Game Setup:
Game Status:
Players Alive:
1. Dierfire
3. gigabyteTroubadour
4. Lycanfire
6. *kraska77
7. RadiantCowbells (SE)
* indicates a prod
A | B | C | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Town Jailkeeper | Vanilla Townie | Mafia Goon |
2 | Mafia Roleblocker | Town Cop | Town Doctor |
3 | Town 1-Shot Bulletproof | Mafia Goon | Town Tracker |
I know it's still early in RVS, but does something about this vote seem deliberate to anyone else?
I gotta stop writing messages while in a hurry, I've made three typos this game already... :KIn post 11, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:I know it's still early in RVS, but does something about this vote seem deliberate to anyone else?
(mafia scum doesn't have a [hr] so just imagine this is a nice, clean horizontal rule)
House, as the IC, do you have a private thread in which you comment on us newbies' plays to give constructive criticism? I noticed that a couple of the ICs from the games I read did that, but not all of them did.
Also, if you're lynched early into the game (despite my comment i'mnotsuspicious of your move), are you still allowed to provide help with theory questions about the game, so as long as you don't provide gamebreaking information? Because if not, it seems like there's a penalty to us accusing you too early in the game if you could help newer players out.
I have never heard of an IC PT, so I'm asking the mod for clarification on the ability to post in there once dead. I highly doubt it, though.In post 11, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:House, as the IC, do you have a private thread in which you comment on us newbies' plays to give constructive criticism? I noticed that a couple of the ICs from the games I read did that, but not all of them did.
Also, if you're lynched early into the game (despite my comment i'm that suspicious of your move), are you still allowed to provide help with theory questions about the game, so as long as you don't provide gamebreaking information? Because if not, it seems like there's a penalty to us accusing you too early in the game if you could help newer players out.
I see my mistake, I just read a very long (and constructive) mod pt. For some reason I was under the impression that it was an IC who wrote it. Definitely not the same thing!In post 13, House wrote:I have never heard of an IC PT, so I'm asking the mod for clarification on the ability to post in there once dead. I highly doubt it, though.
Oh, of course not. I was just wondering what would happen theoretically.In post 13, House wrote: That said, you should not want to lynch ANYONE frivolously, not just the IC. If I'm scum, I need to swing just like anyone else.
It gets screwed up on my phone, sadly. But it works fine on my computer!In post 13, House wrote:Also, you can quote a partial post by highlighting the text you want to quote and clicking the quote button.
The two SE slots can also provide some guidance on mechanics and such, but they are not bound to the IC code is conduct and any game theory they provide should be judged on its own merits.In post 14, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:But I do wonder about the design decision behind the possibility of ICs dying early. Was the idea that by the end of D1, players would be able to go without their IC if they were lynched or NK'd? I guess that bridge'll be crossed when we get there.
EBWOPIn post 15, House wrote:The two SE slots can also provide some guidance on mechanics and such, but they are not bound to the IC codeIn post 14, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:But I do wonder about the design decision behind the possibility of ICs dying early. Was the idea that by the end of D1, players would be able to go without their IC if they were lynched or NK'd? I guess that bridge'll be crossed when we get there.isof conduct and any game theory they provide should be judged on its own merits.
Is your meaning by "deliberate" because I also voted for Smurphinator? I'm not sure what else you could mean by it. If so, I can see your point, though I'm not sure if that really provides that much information yet, given that it's still RVS (I think). It's certainly something to be noted.In post 11, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:I know it's still early in RVS, but does something about this vote seem deliberate to anyone else?
It IS deliberate.In post 11, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:I know it's still early in RVS, but does something about this vote seem deliberate to anyone else?
For casting a naked vote into a convenient wagon...
EBWOPIn post 20, House wrote:Forcastingturning a naked vote into a convenient wagon...
VOTE: makesnosense
Even in RVS, nothing is truly random. By deliberate I meant that there was some sort of alignment-related motivation behind it, be it town or mafia. Obviously it's not enough to build a case, but I think it's interesting that someone put a random vote on someone before seeing how they react.In post 17, Harlii wrote:Is your meaning by "deliberate" because I also voted for Smurphinator? I'm not sure what else you could mean by it. If so, I can see your point, though I'm not sure if that really provides that much information yet, given that it's still RVS (I think). It's certainly something to be noted.In post 11, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:I know it's still early in RVS, but does something about this vote seem deliberate to anyone else?
Of course, I would not be surprised if itHouse wrote: It IS deliberate.
I chose that person to vote because they used 'ph' instead of 'f' in their name.
Hence, not smurftastic.
I moved my vote because my first vote was rvs and my second is based on suspicion.In post 22, gigabyteTroubadour wrote:I'm also not sure how I feel about makesnosense's vote or how House moved his vote.