Ryan wrote:Too many long posts since I last posted.
That isn't my fault. If I didn't have to defend myself, then I wouldn't make long posts. It's as simple as that. Since I do, since I'm close to a lynch, since people are refusing to listen to many of my excellent points, many of Red's good points, listen to many of the people defending me,
I continue to make long posts, each with reasoning which defends me, and shall continue to do so as long as I'm under the threat of being lynched.
I have a major headache from this game
You can do one of two things, Ryan, to stop your headache:
1: You can ignore my posts and continue voting me for it, making yourself look INCREDIBLY scummy, not only for not reading my posts, but for not listening to my logic, and for lynching a semi-clear player. (Dev, Red, and I are all semi-clear. Dev by rolecop [but could be mafia rolecop], me by Dev [being a lyncher, though, it bumps me down to semi-clear], and Red [my target could be mafia, making him only semi-clear].)
OR
2: You can take my word for it when I've said that I've defended BETTER than well against my attackers, unvote me, and scum hunt by looking at other players. The pro-town thing to do when wishing to avoid a headache.
But preferably, you do option C:
Ignore the headache and read everything, the even MORE pro-town thing to do, and form conclusions from just that.
and would honestly like to get to the next day, with Mastin gone, so I (and presumably others) wouldn't have as many headaches.
And this is where the problem really lies:
Long posts produce far more information than shorter ones. They contain far more potential slips, far more information to analyze, far more information to give us who the scum are.
They're how the BEST cases are made (prove me wrong: Show me a single post that was short yet provided a STRONG case), in both offense and defense. I've never seen a good defense that was short, and good offense that is short...well, is spread over several posts, not one. For if it were in one, it'd stop being a SHORT defense, now, wouldn't it?
Long posts are how the game of mafia works when you're truly playing.
I've SEEN you post walls of your own, Ryan. I've SEEN you respond to them. I KNOW that you can do better than what you currently are doing.
This inconsistency in your posting style and preference is, well, concerning. AND
My death won't remove all the long posts.
Red Coyote,
Zoraster,
And I, AT THE LEAST, produce a great number of walls.
Do you want both of them dead as well?
Two semi-clears and one unknown due to post length?
You can be suspicious of that all you want
Saying "go ahead and be suspicious over the argument; it doesn't matter" doesn't mean people won't do that, Ryan. I am incredibly suspicious of you now for that attitude, and for saying, basically, "I'm not suspicious because I said that I know that I'm doing what you accuse me of", which is incredibly scummy.
Now, these are just my interpretations of your wording.
Care to provide an alternative explanation?
Azhrei, why keep Mastin alive?
Simple:
Az is perhaps one of the very few who is actually listening to me and realizes that I am correct,
That I am a pro-town player,
That today is not the day for me to die.
King wrote:A nine player game where there are three scum and six town
This is the worst-case scenario for the town, because for the cop to get a result, it must be night-start, placing the town in mylo (Mislynch-and-lose. It is EM terminology, for the most part, and is similar to lylo, lynch or lose) day one. Some setups has that work out well on Epicmafia (*coughspoliticsasusual*), but most do not.
So the given scenario itself would be extremely scum-sided, as if the scum is smart and counter-claims, the town is forced to no-lynch, to prevent a loss. The next night-kill gives the "cops" more reports, and another dead body, etc.
A scum is outed day one (while not technically 'scum', this one represents Mastin).
A person is either scum or they aren't.
There is no "technically" about it.
If your given scenario is two scum and one anti-town role, with a day-role-cop instead of a night-role-cop, THEN it makes sense, but it ALSO still fails to account for the fact that, day one, there would be TWO people who are confirmed "not scum" (the role cop, the anti-town role), making the chances 2/7.
In the case of a lyncher,
That becomes 2/6.
1/3.
33%.
Making the odds of lynching scum EQUAL to the chances before the "scum" was outed before.
The way you are putting it sounds like you are advocating lynching pro-towners so the chance of lynching anti-towners goes up, which you cannot possibly be advocating. What you are saying is mathematically true when taken over multiple days, but that doesn't matter because it is irrelevant to the game of mafia.
Good players think: Think about DAYS ahead. This is like, in a newbie game, the scum discussing what times they'll be online when in lylo, in their pre-game chat, and also discussing what possible roles are out there, what to claim, etc.
New/bad players think: Oh, it's bad/unnecessary for this day. We won't do it.
In other words,
THE POINT OF MAFIA IS TO LOOK AHEAD. See the possible consequences of your actions. See the possible outcomes, the possible advantages, the possible disadvantages of action X.
So, YES, I am advocating for thinking DAYS ahead because that's what any GOOD player SHOULD do.
Short-sightedness-->BAD.
Long-term thinking-->Key to victory.
Understand that, now?
Yes, in mafia, as in life, you avoid UNNECESSARY risks.
No risk, no reward.
Risk of hitting a pro-town player/outing an important role will lead to the reward of lynching scum.
Risk of me claiming was to hopefully end up with the reward of being a full-fledged member of the town.
Risks are a huge part of mafia.
Gambits employed,
Tactics used,
Lynches,
Bold moves,
etc.
No guts, no glory.
There are dozens of ways to say it:
Mafia is a game full of risks.
Empking wrote:Have you ever seen that role before?
On here?
Once or twice. I forget where.
On Epicmafia?
All the time.
Me being from epicmafia and being a role commonly on epicmafia, I did what I would do there on epicmafia:
Claim everything.
And hope the risk gives the reward of winning.
Here, the role is rare, and even in a setup like this, I gave the chances of a role capable of converting me to be less than 40%.
That 40% is enough for me to claim.
It's enough for me to try and push for the minuscule chance of not losing.
It's enough to give me hope.
Dev wrote:and yes mason recruiters exist, I've come across em before.
I'd appreciate a link, in my defense of the role existing in previous games. It would be REALLY appreciated, Devestation.
Zor wrote:Length and post number, as I assume you'd admit, is not a sign of being pro-town at all.
Uh, no, it shows devotion to the game.
Devotion-->Pro-town,
Lack of Devotion-->Anti-town.
By having the longest contentful posts, and the greatest post number, I'm certainly proving how I have been pro-town by that definition.
That's not even including all of the excellent points I've brought up,
My scum hunting,
My insight into the game,
And my theories.
I assume when you were scum, your posts were both lengthy and numerous.
I have no true completed game as scum, Zor.
No.
No, I do not have lengthy posts and numerous posts when scum.
If I did, I'd link it for comparison to my play this game.
It's that your post-count and post-number cannot be viewed as an indication of pro-townness.
When factoring in the content of the posts as being solid, I think you can.
It's just you don't want to.
For it'd be one more thing in my defense, one more think which would make me less likely to be lynched, something which you clearly oppose.
I have a suspicion that THIS is why you're insistent on doing the math. Not the "99%" that you think will prove you right (as I think it will only reinforce my point). But that you'll have poured a lot of effort into the game and you're hoping people will equate effort with pro- town.
Effort IS pro-town.
Lack of effort is anti-town. Perhaps not scummy, but certainly not beneficial to the town. People who self-vote, even self-hammer, show a lack of effort/devotion to the game.
Those who fight to the bitter end, who give their scumspects, explain why, give solid reasoning as to why they're not scum, are showing effort, are showing a true devotion to the game.
And that's something I find incredibly pro-town to do.
Don't get me wrong. I do believe you hope to become a town member.
And the BEST way to become a town member is to NOT lie and to
!
It's possible you hope to lead us to scum today as well.
Even if I didn't want scum dead, Zor, let me put it this way:
It'd either be a scum hunting lynch today, or a lynch of me. No other option exists, unless by some miracle we have another day cop with a guilty. So, yes, at least for today, you MUST admit, that I want scum dead more than any other player in this game.
But the first is merely a hope
Without hope, there is no reason to live at all.
not something that you've already decided is something you're going to count on.
WRONG!
I
counting on it already.
I wouldn't have claimed if I wasn't.
I am counting on a 40% chance, a gambit which I am praying will pay off. I've got nothing else, other than that 40%. Other than that small chance to live, I've got nothing.
So I put all my hopes into it.
My one hope of winning right now is in that 40%.
That 40% caused me to claim.
If that 40% is not true, then I'm dead.
It's that simple.
The second would be self-serving (though obviously beneficial to town).
I suppose this is true:
It serves my purposes, by letting me live at least until n1,
And gains me credit from the town that my motivation is legit, and that my intentions are pure.
Is there truly a problem you can see with that?
This is outright false.
No.
I won't claim masoned when I'm not.
1: Outing real masons-->BAD.
2: Being forced to claim my partner, when I have none-->DEATH SENTENCE.
3: Lying-->Leads to Lynch all Liars-->BAD.
4: Honesty-->Pro-town-->GOOD.
That's the shortest summary I can give of it, but I can elaborate on it later.
Again, no matter what, claiming mason when not is bad.
People would doubt it. So I'd have to claim a partner. If I failed to do so, I'd get lynched.
And the real masons might CC...
There's a bunch of problems with claiming masoned day two if I am, in fact, not masoned.
So don't you DARE think that I would do so.
You fake claim mason, and you increase your chances of survival and this is exactly why you'd do it.
No.
Look at this town.
For thirty seconds.
They doubt EVERYTHING I say.
They doubt my target.
They doubt my intentions.
They doubt I'm the lyncher.
They doubt the statistics.
They would definitely doubt my mason claim.
So I'd be forced to out a "mason partner", and that "mason partner" would disprove my story as false.
No,
Claiming masoned when I am not is suicidal.
Where claiming the truth (that I was not) leaves me with a slim chance of survival.
You say you have all the reason in the world to tell the truth, but that's false too. You have all the reason in the world to keep yourself alive.
I'm not a survivor.
My goal right now is to avoid being lynched day one.
If I do that, then I've fulfilled my usefulness. I've tested the setup, and might have a chance of winning. If I hit scum with the day one lynch, even better!
Simply put, sure, today, I want to stay alive.
Night one, I'd accept my death willingly.
your assertion you have proved your target is RC.
The evidence is there.
I've proven how
-I was in my cop meta and breadcrumbed similarly,
-Only three people would make me do that, Red amongst them,
-That I breadcrumbed my true role early on. This I have done since I joined. Look at 742, for example. One of my first posts of the game was "Their scumminess warrants not only questioning, but investigation", or something like that.
Ask Ace.
But it was a huge breadcrumb/cop slip, VERY early on.
-That I have no reason to lie, right now. We lynch all liars, so I don't lie, in the attempt to appear more pro-town.
...How much more do you need?
The evidence has been laid out several times.
I've shown how Red's my target, the best that I can.
If that's not enough, then nothing would be.
People may buy this or not, but it's not proof whatsoever.
I've given you the proof. You're just IGNORING it because you refuse to accept the prospect of three semi-clear players and want to cast doubt/lynch at least two of them
[/u]!
Claiming that we ALL should know is insulting.
Not when you're all experienced players, and simply researching a LITTLE into my previous plays should prove that I'm telling the truth.
Are you suggesting that if there is a vigil, from town's perspective we should have him shoot you?
Yes.
-It tests the setup,
-I am an anti-town role. Better to get rid of me n1 than to lynch me d2.
How many times must I say that?
But what you've failed to consider is that for those on the fence, they could be the deciding element.
Others have made this accusation of me; it's fair to return the favor:
Fence sitting-->scum tell. They need something to push for a lynch of someone not one of them, and statistics of another player give them just that.
or it could be scumminess
Quoted for truth.
The twist of irony:
Zoraster ran out of time with that post.
I, in responding to it, ran out of mine.
Be back soon/tomorrow. (One or the other)
)
