Blitz 12: Double Trouble! (Game Over)

Firebringer · Post Post #950 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:02 pm

Bad wording, I mean pushing against the train on her.

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #951 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:03 pm

In post 950, Firebringer wrote:Bad wording, I mean pushing against the train on her.

Oh, yeah. You defended her pretty hard.

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #952 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:04 pm

I guess Squirrelly was right after all.

Firebringer · Post Post #953 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:07 pm

In post 952, AlwaysInnocent wrote:I guess Squirrelly was right after all.

On what?

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #954 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:12 pm

Why did you defend Wanderer when she was in danger of being lynched?

Firebringer · Post Post #955 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:13 pm

In post 954, AlwaysInnocent wrote:Why did you defend Wanderer when she was in danger of being lynched?

Cause I didn't see a strong case on her being scum.

TheDominator37 · Post Post #956 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:21 pm

In post 932, AlwaysInnocent wrote:If Ranger is scum, and Errant is town, then Errant seems to be irrationally confident about Ranger, who, according to Errant, was quite capable of deceiving them. And now it's almost like it's a fact that they are town. No. I'm not buying this at all.

Errant is scum whether Ranger is scum or not.

UNVOTE: Ranger

VOTE: Errant

Don't worry about relation to others based on your reads. That leads to

the dark side of the force

mislynches

TheDominator37 · Post Post #957 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:25 pm

In post 924, AlwaysInnocent wrote:6 scum out of 16 players is not a huge leap.

Consider the setup Jungle Republic, which has 5 scum out of 12 players. How do they balance it? By only allowing one nightkill per night. In Jungle Republic this is done by only granting Werewolves the power to nightkill, and give the Mafia an extra Mafia Goon. It may seem like the Town is very weak, but since the scum factions are also competing with each other, the Town is in a better position than you would think based on the number of scum alone.

Now consider this game. Until now only
one
person was killed each night. We know that there are (at least) two scum factions, so apparently something is keeping the nightkills minimal. It is not Titus, since Titus was killed on N2 and did not seem to influence the number of nightkills on N3. Recall that Pisskop said that this game had
unique nightkill mechanics
, which may have very well something to do with the "lack" of nightkills.

It may not even be a stretch to think that this game has 7 scum, but I would not go that far... yet.

NO WAY that this game has only 4 scum, though.

Realistic and likely. But I'm not sure of your intentions with this post. Almost like you are forcing a town read for yourself

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #958 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:28 pm

In post 956, TheDominator37 wrote:
In post 932, AlwaysInnocent wrote:If Ranger is scum, and Errant is town, then Errant seems to be irrationally confident about Ranger, who, according to Errant, was quite capable of deceiving them. And now it's almost like it's a fact that they are town. No. I'm not buying this at all.

Errant is scum whether Ranger is scum or not.

UNVOTE: Ranger

VOTE: Errant

Don't worry about relation to others based on your reads. That leads to
the dark side of the force
mislynches

Associations are important, though.

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #959 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:29 pm

In post 957, TheDominator37 wrote:Almost like you are forcing a town read for yourself

Yes, I am. What are you going to do about it?

TheDominator37 · Post Post #960 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:30 pm

In post 929, Errantparabola wrote:
If you havent explained already, could you ecplain your scumread on Ranger?

@NeverInnocent

can you answer this question please?

PEdit 1: Not until we have a flip they aren't
PEdit 2: Lynch you

AlwaysInnocent · Post Post #961 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:34 pm

In post 960, TheDominator37 wrote:
In post 929, Errantparabola wrote:
If you havent explained already, could you ecplain your scumread on Ranger?

@NeverInnocent
can you answer this question please?

I have already explained that.

PEdit 1: Not until we have a flip they aren't

We've had two scum flips, so yeah. Associations are important.

PEdit 2: Lynch you

At least you would be doing something that people can read you by.

texcat · Post Post #962 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:11 pm

What's up with ZZZ? Can we get a prod and/or replacement?

pisskop · Post Post #963 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:14 pm

Seeking replacement for zzzx

TheDominator37 · Post Post #964 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:16 pm

VOTE: AlwaysGuilty

Firebringer · Post Post #965 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:21 pm

In post 964, TheDominator37 wrote:VOTE: AlwaysGuilty

You messed up the name a bit there buddy.

TheDominator37 · Post Post #966 (ISO) » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:36 pm

Gotcha there fireextinguisher

Ranger · Post Post #967 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:22 am

Always Innocent wrote:I suppose you're right about that, but often there is one active scum member guiding the game, and that could be you.

If we want to go, "but it could be you!", then I could just as easily say, but it could be you. :P

Not really a good argument to avoid voting texcat.

Somehow she was already speculating about Wanderer being scum.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. You people have no clue how much the RVS reveals. I'm planning on going over it again some time soon to see if I can get anything.

It seems like she cared more about appearances than just getting confirmed scum lynched. Perhaps she thought that jumping on the wagon would make her suspicious?

Absolutely not. ABR was getting lynched, period. Why would I feel the need to join? I spent my time productively. There's nothing suspicious about voting confirmed scum.

You'll note ABR hammered himself to cut off discussion for the day, something I was engaging in at the time.

voting for Albert B. was the best thing for any alignment.

Yes, it would be the best for any alignment. Meaning me not doing it is...
...What, exactly?
What do you think it was?

Because I've explained my reasoning.

texcat wrote:"Not providing much reason"? As opposed to you, who provides readlists with no reasons?

Not providing reasoning by itself is not the crime. It's not providing reasoning while

being focused on only specific players

. When I gave my readslist, that was me giving a spreadsheet of the whole game. When you've given not much reasoning, you've...done so on a select few players. One or two. You're refusing to take stances on more players. Combine that with a low post count and low activity, and you've got why you are scum.

Ranger · Post Post #968 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:22 am

(I should mention Firebringer is almost definitely town for me now.)

Squirrelly · Post Post #969 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:25 am

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Flubber

- pers

Squirrelly · Post Post #970 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:28 am

In post 957, TheDominator37 wrote:
In post 924, AlwaysInnocent wrote:6 scum out of 16 players is not a huge leap.

Consider the setup Jungle Republic, which has 5 scum out of 12 players. How do they balance it? By only allowing one nightkill per night. In Jungle Republic this is done by only granting Werewolves the power to nightkill, and give the Mafia an extra Mafia Goon. It may seem like the Town is very weak, but since the scum factions are also competing with each other, the Town is in a better position than you would think based on the number of scum alone.

Now consider this game. Until now only
one
person was killed each night. We know that there are (at least) two scum factions, so apparently something is keeping the nightkills minimal. It is not Titus, since Titus was killed on N2 and did not seem to influence the number of nightkills on N3. Recall that Pisskop said that this game had
unique nightkill mechanics
, which may have very well something to do with the "lack" of nightkills.

It may not even be a stretch to think that this game has 7 scum, but I would not go that far... yet.

NO WAY that this game has only 4 scum, though.

Realistic and likely.

Why is 4 scum "likely"?

But I'm not sure of your intentions with this post. Almost like you are forcing a town read for yourself

How does a discussion of setup and mechanics make you think he's forcing a town read for himself?

Ranger · Post Post #971 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:29 am

Always Innocent wrote:Squirrelly: actively scumhunting, so town
Ranger: the evil mastermind; it is easy to be deceived by her, she knows how to be convincing as scum (but there are some tells)

One of these things is not like the other.

(You're tunneling.)

I just don't trust you.

And therein lies the problem. You don't trust me, yet everything you've said is reason for me to be town. You're blatantly saying I'm scum, off of what amounts to paranoia.

Vote texcat. Eliminate vampires. If you think I'm a werewolf, fine. But it will be easier to scumhunt if the vampires are killed off first.

Ranger · Post Post #972 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:32 am

Errantparabola wrote:Fmpov, ranger and i is clearly tvt. Ive responded to all of her arguments. But ive learned that sometimes there's no convincing her. So i decided im not going to clog up the thread begging her to townread me.

You know, the last time you said this, I was scum.

What makes you think that I'm not scum this time so strongly?

(I actually am willing to reconsider my read on you. Right now, it's things like this and POE that have you as a werewolf.)

Ranger · Post Post #973 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:34 am

Squirrelly wrote:UNVOTE:
VOTE: Flubber

- pers

I'm willing to consider that option tomorrow, but today, we should really be lynching texcat.

Ranger · Post Post #974 (ISO) » Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:39 am

Off of the RVS posts, I am heavily considering ZZZX for scum, particularly werewolf; I don't think Yakko is scum, especially not a vampire.
I'm looking and Errant does still look like a possible werewolf, however, most strongly, texcat's posts stick out like a sore thumb.