Page 39 of 54

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:10 pm
by Alisae
VOTE: Azral
and that post is sketchy as fuck.

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:13 pm
by Azral
In what way?

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:14 pm
by Alisae
"Oh, let's just find the biggest wagon and hop on it"

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:19 pm
by Azral
Sounds like you're not paying attention to the game. I've been pretty clear about thinking zefiend is someone we should lynch. If his wagon has more support than yours right now, fine.

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:31 pm
by Azral
In post 840, Alisae wrote:
In post 839, FrankJaeger wrote:Fuck it

VOTE: zefiend
ewww
did I ever mention how I don't believe your doc claim?
In post 841, FrankJaeger wrote:
In post 840, Alisae wrote:
In post 839, FrankJaeger wrote:Fuck it

VOTE: zefiend
ewww
did I ever mention how I don't believe your doc claim?
No, go ahead.
In post 927, Alisae wrote:wtf.
I rather lynch Frank cuz THATS NOT A DOCTOR.
In post 942, FrankJaeger wrote:I think i would be called a questionnare doc
Ali why are you dodging on providing reasoning for this

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:32 pm
by Alisae
It's a fake claim to cover up his lurkyness D1.

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:42 pm
by Azral
^terrible post
basically admitting the claim is probably legit, then ignoring it.


fwiw I have more reasons to believe frank is scum today than anyone else but doctor claim = assume true as far as I'm concerned.

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:18 pm
by ɀefiend
In post 925, Desperado wrote:Desperado - Mason
Davsto - Mason Vig
Narna - Census Taker?
Alisae - Watcher
Azral - Vig
KainTepes - Questionnaire Checker
Zefriend - Questionnaire Cop
SnarkySnowman - Informed Lyncher
Frank - Conditional Doctor
Just to confirm, you're saying you and Davsto confirm each other as Town?

In that case, there's no reason to think Azral is also a Town vig.

VOTE: Azral

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:33 pm
by Azral
I am. (I assume we're both limited or just one of us is)

There is less reason to think town has 6 investigative/clearing powers.

The setup is probably: People get the alignment they asked for, up to the point when that becomes unbalanced. Then they get another role xyzzy thinks they'd like.

We know from Narna that 9 people (majority) wanted alignments to affect roles, and we know from McMenno that a lot of people wanted 3p/scum.

Ali's predecessor asked for 3P which is a slight nudge toward her being scum but eh.

Also we know we have a double voter who hasn't claimed today - that person is likely scum for not claiming. We might be able to clear people by bringing wagons to L-1.

Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:48 pm
by Davsto
In post 957, ɀefiend wrote:Just to confirm, you're saying you and Davsto confirm each other as Town?
no zefiend weve both separately claimed masons with a hidden partner and are counterclaiming each other

(That's a sarcastic way of saying "yes")

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 2:28 am
by Narna
On top of liking them last phase, I'm buying Zefiend and Frank's claims. It makes sense given the game and my own role. Snarky's claim fits with the alignment question answers, but it's still a crackhead claim. I'm lowkey suspicious of the mason claim since that exact same claim could have come from the mcmenno/ari vig survivors. Thankfully, Desp and Davsto have looked pretty townie recently. KT is mostly iioa and a push on the sk. KT's late Lane vote was kinda pointless, and I fear it could have been a subtle buddying attempt on me. Azral's claim is the main reason he's so low. I like most of his content minus the Zef scumread. Alisae's claim is dubious since it's the only investigative unrelated to the questionnaire. Who did you watch last night? The Zefiend vote was opportunistic. The way Ali jokes about Snarky's role as if he doesn't believe the claim in #861 while voting for the guy who faked a guilty on Snarky is not settling well with me either.

Zefiend, Frank
Desperado, Davsto, Snarky
KT, Azral, Alisae

VOTE: Alisae

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 2:30 am
by Narna
Gamma totally answered third party and "yes" to influencing the roles. He said he had little experience with the role. I'd put good good money on those answers.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:09 am
by Desperado
lmao this dude has masons on 2nd tier

good job great effort

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:09 am
by Desperado
still 100% ok with killing narna

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:10 am
by Alisae
In post 962, Desperado wrote:lmao this dude has masons on 2nd tier

good job great effort
In post 963, Desperado wrote:still 100% ok with killing narna
I can't stop laughing.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 5:35 am
by Narna
Why ever could the mason claim not be confirm town? I wonder...
In post 712, Aristophanes wrote:Also, Mason claim would have been brilliant

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:10 am
by Davsto
So how do you explain my vig shot in general

Not to mention why would I, as scum, shoot a survivor, who was all but destined to be lynched the next day, distracting from scum for a further day? That would be a terrible choice.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:48 am
by SnarkySnowman
Not sure I'm ready to do that. It may have been a bad play but it looked kinda like a bad town play.

Like I'm on the ropes + about to be lynched. People think I'm a 3p lyncher, and are prepared to lynch me regardless of whether the guilty is real or not. He says "it was a reaction test" and unvotes.

If he were scum paired with me, that makes no sense, because now we're both on the hot seat.

If he were scum and doesn't know my alignment, he'd be pushing for me to die.
And then when I flip town, he gets the rope because he lied and got a townie killed.

His action doesn't make sense to me from a scum perspective. I'll sit on that for a bit but probably I will not be voting zefiend

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:48 am
by SnarkySnowman
That was @azral 949 by the way

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:23 am
by Azral
People don't always do what you'd expect them to do.

The fact is his claim is suspicious.

I would prefer Ali though, seems stronger.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:24 am
by Narna
In post 966, Davsto wrote:So how do you explain my vig shot in general

Not to mention why would I, as scum, shoot a survivor, who was all but destined to be lynched the next day, distracting from scum for a further day? That would be a terrible choice.
It would be a pretty shitty groupscum kill, but there are potentially a fuckton of third party in this game. If you only have the one shot like Ari, then I think locking down a mason claim with it would be solid. This compounds with Desperado pushing for the massclaim which makes the masonry a lower priority nk target. You two still seem town from your play, but this isn't the game to treat masons as confirm town.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:37 am
by SnarkySnowman
Remember how I said there are 7 factions? Not probably a fuckton of 3p, definitely. It makes sense both our info put together.

Azral, I think the claim is more believable than watcher or vig

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:01 am
by Desperado
In post 970, Narna wrote:It would be a pretty shitty groupscum kill, but there are potentially a fuckton of third party in this game. If you only have the one shot like Ari, then I think locking down a mason claim with it would be solid. This compounds with Desperado pushing for the massclaim which makes the masonry a lower priority nk target. You two still seem town from your play, but this isn't the game to treat masons as confirm town.
lmao i pushed for a mass claim when we had a fucking cop guilty out

you know, when we had 3 confirmed town and one scum left, maximum

you're so goddamn scummy

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:04 am
by SnarkySnowman
>3 confirmed town and one scum left maximum

Sorry what? I get the 3 confirmed town from your perspective but what do you mean by the other part

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:17 am
by Azral
In post 971, SnarkySnowman wrote:Azral, I think the claim is more believable than watcher or vig
We can agree on the watcher part - that's something.