In post 12, Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:PS: This is a serious question. Should everyone claim what they are the day after their specific night? Ex, a N1 cop claims on Day2?
Oh for fucks sake. "Hey let's all claim when we've used our shots so scum can kill the PRs". Also why the fuck do you feel the need to emphasize that it's a serious question?
In post 13, Voidedmafia wrote:Considering that they're only able to use it on that specific night, I don't see why not. I don't think they should sit on their result for longer than one day cycle, anyways.
Oh my god.
In post 13, Voidedmafia wrote:I would also suggest that, should a cop and doc have the same night, they should both claim (or at least make their claims easy for each other to deduce, and then the doc auto-protects the cop. Do note this ONLY applies if a cop and doc share the same night, as that should garauntee an investigation. If the doc in question shows him/herself to be particularly townie I suppose it's not bad to risk them not shooting the cop.
What the fuck? What the fuck?
In post 14, IceGuy wrote:Cops and docs should only claim if they have a result that makes claiming worthwhile.
Keep in mind a claim means "you can kill somebody else, I've already spent my shot".
Thank god for sanity.
In post 16, Voidedmafia wrote:Also, I only care for it to be considered IF AND ONLY IF we ever have a cop and doc with the same night. It allows for a garaunteed investigation (scum can't shoot the cop because of the doc protect). Or what, exactly, are you objecting to?
Cop goes "I'm the cop, any doc here?". Silence. Cop: "Oh fuck".
Wait, I have an alternative too. Cop: "I'm the cop etc. etc." Maf: "Cop too". Only doc: "Oh fuck".
In post 19, Voidedmafia wrote:That's why I suggested they try not to outright claim to everyone else, though I admit that's a problem for that suggestion.
So you want the cop and the doc to magically find each other without anyone else noticing? Scum are supposed to try looking town y'know.
In post 24, Venmar wrote:- Don't see why we would want everyone that works on a specific night to claim, the chances aren't in our favor really. There's also the chance that a N1 cop would claim and a scum would claim N1 doc and the cop would end up dead, or a N1 cop would claim and no N1 doc would claim because there wasn't one. These are things we should consider, and that scum can always potentially lie themselves into the claim. Maybe not as a doctor because then a dead cop would put them to the noose, but a claimed cop maybe, and claim that a innocent townie turned up as mafia. Really, this will be a interesting game because claims will probably run rampant at one point or another. ( This is my prediction. )
What did I replace into?
This guy is even scummier though. I mean look at his reasons. Look at them.
nonononono
This guy. Don't be this guy.
In post 40, Scott Brosius wrote:Voided's idea is bad and the fact that he claims he answered the question about how doc+cops with simultaneous nights would even know such a thing, is weird.
Scum. Scum everywhere. I refuse to believe my eyes.
This guy might be the best out of a bad bunch this far. He's wrong though.
Yes. Yes we are. Now RTFT.
In post 50, IceGuy wrote:Shut the fuck up with the claiming ideas. Nobody claims. There is absolutely no benefit to town for somebody claiming any role right now, be it D1 cop or N5 doc.
Basically this.
Fuck you.
In post 63, Om of the Nom wrote:Okay, perfect.
Now we can finally start proper discussion.
Iceguy: Do you have any reads on anyone yet?
hahahahaha
HAHAHAHAHA
In post 66, FuDuzn wrote:My vote for Voided was random, but to keep some pressure on him(at least until the action picks up here) I will leave my vote be.
Because we all know pressure votes are best when you tell the victim so. "I vote you just because I'm too afraid to pick any enemies".
In post 67, Om of the Nom wrote:Haven't my actions already heavily implied I didn't pay attention to anything that anyone not-me has said up till now?
tl;dr, no I don't have a read on anyone.
I think I hate you. 3 pages. Too much to read.
In post 71, Om of the Nom wrote:Lol.
I've been known to not read shit as town.
As scum I'm more concerned with keeping up appearences, so I would probably have read it.
But I seriously cannot be fucked.
Can we all laugh at you now?
Uh no.
"Let's take a non-committal stand here so I don't get enemies. Of course we shouldn't lynch guy A because he discussed theory, we should go for someone else. If that fails we can always go for guy A." I cross my fingers and guess that this guy is town though. This guy is more scared newb than scared scum. Also Dayne's town, for whatever reason. Don't ask.
In post 88, IceGuy wrote: In post 86, FuDuzn wrote:Just so I am clear, Iceguy, were you voting Om just out of frustration? You hinted that it may have been for a deeper reason.
Mostly out of frustration, but also to see how he'd act. While first gut instinct is that he reacted scummy, I'll probably pull up meta to check whether this was typical for him.
Bad idea no. 1. You don't simply meta someone who defended himself with self-meta on page 3.
In post 89, FuDuzn wrote:I guess right now I am weary of either Iceguy or Dayne trying to turn a bad idea into a clearly scum idea. I wanted to keep my vote on Voided as this dynamic was explored, and to keep pressure on Voided, but I feel like we are in the early stages of manipulation here.
Fencesitting 2.0.
In post 91, Venmar wrote:- Just curious, you think it would be a good or townie thing should have Voided pushed his bad plan? You know, he is trying to make us believe in a bad plan but you would say he is townie because he believes in it. True or no?
Bad does not equal scum (case in point, you).
In post 103, Venmar wrote:- This explains nothing, and rather seems like a fluff post that shows nothing of what you are actually thinking. Since you say nothing but rather just support what someone else, in this case IceGuy, has said, you are techincally sheeping what they have said.
I feel bad for this guy, he's trying so hard and this is the kind of posts that he achieves.
In post 107, Venmar wrote:- Not saying YOU are wrong about Voided, i am saying the case you guys have against him is not strong enough for a lynch. But if it makes your poor soul feel better, i will back off and let you do your thing?
Oh noes, I can't stop quoting him!
Btw, Scott vs. Venmar is town-town.
I take back everything I've said before, this guy is terrible too.
I'd love to see this guy and omnomnom in a hydra. It would be the worst thing that had happened to this earth since Hunter S. Thompson committed suicide.
Thinking about it, there's a big difference though. Birds and stones is probs town while omnomnom is probs scum.
In post 116, FuDuzn wrote:This 2bird/Delta dynamic seems very contrived, 2bird why would you put a vote on Delta like that just to take it off of him? Also please explain more your vote for Venmar. Please give me more then the tiny quote you brought up.
This guy is saying the things I'm thinking but I don't like the way he say it in. It's almost as fake as Amy Lumet's tits.
In post 117, 2birds1stone wrote:Woah, it's okay to wagon Voided based on one quote (i.e., the terrible plan), but voting Venmar based on one quote isn't?
Um, are you his partner?
"Why should I not kill the president when Lee Harvey Oswald did?"
In post 121, Venmar wrote:- So. You are/were against Voided because of one thing, and now you are attacking me because of one thing. But you think that someone who is on the Voided wagon, a wagon you supported, is scum, but when you look at me, no. I also like how you are attacking FuDuzn because he is disagreeing with you. Are you going to do this to everyone who thinks of disagreeing with you or hinting a defense for the people you are attack?
Finally a post that I don't want to headbutt a stone for. It's a shame you're wrong.
In post 124, Om of the Nom wrote:Yay wagons
VOTE: 2b1s
I agree 2b1s' reaction and subsequent OMGUS were super duper terribad. He made like a really weak attack on him just because he voted for him.
Also this just motivated me to do something in this game. After I catch up in my other games I'll see if I can ISO 2b1s and find more suspicious shit.
Fuck this shit.
"Episode VI: Return of the hypocrite"
nope.jpg
In post 131, Venmar wrote:- I was giving you what i believed to be my self-meta. So you should take it as such.
CAN EVERYONE STOP WITH THE FUCKING SELF-META PLZ?
Feeling a bit better about Voidedmafia now... this game is confusing as hell though with 50% scum and 50% idiots.
Let's mark this guy down as town too.
In post 134, Venmar wrote:- To me it is a null-tell. White-knighting can be used by both town and scum, and in my case i am town. Since it can lean both ways you cannot say that white-knighting is an instant scum-tell, i've seen it used by town before, and it is being used by a town in this game as well, me. It's nice that you used it to catch scum, but that, in my opinion, does not automatically make me scum.
...shit was SO cash.
Don't write that as town. Never write that as town.
Ugh... Dayne is not firmly in the town-column yet. He's not the scummiest in this bunch though.
In post 142, DeltaWave wrote: In post 141, Venmar wrote:It also could have been a sub-conscious feeling i had that made me say that over and over again.
This is really awkward and it makes me want to put you in my lynch pool for saying it. Pinning it on your subconscious is a new one.
Yeah, this really. I tend to overanalyze stuff but shit, Venmar ain't town yet. I think I gave him a newb pass too early.
absent101 is classy yet again.
In post 152, ConfidAnon wrote:This is the most convincing case for voidedmafia being scum that has been laid out thus far. That being said, I still think a mountain is being made out of a molehill. Disagreements in a theory argument can happen just as much in an MD thread as they can in a game thread. If you were discussing this strategy for this setup in MD, you wouldn't find voidedmafia scummy for stating it.
Too much fencesitting.
Fuck off.
10/10 would vomit again.
In post 173, 2birds1stone wrote:I get everyone else's votes, but seriously, have you played a game with me where I haven't OMGUSed everyone and called scumteams for trivial reasons?
Ugh... hate to say it but this guy will need to be lynched sooner or later. This guy and Om of the Nom.
In post 188, DeltaWave wrote:Regardless, self-meta in defense is scummy and apparently IceGuy says it's not even accurate, so go ahead with the hammer IMO.
Why does everyone seem to ignore Om of the Nom's equally scummy use of self-meta?
OK I guess, would've preferred Om of the Nom though if we're talking possible VI's possible scum.
Quality post right there. Yet another lurker who I wouldn't mind dying.
In post 210, Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:I think he's scum for camping his vote on me, even though he was around lynch time, but couldn't commit to a wagon.
This is a dishonest post. It's a post from someone who is trying so hard to look active that his face shares its color with a lobster.
In post 213, Malakittens wrote:No, I had a possible scum read on FuD due to post #89, but due to Iceguy falling into my latest trap that I set out..
Noooope!
In post 214, Om of the Nom wrote:You guys must have been acting stupid to have lynched someone without me here *annoyed* D:<
Anyway, gutty gut gut gut tells me Mala is scum. I like this wagon.
VOTE: Malakittanz
From what I've been getting from her posts, she isn't really committing to any of her reads. Plus she's showing a large amount of hesitance to vote until she gets a strong scumread (which at this rate will probably never happen). She spends a lot of time waffling too.
How surprising that one would see omnomnom bandwagonning. OWAI-
Lulz.
In post 221, Scott Brosius wrote: In post 218, Malakittens wrote:So, it's better logic to assume that all of the scum team is on ONE wagon rather than mixed together between two and possibly 3. If we all were guided by that logic then it would be dumb not the other way around. Having them all on one wagon is a very easy way to expose themselves when one is lynched. >.>
It's poor logic to assume anything about scum placement on wagons, especially with such limited information.
This guy. This guy is town.
I lol'd.
In post 239, DeltaWave wrote: In post 223, Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:^ That last sentence doesn't make much sense.
It seems like you're jumping on wagons and giving logical reason to justify your voting so you don't look like you're voting blindly, but at the same time the reasons you give seem artifical and fake, and it looks like you're just being opportunistic.
Why are Scott's reasons artificial and fake? I ask because Scott is town as fuck.
I like DeltaWave. He seems earnest in a way that's hard to fake as scum.
U mad brosius?
That's a good question. There's too much fucking noise in here, I'm beginning to forget my suspects.
In post 254, Venmar wrote:- Ok, i found three posts in my ISO that could possibly hint what you are talking about in this quote.
Post #54 - I did not prod Shotgun to post more in this post at all. Insteadi told him to reread the thread and he should get the answer to his "question".
Post #95 - Here i asked Voided to come in and share his thoughts. While i did kind of tell him to post, it was for a good reason. The discussion was heavily placed partly on him and his feedback seemed like a given.
Post #121 - This is true, i will give you that.
Instead of trying to argue that your behavior isn't scummy you try to explain it away?
In post 254, Venmar wrote:- This is stupid. Why?
1. I never wanted to vote Voided. If you read the thread a little bit closely, you would see that I wasn't going against Voided, I war rather kind of defending him. I never showed interest in voting for him so i never actually hesistated to vote for someone i never want to vote for in the first place.
2. I already explained why i was hesitant to vote for Scott. I said I thought that what i brought up in-thread about him is and was not enough to vote or lynch him. I think i should have put a vote down to pressure the guy, but i never saw him as a scummy person but more of someone who was being unhelpful and mostly sheeping by just making empty posts saying " Yup ", or " I agree ".
3. I made a post regarding 2bird and i explained my case on him. Read that.
Same thing again. I'm beginning to get bad vibes here.
In post 261, absta101 wrote: In post 259, IceGuy wrote:Chainsaw defense ahoy.
Is there any indication why you consider Mala town?
Calling chainsaw defence without a flip. Nice attempt at making me look bad.
1. The Mala waggon grew way too fast.
2. The lack of good reasons for votes.
I see post #199 as harmless town speculation. What do you see?
This is a surprisingly good post from Mr. Lurker. I've been trying to avoid commenting at Mala lately because I'm undecided but I can really see why he thinks the things he thinks. Having said that I can't say I agree with his attack on Scott though.
In post 271, Om of the Nom wrote:Kinda, I haven't really been paying attention to exactly what she's saying, but I could probably make a case if I could be bothered to.
...
In post 278, FuDuzn wrote:I am trying to give this game a quick read through so I can get back into it, but I also notice that Delta doesn't want to tell me why Scott is town as fuck. What's the hold up?
Just can it already. FuDuzn is trying so hard to not push himself in a corner that he's starting to levitate above the crowd. That's not a good sign.
To give y'all an example this is exactly why I think DeltaWave's town. He thinks what I thinks and he expresses it in a town way.
In post 288, DeltaWave wrote:Interesting that I asked SAD a question, he ducked it, I reiterated the question and it looks like some people are stalling for him now.
I could go for Dayne with two out of Venmar/FuDuzn/Omnomnom.
In post 293, Voidedmafia wrote: In post 292, FuDuzn wrote:
I don't have an issue with you questioning Dayne, but I hate when people make reads on players without giving a good reason. And then won't even back it up when prodded about it.
Pretty much this.
Your jump to "peoplz are stalling for him!" is duly noted.
Vote: Deltawave
Aw christ. Are you reading the same game as I do? Moreover, how can DeltaWave be your biggest scum read based on that?
In post 304, Om of the Nom wrote:So what was the vote for? Generally you vote someone you think is scum, not someone who is being anti-town.
So I'm agreeing with Omnomnom. Fuck my life.
In post 306, Malakittens wrote:I already stated that I feel Scott is showing signs of scum by not making his own cases or own opinions. Both are commonly a scum trait and it doesn't sit well with me. I already gave you concrete facts on both. Try reading my posts
I'm getting a good feeling out of Mala now. I think she just panicked earlier in the day when she got all the votes.
In post 316, Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:Still on V/LA.
FuD and/or Scott are scum on the Mala wagon.
And I could sheep ConfidAnon into voting Venmar (infact, if we can proxy votes, I would give my vote to him).
Terrible post for a couple of reasons. So you say that FuDuzn and Scott are scum. Why the fuck don't you give a single reason? And are you trying to tell me that it's a pure coincidence that the two most suspected players on that wagon also are your top scum reads?
The bottom line is even more terrible, you have a town read on ConfidAnon that is strong enough for you to pledge your vote to him but when I reread you haven't mentioned him once before. What the fuck man? What the fuck?
In post 340, Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:Yea, I have pretty strong townreads. I'm not going to lie, sometimes I have horrible scumreads. But I usually nail townies. And I'm pretty confident that Mala is town.
5 bucks that Dayne will go "heh, obvtown" if Mala is ever lynched. Great way to distance yourself from the main wagon, man. You've given little to no reasons either.
In post 342, FuDuzn wrote:Yes Dayne, but you were speaking in absolutes. Wagon analysis would be looking at both flips and saying if scum then so and so is scummy, but if town then so and so is scummy. To me that says you know how the flip will go, I don't like that.
This guy is so careful in his use of language that it hurts. I guess I'll meta him later but I don't like it all. He takes every single word in absolute consideration and he's very fucking afraid of being seen as scummy.
In post 350, Malakittens wrote:Please don't tell me how to scum hunt it took me games and games on the other site to get where I am and finally mastered it.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO-
Venmar comes in with a terrible hammer.
Oh, wait, I did the same error as CES. A bit less terrible then I suppose.
Lolwut? That guy was a gift from god to scum.
In post 370, Venmar wrote:If i haven't made it obvious yet, i got a guilty on FuDuzn.
Wooooshhhh.
In post 373, FuDuzn wrote:Or actually I should ask, why choose me to force the town to mislynch?
In post 379, Venmar wrote:I briefly went through FuDuzn's ISO.
He never said he was suspicious of me...
Ummm??
Stop justifying yourself! It's things like this that rubs me completely the wrong way. I believe that FuDuzn's guilty, no reason to fake a guilty this early, but I still definitely think that he might be bussing.
I can see Venmar as newbscum believing that he would be conftown after faking a guilty. Now he's panicking due to IceGuy not raising him to the skies.
In post 398, IceGuy wrote:And you're desperately trying to push this lynch extremely quickly before anybody has second thoughts, such as that both of you might be scum, or other claims.
I agree with this. I was beginning to forget IceGuy but he's really becoming a big town read again. This kind of posts are pro-town.
Having said that, if FuDuzn doesn't get lynched today I'll tore everyone here to fucking pieces.
I agree. Dayne is trying hard to go with the flow here.
Why? And why do you call it an "epic" gambit? I would call it a fairly standard gambit that we should really expect in this setup.
In post 428, IceGuy wrote:Ladies and gentlemen: Venmar - FuDuzn - absta101, the scum team.
Switch absent with Dayne and I'm happy with that team.
Yes. There's no town motivation at all to dodge those questions.
I'm not really getting a grip on Voided... he's reasonable I guess but he's also an experienced player and that page 1 strategy still irks me the wrong way. In any case I guess I have bigger suspects though.
In post 492, Natalie wrote:- Why are people so hung up on Delta's "town as fuck" comment about Scott? It seems pretty obvious he got an innocent check on him. Or at least that's what it looks like to me.
Don't fucking mention it then! We want scum to have a little info as possible.
In post 509, Venmar wrote:- Not answering that until you answer my previous question better. That was not a valid answer to my question.
Holy fuck, Venmar's way too confident for my liking.
In post 518, IceGuy wrote:For later reference:
2birds1stone
- 7(
Malakittens
, DeltaWave, Venmar,
Voidedmafia
,
Om of the Nom
,
IceGuy
, absta101)
Venmar - 4(
2birds1stone
, ConfidAnon, Ser Arthur Dayne, Scott Brosius)
Ser Arthur Dayne - 2(absta101,
FuDuzn
)
Malakittens
- 6(
IceGuy
,
FuDuzn
,
Om of the Nom
, Scott Brosius, absta101, Venmar)
Scott Brosius - 1(
Malakittens
)
FuDuzn
- 1(Ser Arthur Dayne)
Venmar - 1(ConfidAnon)
DeltaWave - 1(
Voidedmafia
)
Makes me want to kill Dayne with fire. That combined bussing and lynch-avoiding ain't fun.
In post 520, Natalie wrote:VOTE: IceGuy
I don't like how he is pushing for Venmar even though FuDuzn turned out to be scum.
Aw c'mon. I'm sure you're better than this.
In post 521, Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:I think Iceguy might be going for too scummy to be scum? Not wanting to quicklynch guilty-confirmed scum, pushing on a cop (assuming Ven is telling the truth, which I am pretty sure he is), etc...
I don't want to live on this earth any more.
In post 526, DeltaWave wrote:I would have preferred an investigation on Dayne, that would have made this a lot simpler.
I would also like someone to investigate Dayne. Probably for other reasons than you though.
Or why can't he just be scum bussing? You're going in circles here, Dayne, and not once do you explain
why
you think the things you think.
In post 537, absta101 wrote:UNVOTE:
I don't remember why I voted her. I haven't been paying much attention to this game.
In post 539, DeltaWave wrote:If anyone still doubts that Scott is town after this, you need to lay off the drink
Yeah, town thing of Scott to bring up. Still, obviously not true.
I'm intentionally not commenting further on this because frankly there's not a lot to say. Absent101 acted weird this game and I can't say I'm that impressed by him but apparently he wasn't scum. I have no idea why he did what he did.
So, there.
In post 555, IceGuy wrote:I had him as a null read before that, but I believe that his behavior yesterday and today was/is very scummy. What made me think of the gambit was not just the claim, but mainly Venmar's behavior. He doesn't play like a cop who got a guilty.
Partly what I'm trying to say too. Way too self-confident for my liking, mainly.
In post 566, Venmar wrote:Why would ConfidAnon make sense as my partner at all? If we were to pull off this "gambit", why would he have tried to buss me both day 1 and day 2?
Bussing does not equal willingness to lynch you. I can see multiple ways for you to be scum together, hypothetically at least.
No idea though why I'm even mentioning this because ConfidAnon gave me a pretty strong town read. Natalie hasn't really been obvtown but I think ConfidAnon's play is enough for me to focus on other suspects instead.
In post 574, Venmar wrote:- Funny, you think i am scum but still expect me to scumhunt? I thought scum couldn't scumhunt...
Scum-driven line of thought. You're supposed to explain how you're scumhunting, there's five more guys here y'know.
In post 577, Venmar wrote:- This is so hilarious, because I think a counterclaim was exactly what you were wishing for last day phase by hoping someone counterclaims by saying they got a guilty on me or innocent on FuDuzn. You sounded pretty desperate for one of the two, ignoring the fact that cop would have to be N2 or a N1. Even in that case, it looks like Delta was from N1. Did you just screw up your logic?
I disagree. IceGuy wanted to wait for everybody, but that's it. You, on the other hand... I would say that you sounded pretty desperate, afraid that someone would have a guilty on you.
In post 593, Natalie wrote:FOR GETTING A GUILTY ON A SCUM AND CAUSING HIS LYNCH.
Are you being an idiot on purpose?
Looks like town, sadly.
In post 595, Natalie wrote:Because there was virtually no reason to do it besides earning towncred.
"There's no reason to lynch scum besides winning the game". Get a fucking grip, gambits exists.
VOTE: Ser Arthur Dayne
I could also go for Venmar as a compromise but despite my ridiculous amount of posts on him (ze NOISE) I do find Dayne scummier and more of a safe bet.
