This posts irks me, but yes, I agree.In post 1398, Sakura Hana wrote:Oh hey Sven is suddenly agreeing with me. (I think?)
I am a no one in this game, me agreeing or not should mean nothing.
This posts irks me, but yes, I agree.In post 1398, Sakura Hana wrote:Oh hey Sven is suddenly agreeing with me. (I think?)
And this, the predicate of the sentence you still haven't read...Regardless of his alignment pie will yield the most info for town, and that's really what D1 is about. Information.
...eliminating the obv scum choice for NK forces their hand to have to choose thereby giving more chance for POE.
It's called buddying...In post 1398, Sakura Hana wrote:Oh hey Sven is suddenly agreeing with me. (I think?)
Wrong. Obvious nightkills remove any possibility for meaningful analysis, as "any scum" would make the "obvious" kill.In post 1386, Svenskt Stål wrote:You do realize that what you are saying is that we should do the "OBV" NKs, so scum cant. Thereby forcing them to make stuff we can get clues from?...Thats how I read it.
It's called a hypothetical.In post 1390, Sakura Hana wrote:I disagree, why would he call someone an "obv scum kill" if he thought said person was scum.In post 1388, Svenskt Stål wrote:But its not a scumslip, its either intentional from scum, or retard town.
How am I buddying with sakura, I called him scummy, then his post irked me. The post you qouted thou is a good example of buddying.In post 1402, waynegg wrote:It's called buddying...In post 1398, Sakura Hana wrote:Oh hey Sven is suddenly agreeing with me. (I think?)
Uhhm, I think I need a defenition on "obvious nightkills" here, to me it means strong players, clear players, power roles.In post 1403, Majiffy wrote:Wrong. Obvious nightkills remove any possibility for meaningful analysis, as "any scum" would make the "obvious" kill.In post 1386, Svenskt Stål wrote:You do realize that what you are saying is that we should do the "OBV" NKs, so scum cant. Thereby forcing them to make stuff we can get clues from?...Thats how I read it.
Obviously this logic is flawed with four other claimed power roles, but yeah, what Sakura said.In post 1406, waynegg wrote:IF he's truly town, he's who scum have to kill because they can't have town killing day and night. That's why he's the obvious choice for NK if town. I thought you'd played this game before Sven...
Pie is either scum or townIn post 1406, waynegg wrote:IF he's truly town, he's who scum have to kill because they can't have town killing day and night. That's why he's the obvious choice for NK if town. I thought you'd played this game before Sven...
In Hypothetical A, Player X is a town Vig. Town Vigs are dangerous to Scum Team 1. Scum Team 1 killing Player X is therefore an "obvious nightkill".In post 1405, Svenskt Stål wrote:Uhhm, I think I need a defenition on "obvious nightkills" here, to me it means strong players, clear players, power roles.
Are you saying that you trick scum by lynching those?
Because we think he's scum, you derp.In post 1407, Sakura Hana wrote:P-Edit: SO LET SCUM KILL HIM INSTEAD OF KILLING HIM YOURSELF HERE JEESH.
No, just fucking no.In post 1410, Majiffy wrote:In Hypothetical A, Player X is a town Vig. Town Vigs are dangerous to Scum Team 1. Scum Team 1 killing Player X is therefore an "obvious nightkill".In post 1405, Svenskt Stål wrote:Uhhm, I think I need a defenition on "obvious nightkills" here, to me it means strong players, clear players, power roles.
Are you saying that you trick scum by lynching those?
Therefore despite the fact that we feel Player X is scum, even if Player X is town, Hypothetical A argues that pro-town benefit can be had from lynching Player X.
Because we think he's scum, you derp.In post 1407, Sakura Hana wrote:P-Edit: SO LET SCUM KILL HIM INSTEAD OF KILLING HIM YOURSELF HERE JEESH.
Wayne, I'm going to say this the nicest way possible.In post 1411, waynegg wrote:Site meta dictates a day vig is town. It also dictates that town don't get two extra kills by way of vig (even if in Multiball), ergo Pie is most likely lying scum. Sure, Mhork could have gone off the ranch with his setup, but I'm not getting into setup spec. That house is stacked and a sure fire way to lose.
Town pie being NK'd gives town no info to lead into D2. None.
And in other news, Nat is scum.
Right so we have two claimed town vigs?In post 1411, waynegg wrote:Site meta dictates a day vig is town. It also dictates that town don't get two extra kills by way of vig (even if in Multiball), ergo Pie is most likely lying scum. Sure, Mhork could have gone off the ranch with his setup, but I'm not getting into setup spec. That house is stacked and a sure fire way to lose.
Town pie being NK'd gives town no info to lead into D2. None.
And in other news, Nat is scum.
You're right, we could just lynch him.In post 1412, Svenskt Stål wrote:No, just fucking no.
Majiffy jesus fucking christ.
We dont need to guess you fucking derp.
That just creates more claims.In post 1415, Svenskt Stål wrote:WE LYNCH OUTSIDE CLAIMS
No. No we can't.In post 1414, Sakura Hana wrote:Majiffy can use his PR to confirm that pieguy indeed killed who we wanted him to kill. So can talah.
A tracker would see who his/hers target visist?
Seems like I've read that somewhere before... Where was that?... Oh yeah...In post 1414, Sakura Hana wrote:Ok then let's play waynegg's game, I think Majiffy is scum and im going to want him lynched today to take away the obv NK on a watcher since we gain no info from it.
From waynegg's logic, this is the correct way of playing. In fact, Majiffy can use his PR to confirm that pieguy indeed killed who we wanted him to kill. So can talah. But NO he rather NOT use his PR to confirm his suspicions about pieguy and instead he rather lynch him.
In that post you still haven't effing read...In post 1376, waynegg wrote:Derp town needs to stop Derping and lynch pie, or even Jiffy.