April 22nd, 2021, 07:16 PM
Had to swap to a different machine. Forgot to backup bankfile (if that would even work). Could you restore my points? I don't recall the approximation, but I believe I had somewhere between 2600-2900. There might be a record with even more points than that buried somewhere. I'm not quite sure, but regardless, could I have my points restored?
Had to swap to a different machine. Forgot to backup bankfile (if that would even work). Could you restore my points? I don't recall the approximation, but I believe I had somewhere between 2600-2900. There might be a record with even more points than that buried somewhere. I'm not quite sure, but regardless, could I have my points restored?
August 22nd, 2018, 10:16 PM
In a particular game, I was beginning to lose faith in the town as an investigator due to their behavior and unwillingness to take the game seriously, question and pressure suspects, follow leads (including my own), or use logical thinking. I was paralyzed in thought on how to proceed with this situation. . . And then, the Mayor soon revealed and the following conversation took place (my color was orange):
Averis: "Gg, I'm not quite sure what to do anymore, town is in a chaotic state and refuses to take anything seriously. . . I'm starting to lose hope at this point."
Mayor: "wtf orange? don't ever give up in this game. stop being a pussy"
Averis: "If you say so."
Mayor: [COLOR="#FFF0F5"]*Trials and lynches an innocent lookout (who's defense was "I Am Black Male")*[/COLOR]
Mayor: "WTF?"
Mayor: [COLOR="#FF0000"]*Has given up on life!*[/COLOR]
I believe this was during Day 3 or 4. I've never been in a game where a person contradicted themselves that quickly before.
In a particular game, I was beginning to lose faith in the town as an investigator due to their behavior and unwillingness to take the game seriously, question and pressure suspects, follow leads (including my own), or use logical thinking. I was paralyzed in thought on how to proceed with this situation. . . And then, the Mayor soon revealed and the following conversation took place (my color was orange):
Averis: "Gg, I'm not quite sure what to do anymore, town is in a chaotic state and refuses to take anything seriously. . . I'm starting to lose hope at this point."
Mayor: "wtf orange? don't ever give up in this game. stop being a pussy"
Averis: "If you say so."
Mayor: *Trials and lynches an innocent lookout (who's defense was "I Am Black Male")*
Mayor: "WTF?"
Mayor: *Has given up on life!*
I believe this was during Day 3 or 4. I've never been in a game where a person contradicted themselves that quickly before.
August 1st, 2018, 04:08 PM
I see. So far it seems that you're more likely to be protected by prot roles, and if that's not the case, then there really is no advantage. Also yeah, it is a dumb reason to lynch someone for, and I didn't expect using it to paint my opponent as evil would work, but the town still decided to roll with it. His name wasn't trolly at all, the town lynched him solely on the fact that I lied about his -blacklist.
Anyhow this does answer my question. Thank you.
I see. So far it seems that you're more likely to be protected by prot roles, and if that's not the case, then there really is no advantage. Also yeah, it is a dumb reason to lynch someone for, and I didn't expect using it to paint my opponent as evil would work, but the town still decided to roll with it. His name wasn't trolly at all, the town lynched him solely on the fact that I lied about his -blacklist.
Anyhow this does answer my question. Thank you.
August 1st, 2018, 02:46 PM
The question is in the title. I'm rather curious, because the use of colored names seems to only provide disadvantages. The reason I'm asking this is because in a recent game:
A player with a colored name was put on trial on D1 (Yes, there is a trial on D1) and claimed bus driver and even detailed his plan of action for the first night. The town agreed to inno him. Being an arsonist, having a bus driver alive would prove to be disadvantageous to me as I may douse incorrect targets. [COLOR="#00FFFF"]So, I decided to use his colored name/points against him by openly lying with the statement: "I know this guy personally, he blacklists town roles. He's lying." "He even told me specifically a few games ago that he blacklisted Doctor, Sheriff, Investigator, Detective, and Bus Driver."[/COLOR] Since he uses a colored name and likely has the points to use -prefer and -blacklist, the town believed me and changed their votes to Guilty which resulted in him being lynched. They did not think of me as being suspicious and instead was angry with him saying things along the lines of "Don't blacklist town next time scrub". Unfortunately this manipulation seems to only work once as I've tested it several times on players before, but you get the point.
In addition to being subjected to random lynch, being a preferred target for killing roles, being disliked by players who can't use colored names themselves (jealousy), and probably a few more that haven't come to my mind yet, what exactly are the advantages of using a colored name? Players who use them only seem to make it easier for opponents (me in the example above) to eliminate them and win the game.
The question is in the title. I'm rather curious, because the use of colored names seems to only provide disadvantages. The reason I'm asking this is because in a recent game:
A player with a colored name was put on trial on D1 (Yes, there is a trial on D1) and claimed bus driver and even detailed his plan of action for the first night. The town agreed to inno him. Being an arsonist, having a bus driver alive would prove to be disadvantageous to me as I may douse incorrect targets. So, I decided to use his colored name/points against him by openly lying with the statement: "I know this guy personally, he blacklists town roles. He's lying." "He even told me specifically a few games ago that he blacklisted Doctor, Sheriff, Investigator, Detective, and Bus Driver." Since he uses a colored name and likely has the points to use -prefer and -blacklist, the town believed me and changed their votes to Guilty which resulted in him being lynched. They did not think of me as being suspicious and instead was angry with him saying things along the lines of "Don't blacklist town next time scrub". Unfortunately this manipulation seems to only work once as I've tested it several times on players before, but you get the point.
In addition to being subjected to random lynch, being a preferred target for killing roles, being disliked by players who can't use colored names themselves (jealousy), and probably a few more that haven't come to my mind yet, what exactly are the advantages of using a colored name? Players who use them only seem to make it easier for opponents (me in the example above) to eliminate them and win the game.
July 13th, 2018, 06:18 PM
I don't know about that 2nd one. I've been in far too many games where players who spam get the attention and control over an entire town and have single-handedly won games because of it — myself included. This of course, depends on the mentality of the players. . . but a lot of them seem to be. . . easily influenced or captured by what text they see the most and ignore the ones they see the least. Some players are more likely to see and obey someone who says "GUILTY" 20 times, in capital letters, than someone who says "Innocent" but only one time in a trial. I've even done a small experiment by doing this myself by spamming GUILTY in a trial while asking 1 player to just type "Innocent" one time in chat and asked players why they didn't vote innocent when someone else said so. They responded that they didn't even see anyone say Innocent and only saw me say guilty. Those players also continued to follow me and lynch other innocent players despite my impossible and ludicrous leads. [COLOR="#00FFFF"]Even when an intellectual pointed out exactly what was wrong with my logic and leads[/COLOR], they simply ignored him or just. . . somehow didn't even see him so long as I kept spamming. Of course, this is just an example of a group of uncertain players with no will of their own, but that seems to very common in games from my experience. . .
Sure there are more [COLOR="#00FFFF"]intelligent[/COLOR] players with an actual [COLOR="#00FFFF"]willpower[/COLOR] to do what THEY think is correct and will be annoyed by you and want you out of the picture, and you'll likely be lynched if there are enough of them and they outnumber those who will follow you, but it is a valid strategy under certain circumstances.
You are also right about spamming making some people auto assume you're jester or executioner, and that's actually a good thing if you AREN'T jester or executioner, as town will often leave you alone. I've won several games as triad/mafia/neutral evil/neutral killing roles by decieving the town into thinking I'm just some desperate jester/executioner doing exactly what you advise against. If the town is quick to make nearly baseless assumptions, this also makes spamming a valid strategy
I don't know about that 2nd one. I've been in far too many games where players who spam get the attention and control over an entire town and have single-handedly won games because of it — myself included. This of course, depends on the mentality of the players. . . but a lot of them seem to be. . . easily influenced or captured by what text they see the most and ignore the ones they see the least. Some players are more likely to see and obey someone who says "GUILTY" 20 times, in capital letters, than someone who says "Innocent" but only one time in a trial. I've even done a small experiment by doing this myself by spamming GUILTY in a trial while asking 1 player to just type "Innocent" one time in chat and asked players why they didn't vote innocent when someone else said so. They responded that they didn't even see anyone say Innocent and only saw me say guilty. Those players also continued to follow me and lynch other innocent players despite my impossible and ludicrous leads. Even when an intellectual pointed out exactly what was wrong with my logic and leads, they simply ignored him or just. . . somehow didn't even see him so long as I kept spamming. Of course, this is just an example of a group of uncertain players with no will of their own, but that seems to very common in games from my experience. . .
Sure there are more intelligent players with an actual willpower to do what THEY think is correct and will be annoyed by you and want you out of the picture, and you'll likely be lynched if there are enough of them and they outnumber those who will follow you, but it is a valid strategy under certain circumstances.
You are also right about spamming making some people auto assume you're jester or executioner, and that's actually a good thing if you AREN'T jester or executioner, as town will often leave you alone. I've won several games as triad/mafia/neutral evil/neutral killing roles by decieving the town into thinking I'm just some desperate jester/executioner doing exactly what you advise against. If the town is quick to make nearly baseless assumptions, this also makes spamming a valid strategy
April 24th, 2018, 06:21 PM
Okay. Sure, I'll just wait for you guys to reply after checking it out. Also sorry and edited my previous response, I just realized that a keeper just recommends an action. I thought the "point ban" already happened or something and was rushing into a game busy thinking "okay so I got point banned, still have my points, and can gain points. . . what's supposed to happen?"
Okay. Sure, I'll just wait for you guys to reply after checking it out. Also sorry and edited my previous response, I just realized that a keeper just recommends an action. I thought the "point ban" already happened or something and was rushing into a game busy thinking "okay so I got point banned, still have my points, and can gain points. . . what's supposed to happen?"
April 24th, 2018, 04:38 PM
I jumped into a game and looked at it myself. I saw this: 27 victories and 54 games. Not sure where the 40 something games and victories came from
I jumped into a game and looked at it myself. I saw this: 27 victories and 54 games. Not sure where the 40 something games and victories came from
April 21st, 2018, 04:01 PM
[B]Account Name:[/B] Bunnaz
[B]Account ID:[/B] 1-S2-1-2163287
[B]In-Game Name:[/B] SLUT SLAYER STEVE
[B]Crimes Committed:[/B] Game Throwing
[B]Your Account Name:[/B] Averis
[B]Summary:[/B] The Game throw occurred in a 2 vs 2 between an executioner (Ehno) and arsonist (no u), vs a jailor (Drunk Bear) and detective (SLUT SLAYER STEVE). For the sake of time if you view the replay, you can skip to 19:00 to get to the point. This revolves around the fact that he intentionally lynched the confirmed jailor, who would kill 8 (the arsonist) and win the game. How was 3 confirmed?
1. I said so in my LW
2. 11 confirmed that he was jailed while he was on trial.
3. 3 said he was jailor TWICE on day 5
4. 11 confirmed that 3 had to be jailor in his LW.
SLUT SLAYER STEVE VOTED THE JAILOR and put him on trial (at this point the game was technically over since 1 town cannot override the votes of 2 neutrals but Enho voted innocent) 3 literally spits out everything I just said above on how he was confirmed and that he was going to jail and execute 8. 7 seemingly completely ignores all that evidence and votes guilty. 7 EVEN SAYS that the person he tracked did nothing at night, which would MAKE SENSE since he was jailed, but still voted guilty. 3 was lynched, which ultimately resulted in the Arsonist burning 7 and the town losing a game it should have won. [COLOR="#FF0000"]I don't think anyone can be this blind to ignore this information/evidence, and that leads me to conclude that 7 deliberately tried to throw the game.[/COLOR] Others player in that game have also agreed that his game throwing was intentional.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]24507[/ATTACH]
Account Name: Bunnaz
Account ID: 1-S2-1-2163287
In-Game Name: SLUT SLAYER STEVE
Crimes Committed: Game Throwing
Your Account Name: Averis
Summary: The Game throw occurred in a 2 vs 2 between an executioner (Ehno) and arsonist (no u), vs a jailor (Drunk Bear) and detective (SLUT SLAYER STEVE). For the sake of time if you view the replay, you can skip to 19:00 to get to the point. This revolves around the fact that he intentionally lynched the confirmed jailor, who would kill 8 (the arsonist) and win the game. How was 3 confirmed?
1. I said so in my LW
2. 11 confirmed that he was jailed while he was on trial.
3. 3 said he was jailor TWICE on day 5
4. 11 confirmed that 3 had to be jailor in his LW.
SLUT SLAYER STEVE VOTED THE JAILOR and put him on trial (at this point the game was technically over since 1 town cannot override the votes of 2 neutrals but Enho voted innocent) 3 literally spits out everything I just said above on how he was confirmed and that he was going to jail and execute 8. 7 seemingly completely ignores all that evidence and votes guilty. 7 EVEN SAYS that the person he tracked did nothing at night, which would MAKE SENSE since he was jailed, but still voted guilty. 3 was lynched, which ultimately resulted in the Arsonist burning 7 and the town losing a game it should have won. I don't think anyone can be this blind to ignore this information/evidence, and that leads me to conclude that 7 deliberately tried to throw the game. Others player in that game have also agreed that his game throwing was intentional.
April 5th, 2018, 04:19 PM
[B]Account Name:[/B] JohnEveryman
[B]Account ID:[/B] 1-S2-1-2975114
[B]In-Game Name: Djinni Vizier[/B]
[B]Crimes Committed:[/B] Game-throwing
[B]Your Account Name:[/B] Averis
[B]Summary:[/B] On Day 2, A player with the in-game name "Happy Tree" demanded Djinni Vizier be put on trial and voted him. Once he was put on trial he became enraged that he was voted and revealed the name and roles of the remaining mafia members including himself and said I would become Godfather the next night (which of course would happen) and threw the game entirely as shown in the replay below
[ATTACH=CONFIG]24449[/ATTACH]
Account Name: JohnEveryman
Account ID: 1-S2-1-2975114
In-Game Name: Djinni Vizier
Crimes Committed: Game-throwing
Your Account Name: Averis
Summary: On Day 2, A player with the in-game name "Happy Tree" demanded Djinni Vizier be put on trial and voted him. Once he was put on trial he became enraged that he was voted and revealed the name and roles of the remaining mafia members including himself and said I would become Godfather the next night (which of course would happen) and threw the game entirely as shown in the replay below