no, i've read nothing but i see L2 and spruance joking about the lynch so i doubt this game is moving forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
i'd hate to see the rest of it wasted on me aswell.
Printable View
no, i've read nothing but i see L2 and spruance joking about the lynch so i doubt this game is moving forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
i'd hate to see the rest of it wasted on me aswell.
I really appreciate the fact you didn't let this turn into lurker lynch #456, regardless of your role.Quote:
Originally Posted by GameFreak
Will your activity increase? What's been holding you up?
And, most pressingly, is there a reliable time we can talk to you at so you don't become disconnected from the game?
Unfortunate weekend really.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
Yesterday i had dinner witht the miss , she just left and now i got work in an hour.
I should be done with work in about 12 hours and i'll read the game then.
Sunday is same story, so expect me later at night.
From what i've read the first person i am going to read through when i'm done is SP.
He's had some weird posts.
I havnt fully read the iced - unknown exchange but that'll surely be interesting and give me more to go on.
Well shit lol. Anyway, d1 ends at 1am for you, and then n1 will be 24 hours. I think it's fair to say I speak on everyone's behalf when I say we'd really appreciate if you could find the time to skim through.Quote:
Originally Posted by GameFreak
Tho, we really need a solid time period to know when you're on. If you come on at some obscure hour without giving us a heads up there's a good chance noone will even notice you're on.
Will things get better after weekend?
yeah, SP has used some dodgy logic at times.Quote:
Originally Posted by GameFreak
Unknown thinks Iced tone is off.
Both are definitely worth looking into.
i'm a busy man but from tuesday i have free days.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
I understand if everybody appreciates it even though at D1 i generally do not post alot.
though i feel you people pressure like shit really. if you say with your vote this is a pressure vote then idgaf about the vote.
No reason to pressure vote a guy who won't be on for 24 hours thats just waste of time.
You had other targets to spend time on but time was spend on some checkers and overall nothing of value.
It would be ignorant to blame such a wasted day on me.
I'm running out of time but i'll keep it simple what my plan is.
At night i'm rbing somebody, i won't say who now but as soon as the day starts i'll declare who and he/she can comfirm me.
Ofcourse maybe sinister doesn't like an escort and i get fucked up but i'm guessing 1 sinister doesn't know his true role yet.
I ain't blaming you. It's just a game anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by GameFreak
And pressure votes aren't unable to become real lynches, as demonstrated, so you probably should have given at least 2.7 fucks. Openly noting your intention is to pressure vote does not reduce the value much. That's the point, if you get pressure voted and don't respond well, you basically become the priority for a lynch.
Anyway, in the past now. I'd like a d1 lynch, or at least the threat of a d1 lynch. I'll spend the rest of my playtime today digging. Hectic life can make it tempting to blot out games. Thanks for your time.
Yeah and if the sinister needs a long term he is unlikely to start a "lynch me or him" tale on d2.Quote:
Originally Posted by GameFreak
Hi
Hi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown1234
Will converted players be told that they are cultist by the councillor, rather than their original role? "I can confirm you're a cultist lol."
If jesters successfully lynch their jester king, what left is there to do? Just be dud positions? Same goes for executioner
cult / occult are not promoted when their leader dies, right? Same goes for mason.
I asked this before, but you never answered: Can you enter a secondary target even if your rolecard only implies you can only enter one target?
Does bodyguard attack ritual killer if he is on someone targeted by cthulu? Does doctor heal Cthulu?
^^Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
Sorry for being unclear, let's suppose I get the sheriff rolecard (OMG SOFTCLAIM SHERIFF)Quote:
Originally Posted by deathworlds
Let's also suppose for my night targets, I sent you the following pm:
"
1) Player A
2) Player B
"
Question A: If I am actually witch, will it DEFINITELY control A and make A go to B?
Question B: If I am actually sheriff, will you randomly select one target from these two for me and say I visited that one?
@RLVG its your move.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
-vote ThePaladin
We need another train. I'm not really comfortable lynching an escort.
Who said we had to lynch?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spruance
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
Now I'm giving it much more thought, this is a fucking terrible plan. This setup is deliberately designed to make multiple cults a strong possibility. If we wait 5 nights for councillor+director to check every player in the game (assuming they don't get culted before they can check people) (and assuming there's no overlap between the two), we could end up with two cult teams of FOUR PLAYERS EACH. Fuck, even 3 nights could be a death knell, because the death of one or two towns would give 6 cult majority.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrlander
This is really off-key for someone who is famed for setup analysis.
I'm trying to reread the entire thread but somewhat distracted so going very slowly.
Just going to say this:
I am really damn tired of Gyrlander's BS and even if I didn't think he was being more trolly than he usually is from my (admittedly limited) knowledge of him playing as town, I would be PLing him.
Vote Gyrlander and force him to play.
I've had Paladin pinged as suspicious for stuff like dodgy statistics [post #205]
and continuing to buddy RLVG [post #515] even after I point out the buddying undertones [post #498] and RLVG himself hinting at buddying undertones [post #236]
and of course a really bad setup strategy [post #518]
but in light of the recent rereadings I think I'm bumping him up to top lynch priority. His use of buddying undertones and setup strat.s to make the game nicer / easier for a cult leader makes me suspect he could be cult leader. Obviously it's a huge jump to wonder if he's cult leader specifically, but lynching cult leader n1 makes a really nice bonus thought on top of suspicious behavior anyway.
-vote ThePaladin
Answer A: YesQuote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
Answer B: You will randomly target one of those, and no, unless your feedback states a players name, you will not know who you targeted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrlander
Dude it's 3 hours to day end if you wanted to rally pressure votes on him you should have done that yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovath
I'm not PLing a player that has actually made valid contributions to discussion, and gives off a town vibe. He's lurking and reading a lot too - I've seen him around.
If he doesn't give deeper thoughts on d2/3 we can consider him. But at the present time you seem to only be suggesting him because he pisses you off lol :P
What valid contributions? Making semi-obvious comments about the setup? Or this contribution?Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
Or the whole episode with pretending to hammer GameFreak but not actually?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrlander
He does this shit every day on D1. And then on D2... and then on D3...Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrlander
I'm tired of licensing this kind of play from him every single game, because it screws over town if he lives to MYLO / LYLO or screens for him to not do anything as scum.
Second of all, I do not get a townie vibe from him.
There may only be 3 hours left but I'm sure as heck gonna try to lynch him.
Ahhh, the most interesting possible setup.Quote:
Originally Posted by deathworlds
You can enter multiple targets in case you're a multi-role, but the randomization will bite you in the ass!
Fun, fun, fun!
I know right?!Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
It's your vote I guess, but really. He's on so often, a real pressure vote at the start of d2 would actually affect him. If he suddenly stops coming on his scummyness would be obvious. I'm not denying the problem, I'm denying the proposed solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovath
And he has made contributions. He actually responded to Taekyon's analysis of him and if he didn't call out Paladin's setup idea I might not have noticed it before n1.
It'd be far more professional and beneficial to settle this dispute with his playstyle post-game, and play with the cards you've been dealt with now but *shrug* if you wanna have some fun, that comes first I guess :3
Post #515 was a continuation of the checkers game, not an overt buddy attempt. You may be reading buddy tones in the playing of checkers, but I do not and to characterize that "Your move" post as a hard "buddy" is a questionable characterization to someone not going back to look at the post and understand the context.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
Post #498 seems more directed at RLVG than ThePaladin.
The problem is that he does this every single game, getting constantly called out on it post-game to no consequence. This is what Gyrlander does. The same reasoning keeps getting put out there as reasons not to PL him (I myself have been on that side before in regards to him) and yet he continues to do this.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
It is common practice for him to be around and "reading" the thread, but all he does is post trollposts or nothing at all.
He is either a detriment to Town or lies low as scum.
Open the checkers tab and look at the bloody board, grandmaster. RLVG stopped replying likely because the game is more or less decided.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovath
Post 498 points out that RLVG was likely in it for the buddying WIFOM. By continuing the game Paladin is acknowledging that but continuing with it anyway.
I know the context of the posts. I've followed the checkers game for crying out loud XD.
I haven't played with him before, but I've known a few very anti-town-esqued players, but accepted them as a part of sfm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovath
I'll concede that people don't change easily and post-game therapy sessions have little effect, but everything else I said still stands. If this really mattered to you, you should have done it 24 hours ago. Now you're better off doing it tomorrow.
Checkers, clearly the root of all evil.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
Do you even realize how dumb that sounds....
Oh? It sounds dumb?Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
Well I guess that nullifies my point and all the other points made about you.
Thanks for handling this with solid reasoning, and not making a strawman of my position.
Wanna give a real response now?
I'm not talking about you knowing the context but about others (like myself) who have not really bothered to follow the checkers game. You simply said, 'This was buddying again' but the post itself is just "Your move." The game may be more or less decided but it isn't over-over, yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
I also personally don't see anything weird about playing a game to its absolute conclusion either, or trying to.
This was the second and third paragraph of your point to RLVG... You're saying that he might be subtly buddying, but then say you're warning him over how he might be misread? I'm really confused now. And in the first paragraph you say that RLVG had baselessly called Paladin town, but assume that he had very good reasoning?Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
The only explanation I see for this is that you're taking RLVG's roleclaim as it is and assuming that he is Sheriff (or at least thinks he is) - yet your first post in response to his roleclaim was a comment on how it was neutral overall and included a vote "pooping on his parade." Afterwards, I see no evolution in your consideration of his role claim (unless you agreed with someone else's analysis and never said it, or your post about it didn't include RLVG's name because I searched the thread that way).
Here is Gyrlander's response to Taekyon's analysis of him, by the way. More setup stuff?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrlander
I will vote for a lynch if I have to - but as it stands I want to push him now and prefer it to a Paladin lynch. Also, I voted for Gyrlander last night but left so it's not completely out of the blue.
Omg I'm sorry I'm so late, it's so close to EOD.
I don't see how we were buddying versus just talking about setup, having a friendly chat, playing a game of checkers etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
Following that reasoning half of the active players have buddied each other.
So are we doing nothing for 5 days/nights till a kill happens or not?
No, lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
Sinister roles are allowed to leave a deathnote.
LW's are not allowed.
WTF Deathworlds.
Okay, y'know what? That particular 515 post wasn't solid. He could have just wanted to finish the game, after dropping the game for ages. Fine. He could have just said "to hell with all the obvious undertones to this checkers game, I'm not even going to address that as I finish this". Fine. But for crying out loud 515 isn't the entire story. READ THE CHECKERS GAME.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovath
RLVG, a player known for viewpoints so deep and lateral he has CRACKED SCUM CODES in-game, and is extremely sensitive to other signals me and you would consider obscure.
Paladin, a player known for using deep setup analysis and USING CHESS TO READ PEOPLE'S INTENT.
Both of these players sit down for a game of checkers. Nothing to see here *shrug*
I am not pulling this out of my ass. Yes, checkers can have "hard buddying". Yes, checkers can have a purpose.
The post was obscure, and I get if you misunderstood it. If you really want to fully understand the post, I can break it down, blow by blow. But that's unnecessary for this present discussion, unless you wish to actually lynch / suspect RLVG right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovath
The point that is relevant for this conversation is in the first paragraph.
I was aware of your vote on him. You talk about taking stuff out of context but, despite his style, he did respond to Taekyon's analysis with valid points, so just posting the reply as if to say "point proven", makes it look like you're making an appeal to his trollish demeanor rather than the substance behind what he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovath
You're clearly set on this lynch. I've made my points. You've ignored most of them. But it's ultimately your vote to use. If your gut tells you doing this has potential, then who am I to tell you otherwise, anyway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
--Wait, there were undertones? I thought we were just playing a game of checkers. How do you even read checkers? I can read shogi and chess but how do you do checkers where you don't even bet anything and are talking about disgaea franchise.
Checkers isn't chess.
I'm dieing. LUL
This is only a few rungs higher than the "this sounds dumb" comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
I'm not saying you're 100% scum, I'm just saying you probably are. You've only got just over 2 hours. Make a real response to all the points said about you, surely noone can take issue with that.
What is dieing?
@secondpassingQuote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
We still doing this?
I literally don't see any other reasoning you have said besides these 2 people were talking about setup and reads.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
These 2 people were playing chess. One guy asked to finish game of chess.
Link and highlight if there is anything different.
@Unknown1234 "dieing"=broken engrish.
HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA, stupid yzb! Checkers is way too detatched from sc2mafia! Chess on the other hand is completely different. Just the other day my queen claimed sheriff and... oh wait.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
You're heading to a lynch by picking on the point that looks weaker, because that's what scum do.
Actual town try to give real responses, rather than try to downplay their opponents. Especially someone like you, who apparently isn't shit.
But your responses are making me believe you less and less. You're just focusing on self-preservation, rather than the good of this town.
I reread your post that was directed at RLVG and better understand it now. My bad. Still, you wrote it in a very obscure manner which you yourself acknowledge, and which projects the opposite of your meaning on a first read.
Nor was I saying his point(s) weren't valid or correct, per se, but they were simply reiterations of previously made points in response to a very unfounded and unsubstantial read by Taekyon, and I do not agree with the characterization that somehow Gyrlander is now a "valid contributor" as a whole.
Thank you for subtly and unsubtly demeaning my intelligence multiple times in your post.
No. You've been reading. Go find it yourself, I'm not your servant. It's literally 3 pages ago at most. You're the one on L-3.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePaladin
Or keep stalling and keep the conversation low-quality, sure.
Checkers and Chess are different games when doing reads. It deals with how complicated the game and possible actions if you can get reads off.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
That doesn't exist in checkers especially given we didn't bet anything.
You do realize the worst possible move for a town to do is to not do self-preservation[not get lynched] since to themselves they are confirmed 100%[at least if their given role is right in this setup], meaning that not preserving yourself is analogous to lynching a guaranteed confirmed town.
I've read through it and commented.Quote:
Originally Posted by yzb25
I don't see anything I haven't commented on.
Kovath doesn't get enough credit.