First off - no need for personal jabs
1. Even you called it a plan and in 66 suggested specifically this one being beneficial and that you planned it because you "didn't want deputy to counter-claim cop"
2. I'm all for town players, I'd appreciate you not branching negative connotation to my thoughts in an attempt to lash at me, it's cheap -
What I'm not for is page one, post one plan making in an attempt for a pro town leadership role - It's far to early for such things and it's not just an opinion, it is indeed a plan as you agree in your posts (general or not, a plan is a plan)
ekiM wrote:Just so everybody is completely clear on this
: We have one power role and one backup. The power role was selected with 50% chance to be either a cop or a doc. The backup was selected with an independent 50% chance to be either a deputy or a nurse. This means we are guaranteed exactly one of Cop/Doc, but have only a 50% chance that the backup role corresponds to the power role.
The power role knows who they are, and that there is a 50% chance that if they are killed they will be backed up.
One might be tempted to say
that a potentially replaceable power role could be less concerned for their own safety than usual,
but it's probably best to
assume a worst-case scenario and play as normal. If threatened with a hammer, claim as usual. Counter-claim false power role claims as you see fit, but assume nothing if a backup is claimed.
The backup will know that they are the backup, and there is a 50% chance that the power role matches with them.
One might be tempted to say
that a potential power role replacement might take into account their own safety more than a vanilla townie would,
but it's probably best to play as if
you were a vanilla townie.
If threatened with hammer, claim. Counter-claim false backup claims
, but think carefully on the best course of action if a power role is claimed.
In the above, do you see where it might seem like a plan?
ekiM wrote:I offered my thoughts on the set-up, because I thought it would help.
Other people were free to do the same. Or not.
I'm not gonna lie - you're not making me feel like it's alright to casually be opposed to it - - I'm not trying to grill you man, but you're implying I'm suspicious and made a personal attack on my private life and how I "plan" it - pretty uncool, dude -
I've only put these two quotes up to point out to you where I read certain signals to suggest it's a plan, and a rather one sided one (not open minded to other ppl) - It's not an attack, I think it's best to call it you and I exchanging POV (since you said they were off)
-----
In you plan, you suggest what we might do with our free will - then slash it with "but you should do this..." more than once
You make statements about the gameplay, and you don't suggest you're spitballin' ideas or anything, it comes across as a plan, and I'm just EXPRESSING how I feel about someone's FIRST POST being a PLAN because it seems like an off the bat attempt to seem pro town and take leadership.
There's nothing wrong with ppl being regarded as such, but it happens naturally and without trying, it simply comes through in the gameplay - - it doesn't get manufactured post one, page one - - That's my only thought.
If you were sharing a thought you had on the set up, you would have worded how you thought the set up was, and pointed out "Could be trouble when claiming" - - that's understandable
But you went so far as to suggest play approaches and what to do in scenarios to come, and that is very much a plan.
Are we on the same page yet?
