Search Results - SC2 Mafia
Register

Search:

Type: Posts; User: Etienne

Search: Search took 0.02 seconds.

  1. Forum:Punished Players & Appeals

    Thread:Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776

    Thread Author:Renegade

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    10
    Views
    1,260

    {Watch List} ►►Re: Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheriff View Post
    The appellant has shown no inclination to modify their behavior and therefore I am recommending a stricter punishment on these offenses.
    Can you elaborate on this? All these reports were made before the warning was issued so how have I shown no inclination to modify my behavior? Also, what about "Etienne stop trans terrorism | #LGBWithoutTheTQ" is against the rules? Could you point me to that on the website, or are you just injecting your own personal feelings into this?
  2. {Ban List} ►►Re: HeroOfChrist: 1-S2-1-11787846, Solid: 1-S2-1-353248, Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776, CDub 1-S2-1-12705◄◄

    So to be clear. Are you saying that "I stand with Putin" is against the rules and considered griefing? Can you point me to a rule that was broken?
  3. {Ban List} ►►Re: HeroOfChrist: 1-S2-1-11787846, Solid: 1-S2-1-353248, Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776, CDub 1-S2-1-12705◄◄

    Just so you guys are aware. I am still awaiting a response for my request on an appeal. If the appeal is denied, please let me know and tell me exactly what I said that is considered "griefing".
  4. Forum:Punished Players & Appeals

    Thread:Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776

    Thread Author:Renegade

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    10
    Views
    1,260

    {Watch List} ►►Re: Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776◄◄

    I am requesting an appeal. I would like to know exactly what I said that is considered hate speech.
  5. {Ban List} ►►Re: HeroOfChrist: 1-S2-1-11787846, Solid: 1-S2-1-353248, Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776, CDub 1-S2-1-12705◄◄

    I am requesting an appeal. I did not break any rules. This is what the website describes as griefing:

    Crime: Griefing
    Griefing is trolling to the point of the game being ruined.
    Examples:
    1) Lying about being a sheriff just because you want the guy with the colored name to be lynched
    2) Targeting a player because of their SC2 identity regardless of actual evidence
    3) Running a setup with Stumps or Scumbags assigned (roles which are impossible to generate without hacking one's bank or copying someone's setup who has done so).
    4) Spamming excessively, especially anything unrelated to the game.
    My leaving that last will, which I do not consider trolling, did not ruin the game.

    When I addressed this on Discord, Arrow said the following:


    "Hate speech and discriminatory language is inappropriate, as is any obscene or disruptive language" .

    "Behavior that intentionally detracts from others' enjoyment is unacceptable"
    If you want to continue advocating for a guy who's fielding mobile crematoria in order to hide evidence of war crimes, go ahead. Free speech does not, however, mean freedom from consequences.
    ANd that's all I'm gonna say on that.
    I could not adequately defend myself without going into murky waters and breaking the rules of General Chat, and Arrow is not part of Thunderdome.

    None of that applies here. Nothing I said can reasonably be considered as "hate speech". Nothing I said intentionally detracted from others' enjoyment, and the part about "fielding mobile crematoria in order to hide evidence of war crimes" is something I vehemently disagree with, but that is besides the point because that isn't "God's work" or the reason why I "stand with Putin". Good things are happening in the Donbas region, which had been shelled non-stop since 2014 until Putin put an end to that. Good things are happening in the world now that western hegemony is being challenged by BRICS, in no small part due to Putin and his ability to work with other countries like India and Brazil, which are often sidelined and ignored by Western powers. So to say that I am spreading hate speech, respectfully, shows bias and Russophobia.
  6. Forum:Punished Players & Appeals

    Thread:Wolfie 1-S2-1-12680157

    Thread Author:Etienne

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    2
    Views
    1,436

    {Watch List} ►►Wolfie 1-S2-1-12680157◄◄

    Account Name: Wolfie
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-12680157
    In-Game Name: Wolfie

    Crimes Committed: Gamethrowing

    Your Account Name: Etienne
    Summary: This player deliberately handed the win over to the witch by lynching the confirmed constable. This is as clear a case of gamethrowing as I have ever seen. I suspect the two of them were in communication throughout the game, but I have no evidence of that. They seem to know one another.

    Name: Wolfie Gamethrow.SC2Replay
Views: 1
Size: 385.4 KB
  7. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post

    I choose to not support glitch abusers and those that spread hacked saves.
    This is irrelevant given the fact that the save at the center of my post was not hacked, or glitched. I, too, spoke out against Hacked and Illegal saves.

    Stop trying to mislead people.
  8. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Drizzt View Post
    When you quit a game that you entered into with 14 other players prematurely, you are saying "My voice and my participation is greater than yours." It is poor sportsmanship, if this was a fencing match I would black card the person, because it is the antithesis of community gaming. Maybe you do not want to play, but maybe some guy/gal who just got off work or is trying to find some happiness for 30 min, maybe they want to play the "shit" save. I don't know, but when you quit, repeatedly and dramatically, you are taking the choice from them, and then its becomes about you, and what you want.
    I completely agree with everything you said. Unfortunately, there are some people who only care about themselves, which is why I made this topic. Still waiting on some actual feedback from anyone in the position to process these reports. So far, one Admin responded with the lie that I abuse the quick-start glitch, but didn't post anything constructive.
  9. [Role Change] ►►Re: Beguiler should be allowed to safely beguile to Vet wihout dying.◄◄

    Absolutely not. By that logic, why not let a Vanguard survive a vet too? The relationship between Veteran and Mafia/Triad is already fine and balanced. No change is needed.
  10. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Some thoughts:

    Sometimes randoming, and seeing how people vote, who voted up who, etc, is a method in and of itself for creating and identifying evidence.

    How many times have you seen someone randomed, innod with a handful of guilty votes, then one of the guilty voters immediately voted up? Whether that guilty voter flips town or scum can provide a lot of info alone.
    True but when randoming becomes to sole means by which you obtain information, and achieve your win condition, that is a problem. Or are you arguing in favor of saves full of witches and vigilantes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    I do appreciate the notion that saves that become casinos of RNG to win are more likely to be bad than not, however it is still not an objective measure.

    What about "normal" appearing saves that are actually rotten to the core? Let's take WakWaks save for example. Wakwak has an 8331 but the 3 neutrals are 1 neut killing and 2 neutral randoms. He jacks up the probability that a jester spawns SO HIGH that I've seen it happen several times where 2 if not 3 jesters spawn.

    By my standards, this is a terrible save. It hides crucial information and is a "sleeper" shit save. How can town, let alone a gov, manage to do anything when 2 or 3 people are trying their best to get lynched?
    For those saves, use the tools that are available to you to prevail. Does the save have detectives and investigators and escorts and what not? Use them and adapt your gameplay for the possibility of a few Jesters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    This is similar to your own save. You allow up to 2 NK on top of a judge to spawn in your save. That kind of neutral evil domination completely destroys towns. You hide and disguise the nature of your save via settings that players are unlikely to see.
    It has been my experience in the months that I have hosted that save, that when there are 2 NKs (which doesn't happen often), town actually wins more often than not. This could be for a number of different reasons. NKs killing Mafia is one reason. Another reason could be that the confirmed NK slot can only be a delayed killer such as an Arsonist or Poisoner. I like to think though, that the reason is that neutral evils are more dangerous to town than a 2nd neutral killer, because they aren't diametrically opposed to mafia the way neutral killers are, so there is less of an opportunity of evils teaming up to win.


    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    I do not believe there is any way to create a single definition of a bad save, but I'd argue you can apply some tests. One such test I proposed is "can town win on their own merits without evils killing evils?" and Law's infamous 9v3mafv3triad save absolutely fails that test.
    I feel the definition I've provided is applicable to the majority of bad saves, without creeping into territory of "subjectivity". Saves with mass jesters or vigilantes or veterans or mass murderers, that relies solely on random voting to get your win condition, OR are set up in such a way that the primary objective is to get an achievement and not your win condition, is something the majority of people can agree are "bad" saves.
  11. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter350 View Post
    I think this definition is still quite subjective. How do we determine if a setup is chaotic, or that it's intended to be? Furthermore, by the underlined statement, this means that 12 Citizens 3 Mafiosos would constitute as a bad setup, since it relies on guesswork ("reads") without any mechanism for confirmation ("leads"). However, Citizens vs Mafiosos is a valid basic setup in the IRL party game and on FM.
    It's subjective in the sense that there might be a handful of people who think “guesswork” is a valid way of playing a game, but I believe it goes against the spirit of the mod. There are roles in the game for a reason. I believe the developer’s intent is for the player to use a variety of different roles to meet the win condition. Otherwise, the game becomes one big random fest, where people are randomed up for lynching based on no evidence at all.

    I think most of us can agree that these kinds of saves can be considered a bad save, and if anyone thinks that witches and vigilantes or mafia vs citizens is a good save, they can certainly argue that. I would like to hear their reasoning behind it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter350 View Post
    I agree with the intention to define it, but I'm not sure we can realistically come up with a good, all-encompassing definition.
    Perhaps not, but we can develop a framework that covers the vast majority of situations. I don’t see many people leaving saves that may have one or two bad settings. I see people leaving saves that has Jesters vs MMs vs Veterans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter350 View Post
    Informing and persuading the lobby beforehand is a good approach to hosting unconventional setups. It's a good people management skill.

    However, I don't think it should be used as a justification for whether a host has the "right" to host an unconventional setup or not, in the context of reports.
    I don’t disagree. I don’t believe anyone has a “right” to host the save they want. Whether that be someone who wants a conventional save or someone who wants to try something a little different. What I said was that everyone should have the “opportunity” to host their own creations.

    As for statement on the context of reports, I believe that intent should be heavily considered when making a determination on these reports. People sometimes don’t read what’s in the lobby and might not know. In that case, you can’t fault them just like you can’t fault someone who leaves a game because IRL stuff comes up – there is no “intent”. It would be up to the person filing the report to provide evidence of intent.

    For example, if a person joins a lobby and then spams that the save is bad and that the host should be repicked when the game starts and then when the host is not repicked, that person leaves, the host is able to establish intent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter350 View Post
    To paraphrase Ren's points:
    (3) Reports are usually only processed based on in-game events, so what happens in the lobby cannot be considered in reports (e.g. when establishing intent to host "bad" setups)
    There are exceptions to this rule, as you pointed out, but those are quite specific cases (e.g. identifying a smurf).
    There are exceptions, and this can be a new one. Why not make exceptions that make the game better?

    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter350 View Post
    Let's say lobby chat screenshots are accepted as evidence. How far back must you screenshot? From the start of the lobby? The SC2 chat log cuts off at a certain point, and doesn't include timestamps. Does this mean we need to screenshot every lobby on the off chance that evidence is required later?
    As far back as is needed to establish intent. You see, the onus is on the person filing the report, not the person processing the report. If there is no sufficient evidence provided to establish intent, the report can be closed without any effort. The burden is on the person filing the report. This means, only people who have the proven intent to leave a game before they join it will be held accountable.

    It's as simple as this:

    If someone hosts an unconventional save and make the effort to warn people beforehand, then yes if they intend to report people who leave then it is their responsibility to build a file on that person and collect the evidence. This would significantly reduce the burden of the staff to do any kind of research. All staff would have to do is look at the setup, determine if it is a “bad” or “illegal”. If it is an “illegal” save, then the case is thrown out and the person doing the reporting is the one who is actually punished. If the save is “bad”, but no sufficient evidence is provided to determine “intent” then the case is thrown out. If the case is neither “bad” or “illegal”, but no evidence for “intent” is provided then the case is thrown out unless the reporter can show a pattern by providing several replays in which the person is leaving saves, which I believe is another issue altogether and not necessarily related to “bad” saves.
  12. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Warning people is not sufficient excuse to host your unbalanced saves, Law's hacked saves, or a stump/scumbag save. Most people don't even read the lobby chat.
    Again you are so blinded by your desire to disagree that you simply have not read anything I wrote and therefore, I don't see that we can have a constructive conversation until you do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Etienne View Post
    Of course, intent wouldn’t be applicable to “illegal saves” such as those that are hacked or forced through via the quick-start exploit.
  13. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    Why? Why is anyone entitled to host a save? Especially folks like you and Law who are so hellbent on constantly hosting your saves and begging to get repicked?

    You realize that is part of the problem, right? You and Law and this inflated ego that your saves are something special. 2 NK and a judge is special, but not for the reason you think.
    You're so dead set in your position that you aren't reading what I am saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by Etienne View Post
    Everyone should be permitted the opportunity to host their own creations
    If a person, for example, wants to host a save in which there is the likelihood of becoming a stump, and creates a lobby for that specific purpose, and warns everyone that there will be an excess of bus drivers and auditors, and they agree to stay. That person does have a right to set that up. You seem only to care about yourself and your own wants and needs that you refuse to even entertain anything else.
  14. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    A host warning in the lobby changing anything makes no sense to me.
    Everyone should be permitted the opportunity to host their own creations, otherwise why give the option to make unique saves in the first place? If a person makes an effort to tell everyone in a lobby that they are planning on hosting an unconventional save, and the people stay, why should one person who doesn't have the "sense" to create their own lobby ruin it for those people?


    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    There is this strange notion that lobby leaders are guaranteed the ability to host their own save. Not sure where that comes from.
    Nobody here is saying anyone should have the guaranteed ability to host anything. If people do not want to play an unconventional save, they have the option of leaving that lobby or they have the option of repicking once it starts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    As much as you like to drag in what happens in Discord and the lobby into conversations, none of it matters. What matters is what occurs once the game has started.
    Intent matters. That just doesn't go away because you are showing your intent outside of the game. If a person is willing to announce their intent, that information should be admissible and a contributing factor in the determination of any punishment that is issued. This is not a foreign concept as people who have circumvented bans by creating smurfs who have admitted that they are smurfs in lobbies has had that information used against them, and rightfully so.
  15. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    All good points, Exeter. From the perspective of an individual, it may seem unfair to be forced to play a save that has settings you don’t enjoy. What I am proposing is a solution that benefits the community as a whole, because being allowed to leave a save on that basis only does damage.

    I believe that there is a solution that benefits everyone. You’ve made some valid points about hacked saves and the quick-start exploit. First and foremost, there should be no punishment for anyone who leaves a save for those reasons. I think that’s something that we all can agree on and would not result in an excess workload for staff.

    Now, I would like to address your point on judgement. Who decides what is a “bad†save? I think that after years of playing this mod there are some saves we can all agree are bad. The example you gave about witches and vigilantes is one. Taking this example, we can sort of create a blueprint for a “bad saveâ€; which I will attempt to define:

    A bad save is a save that exists to be chaotic, or exists for the sole purpose of farming for a particular achievement. Any save that relies solely on guesswork, and not teamwork and coordination as facilitated by a variety of roles.

    With “bad save†defined, I believe that intent should also be factored. For example, I believe that if a host makes an effort to warn people about their save while in the lobby, and people still choose to stay, and the host was not repicked, that host has a right to test out their save. That said, if a person simply leaves a save and does not provide any indication as to why, no “intent†can be determined and that person should not be penalized because they could be leaving for any number of reasons. In such instances, a number of replays should be required that shows a pattern of leaving games – which is another issue altogether, and not necessarily related to “bad savesâ€.

    Of course, intent wouldn’t be applicable to “illegal saves†such as those that are hacked or forced through via the quick-start exploit.

    With “bad†and “illegal†saves defined, processing reports is more streamlined and I don’t believe it will result in “more work†for the staff. I also believe it will be beneficial to the community because it will lower leave trains
  16. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    I've agreed to stop leaving saves as long as the host doesn't use the glitch or an otherwise hacked save. That was the armistice.
    If your appeal was granted on the basis that you will not do it again, then that is something that I can understand. However, your appeal was granted on the basis that I submitted the report for "role quitting", and because you left before your role was revealed to you, you did not role quit. That is not an acceptable basis for an appeal when my intent was clearly to report you for leaving the game because you did not like the save, and I only chose role quitting because there was no other option from the drop down menu that fit.
  17. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter350 View Post
    I'm curious to know as well.

    Prior to the report on me, the consensus is, it's only an offense if players leave AFTER the setup phase (role quit).
    Leaving BEFORE does not constitute an offense as long as they don't try to incite other players to leave with them (leave train).

    The reason why I was originally penalized (later removed via appeal) is because I was leaving an abnormally large number of games.
    The reason why I left an abnormally large number of games is because of the quick start exploit.

    If I understand Djar correctly, once the quick start exploit is fixed, things would go back to normal (i.e. people don't usually leave large number of games ==> leaving not punishable).

    I'm interested to hear Djar's comment, but also worried any statement will set things in stone.

    Yes, the quick start exploit is no good and they were right to grant your appeal on that basis.

    I am the type of person who likes when things are set in stone because there can be no wiggle room. It has been my experience, not specifically with this community but with life in general, that when things are not set in stone, we get punishments for one group of people and free passes for others. I want to avoid that if at all possible, and get a clear answer on what is acceptable and what isn't.

    That said, I would like for this to be an open discussion where more admins/mods and other players drop their opinions. Maybe I am in the wrong? Maybe people ought to have the right to leave a save they don't like? I want to know what the community thinks.

    EDIT: I should mention that Renegade left after the naming phase, a split second before his role was revealed to him. The cut was so close that to anyone else it appeared as if he left the game after his role was revealed. However, his replay ends a split second before.
  18. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Exeter350 View Post
    Anyway, I believe that once the quick start exploit gets patched, things should de-escalate.
    If a lobby is given sufficient time to repick an unconventional setup, and the majority chooses to play it, then players should abide by the outcome of that vote.
    On the flip side, if the majority chooses to play a conventional setup, then the minority should respect the wishes of the lobby.
    I agree with you, however I did not use that exploit and I never have. I don't even know how to do it. If you watch the replay you will see that despite Renegade's best efforts to try and get me repicked, he failed. Then he left the game as he said he would do in discord, before he even joined the game.

    All I am asking of the admin is if this is acceptable behavior or not.
  19. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by DJarJar View Post
    outdated quotes, arguments, etc.

    the repick system exists to let people repick shitty saves

    there is currently a glitch/exploit that lets host bypass the normal repick time to start their saves early (which you use).

    The solution is that frinckles will be patching the glitch soon
    Could you please provide me with a replay of me using that glitch? Because I have never used it.

    I don't understand why you would lie and say I did something I never did?

    For anyone interested in the truth, I have provided the replay that I submitted with my report below. I don't understand why an admin is dismissing my inquiry by saying I did something I didn't.


    Replay:

    Name: RenegadeQuits 001.SC2Replay
Views: 0
Size: 216.8 KB

    Again, I am asking if leaving a game because you don't like someone's save is allowed. If it is allowed, then please make that clear here so that there is no confusion. If it is not allowed then please make that clear, and tell me exactly how a person can go about reporting such behavior.
  20. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►Re: An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade View Post
    I never entered your game with the intention of leaving. I entered with the hope that other players would recognize your broken save settings and repick.
    This screenshot speaks for itself:

    Name: RenegadeAdmitsHeWillLeave.PNG
Views: 15
Size: 85.9 KB
  21. Replies
    2
    Views
    399

    ►►Etienne 1-S2-1-12243776◄◄

    Hi I am requesting a points restore.

    Here is a replay that shows my recent points and what not.
    Name: RenegadeQuits 001.SC2Replay
Views: 1
Size: 216.8 KB

    Also, is it possible to have my saves restored as well? You see I had a horrible accident with my computer and lost all my files, so replacing my bank is not possible.

    Thank you!
  22. Replies
    43
    Views
    5,714

    ►►An Update to Player Reports / Clarification◄◄

    Report:
    https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showt...-1-S2-1-327911

    I recently submitted a report in which a player joined my game with the intention of leaving because he didn't like the settings. I had to put "role quitting" as the reason for my report as there is no option for what he did, and I was lead to believe that leaving games because you don't like the save isn't allowed. However, the person submitted a request for an appeal and the appeal was granted on the bases that it wasn't technically a role quit.

    In a similar case (listed below), the person appealed the decision but the decision was upheld for the following reason:

    Quote Originally Posted by DJarJar View Post
    If we allowed people to leave every time they dislike the save with impunity then we could go hours and hours without a single game of mafia actually starting. In the precedent we've allowed it when the save is clearly awful. However it appears that you are trying to stretch that limit and leave anything you dislike at all.
    Source:
    https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showt...1-S2-1-5640160

    I strongly feel that the current climate of the mod is such that leaving games simply because you do not like the person's save does real damage. Especially if the person knows they don't like the save and chooses to join the lobby anyway knowing exactly what save the host is planning to use. There are plenty of saves and settings that I am not a fan of, and I opt to repick them, but if that doesn't work I play the save.

    I would like some clarification. Is leaving a game that is not a troll save, simply because you don't like the save now acceptable? If not, how should I have labeled my report so that it would have been processed and the appropriate punishment issued without appeal?
  23. Forum:Research and Development

    Thread:Psychopath [Neutral] Evil

    Thread Author:Insiligint

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    1
    Views
    617

    [New Role] ►►Re: Psychopath [Neutral] Evil◄◄

    This needs work, but it's a good idea. If a doctor visits and gets a message that he saved his target, but all killing roles' actions are accounted for, wouldn't the psychopath be outed as being a psychopath?
  24. Forum:Mafia Bug Reports

    Thread:I can't prefer

    Thread Author:Etienne

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    5
    Views
    1,365

    [Setup] ►►Re: I can't prefer◄◄

    Quote Originally Posted by DJarJar View Post
    @Etienne somehow your bank file has gotten corrupted and is missing a field which explains why prefer is not working for you.

    You'll have to delete your bank which will reset you back to 0 points. Then we will do a point restore back to your current stats. So, can you pm me on discord so we can arrange a time to do your restore? Cuz I will need to explain how to delete your bank and also will need an up-to-date replay so you don't lose any stats.

    My discord tag is @DJarJar and you can find an invite link to the discord server on the sidebar of our homepage.
    I've deleted the bank file. Here is my recent replay:

    Name: Recent Replay.SC2Replay
Views: 1
Size: 371.4 KB

    I will message you on discord to set something up. Thank you for your help.
  25. Forum:Mafia Discussion

    Thread:Proposed Chaos Mode Addition

    Thread Author:lawson

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    8
    Views
    2,464

    ►►Re: Proposed Chaos Mode Addition◄◄

    I don't see the problem with this.
  26. Forum:Punished Players & Appeals

    Thread:Chim 1-S2-1-12251099

    Thread Author:Etienne

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    4
    Views
    727

    {Watch List} ►►Chim 1-S2-1-12251099◄◄

    Account Name: Chim
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-12251099
    In-Game Name: amougst

    Crimes Committed: Gamethrowing

    Your Account Name: Etienne
    Summary: This person gamethrew on purpose because he didn't like the fact that Mayor pretended to be PH to avoid getting killed early. So when it came time to lynch the last triad, he abstained and let the triad win out of spite.

    Attachment
    Name: Chim Gamethrow.SC2Replay
Views: 9
Size: 363.0 KB
  27. Forum:Mafia Bug Reports

    Thread:I can't prefer

    Thread Author:Etienne

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    5
    Views
    1,365

    [Setup] ►►Re: I can't prefer◄◄

    Yes. Here it is:

    Name: Broken Prefer.SC2Replay
Views: 2
Size: 244.7 KB
  28. Forum:Mafia Bug Reports

    Thread:Witch Doctor Cultist suicides

    Thread Author:ChannelMiner

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    1
    Views
    534

    [Roles] ►►Re: Witch Doctor Cultist suicides◄◄

    I'm surprise this has not been addressed. It's a real bummer and really makes it not worth it to even be a witch doctor when everyone you convert instantly dies. You can't even heal them.
  29. Forum:Mafia Bug Reports

    Thread:I can't prefer

    Thread Author:Etienne

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    5
    Views
    1,365

    [Setup] ►►I can't prefer◄◄

    So I recently hit 20,000 points and was excited to finally be able to prefer but it does not work. I'm on my 3rd game after hitting 20,000 and I still can't -prefer.

    Account: Etienne
    ID: 1-S2-1-12243776
  30. Replies
    2
    Views
    609

    {Watch List} ►►ChillyB 1-S2-1-601885; JesusChrist 1-S2-1-4614590◄◄

    Account Name: ChillyB
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-601885
    In-Game Name: lol

    Crimes Committed: Gamethrowing

    Summary: Town almost lost because of him. On Day 7 it was down to Constable, Confirmed BD and Jailor (6)/Sheriff(15) claims. We decided to let the jailor claim jail and execute the sheriff claim to prove that he was jailor and not an interrogator. The next day, there was no execute because 6 claimed he was out of executes, but he did say he jailed 15 and 15 confirmed that he was jailed. The next day, we lynch 15 and it turns out that he was really sheriff! It is impossible that he was jailed because 6 was the enforcer, but he lied to town so that town would actually lose. If I wasn't bus driver, town would have definitely lost that game.

    Name: ChillyB gametrow.SC2Replay
Views: 5
Size: 513.9 KB
  31. Forum:Punished Players & Appeals

    Thread:Opiium #1-S2-1-999955

    Thread Author:Etienne

    Post Author:Etienne

    Replies
    2
    Views
    702

    {Watch List} ►►Opiium #1-S2-1-999955◄◄

    Account Name: Opiium
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-999955
    In-Game Name: E.T

    Crimes Committed: Gamethrowing

    Summary:

    i was the dragonhead and my own interrogator executed me n1. this is clearly gamethrowing/name targeting because of my name.

    Name: Opiium gamethrow.SC2Replay
Views: 3
Size: 199.6 KB
  32. Replies
    1
    Views
    352

    ►►Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776◄◄

    Etienne: 1-S2-1-12243776

    https://starcraft2.com/en-us/profile/1/1/12243776
Results 1 to 32 of 37