Touhou: MitLoF ~ Makai Mix (Game Over)

Jingle · Post Post #2700 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:19 pm

I didn't lie. I'm not going to die today.

Jingle · Post Post #2701 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:19 pm

And your reasoning there?

Curiosity · Post Post #2702 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:20 pm

In post 2697, Jingle wrote:Hey, so Wis. You feel like elaborating on that Om townread yet?

I reread him during the night and found he's town. I particularly liked how he asked me to wagon someone with him. Scum wanted me to keep tunneling Kagami so he wouldn't take that risk.

~Wis

Jingle · Post Post #2703 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:21 pm

do you have an approximate page number?

pieguyn · Post Post #2704 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:34 pm

In post 2685, Jingle wrote:I liked neither Om's nor NPIAU's jump onto your wagon. What are your thoughts there?

what didn't you like about either of them? there was no reasoning attached to either one

I also think scum are more likely to hedge in this scenario given they 100% know whatever result DOAA got has to be wrong (discounting any kind of SK/multiball), whereas town are less likely to care about putting up any reasoning when there's a guilty on the table. this isn't exactly a strong reason given it's not hard at all for scum to fake it, but I think both of them were null

although I just remembered something, let me check again

Jingle · Post Post #2705 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:34 pm

I think I found it. I'm not sure it's from Om-town, but Alchemist's flip should clarify that a little and I also think he's likely scum.

VOTE: Alchemist

I don't see Om and Alch as a reasonable possibility.

pieguyn · Post Post #2706 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:35 pm

and the point with the other thing is, I would expect town to be more likely to vote me or do anything instead of..... actively trying to derail the wagon. Ank didn't jump on the wagon, he was defending me.

Jingle · Post Post #2707 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:36 pm

I didn't like the lack of reasoning, which showed lazyness IMO. I also didn't like the blatant disregard for how quickly you were getting to those numbers.

It would have been rather easy for scum to jump onto that wagon and hammer then try to pin everything on MS the next day.

Jingle · Post Post #2708 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:38 pm

In post 2706, pieguyn wrote:and the point with the other thing is, I would expect town to be more likely to vote me or do anything instead of..... actively trying to derail the wagon. Ank didn't jump on the wagon, he was defending me.

Why would scum try to derail your wagon. I'm seeing optimal situation from the scum POV of you getting lynched before you can claim, flipping town, and then a flashwagon on MS for 'faking' a guilty. That's two days of minimal discussion and myslynches, while they get to NK whoever is the scariest.

Jingle · Post Post #2709 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:42 pm

Also I just realize the role I was thinking wouldn't return a guilty on 3rd party, only on groupscum. Please disregard.

Curiosity · Post Post #2710 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:43 pm

Because they know the "guilty" to be incorrect and therefore know the wagon will die when pie claims. Therefore towncred.

~Wis

pieguyn · Post Post #2711 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:43 pm

In post 2707, Jingle wrote:I didn't like the lack of reasoning, which showed lazyness IMO. I also didn't like the blatant disregard for how quickly you were getting to those numbers.

It would have been rather easy for scum to jump onto that wagon and hammer then try to pin everything on MS the next day.

there's a guilty on the table

who is more likely to be lazy in that scenario, keeping in mind the guilty means pressure is off of town for a day?

In post 2708, Jingle wrote:Why would scum try to derail your wagon. I'm seeing optimal situation from the scum POV of you getting lynched before you can claim, flipping town, and then a flashwagon on MS for 'faking' a guilty. That's two days of minimal discussion and myslynches, while they get to NK whoever is the scariest.

meh

I see what you're saying, but in a scenario like this I wouldn't expect one scum trying to derail the wagon to change anything. if there was a scenario where I would get flashlynched, it would happen regardless of if Ank was WK'ing me or not.

p-edit: also, what Wisdom said

Jingle · Post Post #2712 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:45 pm

Ank defending you after both me and Wis did is null to me. AD's

In post 2603, ActionDan wrote:I'm glad this isn't some shit-tier fake guilty gambit play. that's always an annoyance with you people.

Now I await Pie's
full
claim or else him calling you a sack of shit.

is gross. I also don't like Beast's

In post 2599, beastcharizard wrote:Metal has some sort of award. I am willing to pretend it means something and if he is wrong we can just power lynch him tomorrow.

Jingle · Post Post #2713 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:46 pm

In post 2711, pieguyn wrote:there's a guilty on the table

who is more likely to be lazy in that scenario, keeping in mind the guilty means pressure is off of town for a day?

Fair. It's possible that I'm colored by my perception of people's reactions to guilties as well.

pieguyn · Post Post #2714 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:49 pm

beast might be scum actually

I don't like the way he disappeared for a large majority of D1 after notsci announced he had a townread on him - that is generally more likely to come from scum who are manipulating their meta. it also makes the notsci kill make more sense although he was a valid kill regardless of what beast is

btw, the

in your post didn't work

pieguyn · Post Post #2715 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:50 pm

when the hell did they fix that? I meant to write [ area][ /area]

Jingle · Post Post #2716 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:51 pm

Yeah, I didn't mean to hit the area button on the preview page.

Jingle · Post Post #2717 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:52 pm

My paranoia from yesterday didn't resolve itself either on beast, but I'm not sure how strong it is.

Jingle · Post Post #2718 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:54 pm

In post 1737, beastcharizard wrote:I am better as scum. give me a break.

This by the way is the source of that paranoia. I know that Beast sees his town-meta as VI and intentionally uses that as scum.

Dreams of an Absolution · Post Post #2719 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:05 pm

In post 2693, Curiosity wrote:There are no words, MS. You thought he's a mason yesterday, your "guilty" makes sense with him being a mason, yet you fucking make him claim. No fucking words.

~Wis

Fuck your refusal to claim. If I can see a mason pair and ask it multiple times in thread then so can scum. Hiding like a coward is just cowardly and begging to be shot.

Curiosity · Post Post #2720 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:09 pm

Mason knowledge benefits scum. Just because you want to know the masons it doesn't mean they have to claim.

~Wis

Jingle · Post Post #2721 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:11 pm

Too late, we can save the argument about masons claiming for the postgame.

Dreams of an Absolution · Post Post #2722 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:14 pm

In post 2720, Curiosity wrote:Mason knowledge benefits scum. Just because you want to know the masons it doesn't mean they have to claim.

~Wis

I disagree. All the more so when the given mason pair are acting suspiciously yet have obvious associations with each other.

Whatever. Doubt there are two mason pairs in the game. AD/Beeboy probably a neighborhood pair. AD can be scum

Curiosity · Post Post #2723 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:15 pm

Will you fucking stop assigning roles to people?

Dreams of an Absolution · Post Post #2724 (ISO) » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:16 pm

In post 2720, Curiosity wrote:Mason knowledge benefits scum. Just because you want to know the masons it doesn't mean they have to claim.

~Wis

I know the masons and want to be sure =/= I 'want to know' the masons

Like seriously, if your pair has been called out correctly already just claim ffs