced some arguably controversial perspectives on how best to use that power, but he was quite willing to lynch her no matter what her power was not very long ago. I don't really like his Idle Thoughts vote either.
Par for the course for me and this game, Idle's play is frustrating as all hell, but it doesn't strike me as scummy. If he is scum, he is bringing the weak sauce, metagame, poor me approach, which would just be sad.
Vote Chronos[/color]
|
|
|
Post by Chronos on Mar 22, 2012 14:37:50 GMT -5
pizza, to be clear, it's not your style per se that people are objecting to. It's that you're trying to tell us how we should play, and then not playing that way yourself. You keep telling us what a genius scum-hunter you are, but you haven't displayed any genius. Yes, I'll agree that things like Lynch the Lurker can be valid, and agreeing or disagreeing with others' suggestions is fine, but that's all easy stuff. We haven't seen you do any hard work, or come up with any new ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Chronos on Mar 22, 2012 14:50:07 GMT -5
A few reasons for the change. First, I've always believed in giving claimed investigative roles a little slack, since if they're lying, they're likely to be caught in a lie (at which point we hang 'em high), and if they're telling the truth, they're helpful. And I'm not 100% certain that she's lying: If it turns out she's not, it'd be nice to have a few more investigations before we kill her. Second, it became clear that I was in a small minority: Peer review makes it more likely that I was mistaken, and even if I'm not, there's no point in me casting a Nader vote. And third, as the game goes on, others have also risen in my suspicions. Now, I do still suspect her, and fairly strongly. It's quite possible that I'll go back to voting for her later. But not right this moment.
Actually, I'm getting more of a 3rd party or PFK vibe from him, which would account for some "woe is me" attitude. I think he took a Story-written PM, left the "background" paragraphs the same, and edited the powers to something more friendly-looking. Or possibly added them from scratch: Story has been known to give cover roles without any powers listed, and let the person using the cover decide what to make up there. In any event, though, I think that Idle is lying, and I'm a firm believer in lynching all liars, in a policy so absolute that exceptions need not be mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 15:01:09 GMT -5
pizza, to be clear, it's not your style per se that people are objecting to. It's that you're trying to tell us how we should play, and then not playing that way yourself. You keep telling us what a genius scum-hunter you are, but you haven't displayed any genius. Yes, I'll agree that things like Lynch the Lurker can be valid, and agreeing or disagreeing with others' suggestions is fine, but that's all easy stuff. We haven't seen you do any hard work, or come up with any new ideas. All right. This is something I can chew on because it has meat on it. I can see where a player comes into a game and the first impression is too critical. It may be the case where I should have played through an entire game before I gave feedback on what I saw; I play too reflexively and I comment on what I see, as comfortably as if I had been playing here for years. Any shyness I might have had playing mafia left me in 2008. And I can also see where folks can think that my impression of myself is that I'm awesome and others should just do things my way. That's a bad impression and it's not how I really feel, but its an impression people can get if they see me disagreeing with the flow of discussion in a round and right off the bat I'm commenting on that. I don't view myself as a superior player, and I just cite my experience to give some context to my opinions. Experience doesn't make a wrong vote any more correct, but it may help to explain why I habitually use certain strategies. On forums where I'm an established player, I'm more often in the role of organizer or leader, and perhaps I attempted to take on such a role here inappropriately. People don't follow what they don't understand or don't agree with. So I've made missteps. As I mentioned on D2, people follow "lead by example" but I was too busy explaining my differing opinion and then defending it as valid to even begin leading by example. I tried, with my votes and my attempts to discuss other things, to give an example but it got mostly lost in the defending my ideas discussion. It was an attempt at leading and it failed miserably. However, you have seen me do hard work. I've explained at length my view of the game, its setup, and who is acting scummy and why, and explained how I think we should approach the game going forward. I've given opinions on many players, and I'm record with those opinions and the reasoning behind them. Much of what you say I can see, but this point I disagree with you on. I've put a lot more work into this game than I think I should, especially since the audience is not receptive to my ideas. I feel I'm wasting my time at times. It's no use going into more detail if people don't agree with what your premise is in the first place. I have still attempted to explain myself, but that's only out of a love for the game and a desire to help the team, than any serious belief that I'll make a difference at this point. I've come halfway on things, and as uncomfortable as I am playing a supportive role, I will attempt to do so. I see that I'm likely the lynchee of the round, so all I can do now is state where I stand on everyone I have an opinion on, in case it becomes useful to someone. Game strategy discussion, well... I've weighed in on it and we've rejected it so I've nothing further to add there. I'm not sure what else is expected of me. What have I not done?
|
|
|
Post by scáthach on Mar 22, 2012 15:18:50 GMT -5
Much of what you say I can see, but this point I disagree with you on. I've put a lot more work into this game than I think I should, especially since the audience is not receptive to my ideas. I feel I'm wasting my time at times. It's no use going into more detail if people don't agree with what your premise is in the first place. I have still attempted to explain myself, but that's only out of a love for the game and a desire to help the team, than any serious belief that I'll make a difference at this point. I've come halfway on things, and as uncomfortable as I am playing a supportive role, I will attempt to do so. I see that I'm likely the lynchee of the round, so all I can do now is state where I stand on everyone I have an opinion on, in case it becomes useful to someone. Game strategy discussion, well... I've weighed in on it and we've rejected it so I've nothing further to add there. I'm not sure what else is expected of me. What have I not done? Eh, I think part of the problem here is that trying to organise a strategy for Mafia is like herding cats. No one trusts each other enough to agree on an overarching strategy like that (IMO anyway). That doesn't mean you should get disheartened though, people are still reading and considering what you say, and remember confirmation bias, people are more likely to comment if they disagree with something than if they agree so there may be more people agreeing with you than you think. Look at it this way - the two people you think are scum are now the main competing bandwagons with you. Anyhoo, since you're around, want to comment on any of the players other than Idle or Sinjin? I'd love to hear someone else's thoughts on Hal since no one is really talking about him and I'm tempted to move my vote away since it's a one-off.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 15:24:21 GMT -5
I don't know when the round ends and I'll be heading to work shortly.
There would seem to be plenty of powers on the town side, and I've seen myself be much of the subject of discussion for at least two rounds. It is more beneficial to the health of the discussion if I am resolved one way or the other. A roleblocker loss is usually pretty heavy but in a game like this with so many roles (more than I'm used to) town must still pack a heavy punch.
I reiterate what I stated before, I'd rather just be the assumed lynch so next round there is no further question about me. It's wasting time. I do not want to be dragged through day four still being unresolved and still the main subject of discussion, because it's a distraction. If the game can't move forward without my lynch then it has to happen, the sooner the better. Waiting a round or two, mulling it over some more, discussing it to death, and then lynching me anyway is absurd.
The bottom line is you'll miss a couple of additional blocking attempts, and you'll gain freedom from the purgatory we're in and begin to analyze the game with that additional data.
Otherwise, my recommendations for Idle or Sinjin to be lynched stand firm. I will be blocking Idle tonight if I survive, period. It can have no negative effects because Idle claimed no active powers. If he's lying, then he's incapacitated.
I see in the preview that I can respond to Scathach before I go. I still have an hour so get in your questions now.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 22, 2012 15:27:16 GMT -5
I don't know what to make of Hal. His role in lynching Pleo and thereby killing Ed can't be denied, but his motivation for doing so is debatable. I've already spoken my mind about his batmobile conjecture, but I have noticed that he hasn't commented further about it since there have been posts by those of us who question his apparent conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 15:28:37 GMT -5
I'd love to hear someone else's thoughts on Hal since no one is really talking about him and I'm tempted to move my vote away since it's a one-off. While my focus has been on others and I've diverted my energies in that direction, I haven't formed a negative opinion on either Hal's playstyle or his townie-ness. I'll have to look back and see what your case on him was, which will take a moment.
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Mar 22, 2012 15:39:36 GMT -5
Catching up - and sorry for my lack of post toDay. Someone killing of a player (yes Ed turned out to be scum - but Pleo didn't know that) is hardly harmless. I believe the claim and I believe he blocked sinjin, which if I am understanding things, stopped an additional NK. If I'm wrong, correct me. That's a lot of faith playing mafia. You believe a lot and want other to correct you if you're wrong (indicating you'll believe them as well) Cookies' karma is going up through the roof, something like 17 points in the past two days or something, right? Being a karma-freak myself this made me go . Karma has nothing to do with the game what so ever. I karma Cooks when she posts music in another thread as well as newbies to welcome them, Ed out of old habit and Peeker when he makes me laugh. I have tried not to be bias - but I simply don't get Meeko. Sometimes he reminds me of a Mark A from the first facebook-group and as much as i like him, I'd still not want him on my team. This vote is beyond me. The comment from Gnarly made perfect sense to me from the "seems like this is the end of discussion toDay" point of view. So this: town could have a watcher too. could work both ways. it seems a Pleo lynch is happening. i doubt anyone is doing to say something stupid to paint a target on their back. do we see each other again on D2? is the post of Charlie's that is drawing a lot of heat. Oddly enough, it isn't the last line of that which bothers me. It's the second. Unfortunately, I can see either a Town Charlie meaning to post this to the Day thread or a Scum Charlie strategizing with his fellows in the entire post. Charlie's subsequent obsessive objection to lightfoot's link tends to make me lean more Scum misposting than Town. vote: gnarlycharlieI fail to follow the line of thoughts in this post - would you please elaborate a bit? I am not at all convinced by the gnarlycharlie votes and fail to see the case. It's late in the Day and I don't think my vote will matter much - however I want it on record. I can't recall a player with so confused logic and so many comments that makes me think "WHAT???" as Meeko. Some of you say it's very much the Meeko-style but I simply don't get it and I can't see any pro-town motivation behind his gamestyle in this game. I can't say for sure he's Scum (sort of goes with the game) but I can say that I simply fail to see the pro-town motivation behind his posts. All through his game I've read pro-Meeko posts from him. I know it might not be "solid evidence" but it's enough for me. I don't want to join the two leading lynche-wagons as I have stated before. I fail to see both of them (thought I have to admit that a few of the voters seem townies to me). As I have stated in games before I believe a cast-away vote is better than simply go "oh, well - I have to vote for the top 3 players on the vote count". So that's what I'll do Vote Meeko
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Mar 22, 2012 15:41:35 GMT -5
And just to comment on the Idle-case.
If we really are talking policy-votes I fail to see them falling on Idle instead of Meeko. But it might just be my point of view.
|
|
Total Ullz
Administrator
You can take the girl out of mafia - but you can't take mafia out of the girl
Posts: 2,029
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Total Ullz on Mar 22, 2012 15:42:29 GMT -5
Going to place a vote in a second, but quick note here. Cookies' karma is going up through the roof, something like 17 points in the past two days or something, right? I think it has gone up 2 or 3 points since the game started, but no more than that. The real question would be, who the hell cares? YIKES!!! I did it again - now you must be scum (or not)
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 15:50:07 GMT -5
If this is the post: I'm going to Vote: Hal Briston Snipped, bleached I would agree that the natural tendency for scum is to post less after being suspected heavily, because it works wonders. I also agree that he should post the analysis and whatever research he did, as promised. That needs to be followed-up on. I think the reasons behind the vote make sense but the case itself is light. It would be stronger to mention that Hal hasn't voted on any of the candidates for this round, which could indicate that he is waiting to see which way the wind blows before making a calculated move. Others aren't voting but Hal is on record as being a voter and a contributor to the game, and has dropped off since being suspected, which is a change in behavior and it's been almost a week since this analysis was posted, so you can't write it off as RL stuff. That is the behavior I find more damaging. I need to see where Hal stands on this round before it ends, and I don't like that he's waiting for the rest to decide the lynch before he decides where he stands. That, to me, is worse than not posting a promised analysis. The vote has merit and I'd follow it over gnarly or myself. But, he's posting more constructively and substantively than Idle, and doesn't have that semi-bulletproof nonsense claim. As such, Idle is the superior lynch. I get the same sense of fakery and desperation from Sinjin, based on the reasons for voting me and based on my block of Sinjin last night. So, below my top two candidates.
|
|
|
Post by Rysto on Mar 22, 2012 15:51:19 GMT -5
Argh. Sorry guys, I really should know better than expecting myself to be able to place a vote during the workday. I really don't have strong feelings on a scum candidate, which is pathetic for Day 3. I have to go back and do a re-read before Day 4 starts.
At this point, I have to go with my gut: on Day 1, Ed was playing absolutely bizarrely and was literally begging for votes. Chronos was one of the first people to take him up on that, but before anything could come of it Ed smartened up and stopped being a complete idiot, so it never went anywhere and was long forgotten by the end of the Day. Know what we know now, I wonder about the whole exchange. I have a bit of a theory that the whole point was to try to distance one another, in case either flipped scum.
It's not much, but it's the best that I've got.
Vote Chronos
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Mar 22, 2012 15:56:52 GMT -5
I really don't follow the argument against Gnarly, nor Meeko's arguments wrt to ATPG.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Mar 22, 2012 16:02:04 GMT -5
I can see the merit of Chronos' vote on Idle, as I said previously, I do agree ATPG's points against Idle. Both feel scummy to me for different reasons.
|
|
|
Post by BillMc on Mar 22, 2012 16:02:38 GMT -5
I'm not sure what else is expected of me. What have I not done? James Bond: Do you expect me to talk? Auric Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die.
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 16:02:57 GMT -5
And just to comment on the Idle-case. If we really are talking policy-votes I fail to see them falling on Idle instead of Meeko. But it might just be my point of view. My vote on Idle isn't based on Idle being anti-town in his strategy as that seems to be his admitted modus operandi and others have pointed out that he's done it in many games. A lot of players have "antitown" styles such as posting mostly OOG stuff and not taking scumhunting seriously, but I don't see that as scummy as much as personality. You don't always have star players on your team, and I'd rather have bodies to play against than no bodies. The prickly part is the claim itself. That's this-game specific and I didn't even make the best argument against it. It might or might not protect him from death, and is therefore the weakest possible role in the game since it does nothing else. It just seems improbable. If it doesn't protect him then his role was basically nothing at all. So it seems unlikely to be real. My objection was that the bullet-almostproof claim is a convenient way to explain that Idle will be contributing no further information to the town, and won't ever be murdered, which is common on any forum where bulletproof roles exist. De'endee used many of these same people and Septimus claimed bulletproof under duress and he was a mafia godfather who was also bulletproof. It's a great way of handling town vigilantes, since he actually had the bulletproof power. So even if Idle's bulletproof-ish power is real, that's not necessarily a good thing. Mafia generally get something to combat vigs, admittedly roleblockers, but bulletproof or scanproof are very high on that list as well. And if the claim is fake, that's basically an admission of guilt, because mister always claims truthfully wouldn't EVER do that as town. I would, because my playstyle is diametrically opposed, but its not even close to being in Idle's character. So a lie means guilt. His claim is off and bizarre to me, and even if it is true, is a 50/50 shot of meaning he's guilty anyway. Policy lynch for being anti-town doesn't even enter into it, for me. That claim should have made Idle the main alternative to me today and rightfully so. He has to be resolved and soon. I do see that others might be voting him based on anti-town policy. I think anti-town policy lynches are anti-town, but I digress.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 22, 2012 16:03:31 GMT -5
Can you clarify who the 'both' are in that statement, Bill?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 22, 2012 16:04:00 GMT -5
I can see the merit of Chronos' vote on Idle, as I said previously, I do agree ATPG's points against Idle. Both feel scummy to me for different reasons. NETA this one
|
|
|
Post by Askthepizzaguy on Mar 22, 2012 16:05:33 GMT -5
James Bond: Do you expect me to talk? Auric Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die. Cats have nine lives. ;D Which is what my power should have been. I should have been able to survive a death because that's Catwoman's actual freaking power in the damned movie. No offense Story.I edited this post because size 1 text is absolutely illegible.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 22, 2012 16:08:50 GMT -5
Now we have to stop talking general strategy or Nanook might yell at us. I know it's a bit of a joke, but I wanted to comment on it anyways. I don't actually have a problem with general strategy discussion. I in fact quite enjoy theory talk. I do have a problem with someone who only talks general strategy though, especially if they talk about it in a way that basically implies everyone else is an idiot. It was really all joke. I'm pretty sure I've railed more this game about wanting less general discussion and more specific than you have.
|
|