Micro 914: CultD3 (Over)

Blatant Scum · Post Post #400 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:44 pm

In post 398, ObviousScum wrote:Don't worry Blatant, no one will interpret my vote as distancing! We got this

Who are you?
This is the first time I see you!
I totally don't share PT with you!

Hectic · Post Post #401 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:51 pm

In post 399, Blatant Scum wrote:
Disclaimer:
I will be off-meta in this game (I will, for example, be doing reads). Don't use information gathered in this game for reading my meta.

Huh. Why'd you sub your main in?

shos · Post Post #402 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:52 pm

In post 396, Hectic wrote:I'm feeling pretty damn good about sh0s!cult, I think. I don't know why you'd view him as normal cultist more over CL; different players have different ways of playing CL to whoever said that. Maybe fake town-slipping and being strongly opinionated in early setup spec is sh0s' way of playing it.

@sh0s: You moderated a game here before your hiatus, and use daytalk, and don't mention it as a particularly special thing. It's not written standalone in your rules, and you don't remind scum they can daytalk in either of the mafia PTs. Gives me the impression that you know it's a given, and doesn't need mentioning.

Dude that was part of a series of games that I modded in attempt to create a multiball balanced micro. daytalk was inherent as that was a crazy bastard setup.
Honestly, you're mudslinging to the point where I wonder if I should get you back to null or worse, lol. This is hardcore strawman - you're pushing the argument that I am scum because I had somehow fakeslipped town by not knowing that there is daytalking while knowing 2 years ago that daytalk is common in normal games when I mod crazy bastard micros - what on earth, dude

shos · Post Post #403 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:53 pm

OMFG do we have blatantscum and obviousscum as twon different players WHAT

shos · Post Post #404 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:54 pm

this is going to be confusing lol
and if scumteam is comprised of obvscum and blatantscum this is like worthy of a scummie

shos · Post Post #405 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:56 pm

@Hectic: Please do, by all means, try to convince yourself in your argument. When you've done the research - return to me and try to read my mind 2 years ago, lol. waste of time.

ObviousScum · Post Post #406 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:56 pm

In post 400, Blatant Scum wrote:I totally don't share PT with you!

Whatever you say, buddy

Farkran · Post Post #407 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:57 pm

Oh, hi blatant scum! I would... never have guessed who you were. At least not any time soon.

What's with obvious scum now, are you twins?

ObviousScum · Post Post #408 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:58 pm

He's the Jeffrey to my Donnie

Farkran · Post Post #409 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:00 pm

I don't think obvious scum is cult though. Silly entrance, but not scummy. There is merit in what he suggested, although i do not agree with him.

Blatant Scum · Post Post #410 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:00 pm

In post 386, ObviousScum wrote:If we lynch the non-CL every single day aren't we basically guaranteed to have everyone but two be in the pool of winners?

Cult wins with the majority, not parity, so technically everyone but one person.

Blatant Scum · Post Post #411 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:01 pm

In post 388, ObviousScum wrote:The biggest problem being 3A. Obviously this plan sucks for uncrecruitable townies (0-2 players) but other than that basically we can get everyone to win?

Conversely if we play conventionally, every single townie we mislynch is a townie that we're putting at risk of losing the game, when that's totally unnecessary.

Joint win is best for everyone except UTs right?

Guess why Bingle asked everyone to claim UT/ not UT.

Bingle · Post Post #412 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:02 pm

In post 367, shos wrote:Now you claim that I "knew you would prove my lie". Let's say I did. Why on Earth would I do that as scum?..and for the record, why on Earth would I think you will "prove" this? I don't know you.

Actually, we've played quite a few games together, iirc. My main is Jingle. If it helps, most of our completed games are actually from a long time ago when daychat actually was uncommon and encryptor was an OP role.

And yeah, that's kinda the point of asking why you would present such an obvious lie. I don't see how scum you expects to get away with it and I don't see what town you hopes to gain from it, so I'm interested in why you posted it in the first place.

Honestly, I'm kinda disappointed no one caught mine.

Bingle · Post Post #413 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:03 pm

In post 411, Blatant Scum wrote:Guess why Bingle asked everyone to claim UT/ not UT.

Nah, I'd rather lose than not play the game, even if Micc did kinda force me into it.

Blatant Scum · Post Post #414 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:04 pm

In post 401, Hectic wrote:
In post 399, Blatant Scum wrote:
Disclaimer:
I will be off-meta in this game (I will, for example, be doing reads). Don't use information gathered in this game for reading my meta.
Huh. Why'd you sub your main in?

Couldn't resist it after my co-cultist replaced as ObviousScum.

Blatant Scum · Post Post #415 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:05 pm

In post 409, Farkran wrote:I don't think obvious scum is cult though. Silly entrance, but not scummy. There is merit in what he suggested, although i do not agree with him.

My entrance would look similar if replaced. As any role.

Farkran · Post Post #416 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:07 pm

In post 411, Blatant Scum wrote:
In post 388, ObviousScum wrote:The biggest problem being 3A. Obviously this plan sucks for uncrecruitable townies (0-2 players) but other than that basically we can get everyone to win?

Conversely if we play conventionally, every single townie we mislynch is a townie that we're putting at risk of losing the game, when that's totally unnecessary.

Joint win is best for everyone except UTs right?
Guess why Bingle asked everyone to claim UT/ not UT.

Hmmm... you are not suggesting that Bingle thought about the same thing a newly replaced in player just laid out, unless they are partnered.

But if they are, why out this? It's obvious that, while being probably an optimal strategy for this specific setup, it's against the spirit of the game and for that reason alone at least half of the players (on average) would not agree to it. The only reasonable motive would be luring the cultist out. Maybe a poor motive, but trying does no harm.

Hectic · Post Post #417 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:08 pm

In post 405, shos wrote:@Hectic: Please do, by all means, try to convince yourself in your argument. When you've done the research - return to me and try to read my mind 2 years ago, lol. waste of time.

Lul, these are some insane games you've modded; I'll give you that.
Was daytalk in this one? viewtopic.php?p=7824894&user_select%5B% ... 9#p7824894
I can't see any mention of it.

Blatant Scum · Post Post #418 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:09 pm

In post 416, Farkran wrote:
In post 411, Blatant Scum wrote:
In post 388, ObviousScum wrote:The biggest problem being 3A. Obviously this plan sucks for uncrecruitable townies (0-2 players) but other than that basically we can get everyone to win?

Conversely if we play conventionally, every single townie we mislynch is a townie that we're putting at risk of losing the game, when that's totally unnecessary.

Joint win is best for everyone except UTs right?
Guess why Bingle asked everyone to claim UT/ not UT.
Hmmm... you are not suggesting that Bingle thought about the same thing a newly replaced in player just laid out, unless they are partnered.

But if they are, why out this? It's obvious that, while being probably an optimal strategy for this specific setup, it's against the spirit of the game and for that reason alone at least half of the players (on average) would not agree to it. The only reasonable motive would be luring the cultist out. Maybe a poor motive, but trying does no harm.

I guess there are at least two players who would claim Cult Member after asked about it.
Am I right, Obv?

ObviousScum · Post Post #419 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:10 pm

In post 413, Bingle wrote:
In post 411, Blatant Scum wrote:Guess why Bingle asked everyone to claim UT/ not UT.
Nah, I'd rather lose than not play the game, even if Micc did kinda force me into it.

What do you mean by this?

Blatant Scum · Post Post #420 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:10 pm

People who town read Kanna: do you know her meta?

ObviousScum · Post Post #421 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:11 pm

In post 418, Blatant Scum wrote:I guess there are at least two players who would claim Cult Member after asked about it.
Am I right, Obv?

If I was culted I would absolutely claim culted unless the rest of the cult was fiercely opposed

Not A Korina Alt · Post Post #422 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:11 pm

In post 410, Blatant Scum wrote:
In post 386, ObviousScum wrote:If we lynch the non-CL every single day aren't we basically guaranteed to have everyone but two be in the pool of winners?
Cult wins with the majority, not parity, so technically everyone but one person.

Once again, that's my wording at play. If cult comes down to a 2v2 situation with no CL, or all townies cannot be recruited, cult wins. That's only in tie-breaking situations of UT+UT versus CL + Cultist

Blatant Scum · Post Post #423 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:12 pm

Obvious, did you manage to fake some reads, or do you need me to help you in PT?

Not A Korina Alt · Post Post #424 (ISO) » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:12 pm

In post 420, Blatant Scum wrote:People who town read Kanna: do you know her meta?

Also no, I don't meta people. I read people based on how they play in this game.
I also really don't like Blatent and Obvious's interactions here.