Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mephansteras]

There is One unresolved attack: Deathsword attacking Tiruin

There are no Injuries at this time


Turn 1 will go until ~10am Pacific Thursday or until everyone has taken both of their actions or Passed.

[IronyOwl]

Jim:

IronyOwl, as Prince, do you tell people who to kill or do you let them figure it out on their own? How much command of the game do you take?

Not sure yet. In general, I think other people taking initiative is important for us to get reads on them, so I'm less inclined to try to order everyone to swarm someone I think is scummy or back off of someone I think isn't.


Toaster:

Irony:  Noted.  Do you expect people to follow your lead in attacks?

To some extent. Believing I'm town isn't the same as believing I'm correct, though.


Tiruin:
You quoted, but did not respond to, my questions. Why? Too difficult, figured you could go back and work out an answer for them later but then forgot?

Also, another thing occurred to me. You made the same mistake in your RVS question to Toony. If defending me was just a reaction test, what was asking Toony a question that didn't make sense?


Toony, how much weight do you feel an attack carries? Less than a lynch? More than a vote?


Deathsword:

Leafsnail: My answer to Tiruin sounded angry because I was angry at his crap (more below), but not at Toonyman. Thus the difference in tone.

Tiruin: First you attempt to defend the Prince (despite IO not being under attack and being called on it by Meph) to look loyal, then when others (Caz and myself) pointed that out, you deflected it by saying it was a "Reaction Test", which I claimed was BS. Then you made up some crap about me mentioning my survival and panicking, to I called you out on. You then proceeded to call me "jumpy" to once more deflect the attention from you.

You are scum, Tiruin. Attack Tiruin

Why was that one post enough to drive you into a frenzy? Why are you attacking Tiruin over preemptively defending me now when you hadn't mentioned that point in a while, instead focusing on defending yourself?

Also, why didn't you mention Tiruin's literal attack on you? Did that have nothing to do with your own assault, or did you just not want to mention it because it's scummy?


Caz:

What about Leafsnail's suggestion that all kills should be sanctioned by the prince to avoid scum involvement? What say you Lord IronyOwl?

See reply to Jim. It's not a bad idea in some ways, but I'd be concerned about the lack of actions to scumhunt off of.

[Caz]

In general, I think other people taking initiative is important for us to get reads on them, so I'm less inclined to try to order everyone to swarm someone I think is scummy or back off of someone I think isn't.

 It's not a bad idea in some ways, but I'd be concerned about the lack of actions to scumhunt off of.

Alright, seems like a fair strategy. Since we're running out of time and I don't want to action too near the deadline I'll be decisive.

I believe Deathsword to be a traitor. Attack Deathsword.

[Teneb]

IO:

Also, why didn't you mention Tiruin's literal attack on you? Did that have nothing to do with your own assault, or did you just not want to mention it because it's scummy?

Toonyman attacked me, not Tiruin.

Caz: Why do you think I am a traitor? Are you going to accuse me without any case to back it?

[ToonyMan]

Toony, how much weight do you feel an attack carries? Less than a lynch? More than a vote?

It's really a 1/4th of a lynch you could say (at this point).  I would consider anybody you attack you should be pretty confident in lynching though.  This will become easier once the first guard dies and we can get a confirmed alignment to work off of.

[Jim Groovester]

Jim

On 'random' killing, how would you best utilize your only tools [attack/defense - taking the same role said earlier] to find scum? Would you follow the Prince's order and tag along in the hopes they get Loyalists instead, or work on an inference on the number of probable allies you have before striking down your target?

I have no idea what the hell you're asking here.

Jim

I didn't ask you anything about that. Where'd you get the idea that I did?

I am a bit worried about your loyalty, Deathsword.

You don't say.

Better publicly declare that you're worried about traitors, because otherwise everyone would just assume that you were one.

You are playing this game very reactively, and seem agitated. Why not try scumhunting rather than trying to defend yourself and attacking the player that believes you to be a traitor?

You're right, he's not scumhunting. He hasn't even attacked a player he thought was a traitor or explained why.

I think your lazy bandwagon makes you more of a traitor than Deathsword is. Attack Caz.

[IronyOwl]

Deathsword:

IO:

Also, why didn't you mention Tiruin's literal attack on you? Did that have nothing to do with your own assault, or did you just not want to mention it because it's scummy?

Toonyman attacked me, not Tiruin.

Oops, my bad.

I'd still like to hear about the rest, though.

[Tiruin]

Deathsword

Tiruin: First you attempt to defend the Prince (despite IO not being under attack and being called on it by Meph) to look loyal, then when others (Caz and myself) pointed that out, you deflected it by saying it was a "Reaction Test", which I claimed was BS. Then you made up some crap about me mentioning my survival and panicking, to I called you out on. You then proceeded to call me "jumpy" to once more deflect the attention from you.

You are scum, Tiruin. Attack Tiruin

...Do you read my posts in a coherent way? I didn't make up crap in mentioning your survival and panicking. I asked you. The following dialogue fell into you going defensive. The defensive part, in the literal and literary sense, you did not point, I have to say.

On the first bolded part, you say it as if that was my intention when I already said it was a reaction test. Stop twisting my words. Second bolded part, it was logically concluded from your antics, and I believe that I can't deflect attention - everyone reads what is posted.

The situation I said about survival and panicking was related to the question I asked you hypothetically. You responded with aggression. Let's follow the dotted line, shall we?

Spoiler (click to show/hide) Deathsword: Suppose you're a Traitor Swordsmaster, how would you go about in using your abilities for your wincon? As for your question: I would wait until most players have already defended before using my second attack, to increase the chances of hitting. Increase the chances of hitting? There is a %? Anyway, what would you do if you'd get called out on it? How does attacking after most have defended seem to you, if you were a loyalist? Spoiler (click to show/hide) No, there isn't a %, but if I were to use it after most people had used their defends, then the chances of someone stopping my attack would decrease. Your question: if one attacks the Prince, then of course he is scummy. Attacking other players without a case is also scummy. But if you do have a case, then the scummy-ness of the act would depend on the case itself (if it's a good one or just a lot of BS). I didn't say anything about the presence of a case. Anyway, hypothetically, why would you attack a player without a case anyway? If others have defended, it means progress and thus, ideas have been given. Why would you bring in the obvious? Back to being a traitor, when would you think is the best time to attack the Prince. I stated all possibilities for the sake of completeness. And I think I already said what is the best time to attack the Prince as a traitor, but here is the answer anyway: when, at least, half the players are dead. The best scenario would be if one or more other players have already attacked him, thus attracting attention away from you. Spoiler (click to show/hide) -snip- I stated all possibilities for the sake of completeness. And I think I already said what is the best time to attack the Prince as a traitor, but here is the answer anyway: when, at least, half the players are dead. The best scenario would be if one or more other players have already attacked him, thus attracting attention away from you. But here, you don't know who your allies are - town or scum. Can you expound on that best scenario further? I find it hard to see when a player feels confident to attack the prince. Also, why panic about your own survival when attention is equal? The last part of the bolded portion seems like a badly thought diversion attempt.

Afterwards, retaliation ensues. Nice OMGUS...It hurts me muchly. [Spoiler'd for readability]


Meph

There is One unresolved attack: Deathsword attacking Tiruin

Unresolved? He put it in red?



IronyOwl

Tiruin:
You quoted, but did not respond to, my questions. Why? Too difficult, figured you could go back and work out an answer for them later but then forgot?

Also, another thing occurred to me. You made the same mistake in your RVS question to Toony. If defending me was just a reaction test, what was asking Toony a question that didn't make sense?

I messed up my formatting there because I posted that at...a very very late hour in the night. Sorry for that.

> Never post when under mental and physical fatigue.
> People's reactions are different no matter what exists, pertaining to what is posted.
> If someone clearly points a fact out, occasionally, people will repeat the point that needs to be taken in correction, parroting it in a way that follows what was originally pointed out first [ie, the 'expected' answer to a question]
> @2nd part: I wanted to see how his thinking pattern was in that type of situation.

Also, what do you think about roleclaiming early in game?

Dariush

Explain your suspicions and how you came up to them.

Nice job ignoring my post and my questions to you (#61).

It sounded more like an insult to me than a question - and if a question, a hypothetical one. But thanks for reminding me.

You didn't answer me either, though.

Caz

Tiruin: It's been stated that defending is reactionary. Are you pre-emptively defending the prince in an attempt to make you look better?

Reaction Testing. I did that to see how others would react if I stated such. My defense has not been used yet as of this moment.

This is utter bullshit. Which reaction did you expect, other than the inevitable accusation of trying to look towny and a question about you not reading the rules?

It was a poorly made concept, now that I see it. What was in my mind was the fact on differing reactions to a simple statement, and so I did such.


Caz

In general, I think other people taking initiative is important for us to get reads on them, so I'm less inclined to try to order everyone to swarm someone I think is scummy or back off of someone I think isn't.

 It's not a bad idea in some ways, but I'd be concerned about the lack of actions to scumhunt off of.

Alright, seems like a fair strategy. Since we're running out of time and I don't want to action too near the deadline I'll be decisive.

I believe Deathsword to be a traitor. Attack Deathsword.

So you attack Deathsword because of the lack of time?


Jim

Jim

On 'random' killing, how would you best utilize your only tools [attack/defense - taking the same role said earlier] to find scum? Would you follow the Prince's order and tag along in the hopes they get Loyalists instead, or work on an inference on the number of probable allies you have before striking down your target?

I have no idea what the hell you're asking here.

I'll restate, mostly because of me posting at a time inconvenient to my health 

= Do you think using your attacks in conjunction with whoever the Prince attacks will be better than following your own leads? Putting in the knowledge that the Prince always listens to everyone.


If I have my timezone-tell skills right, we've got about ~29 hours and 40 minutes from this post until day end.

[Caz]

Caz: Why do you think I am a traitor? Are you going to accuse me without any case to back it?

You seem to spend all your time defending yourself and trying to look town.

Better publicly declare that you're worried about traitors, because otherwise everyone would just assume that you were one.

You are playing this game very reactively, and seem agitated. Why not try scumhunting rather than trying to defend yourself and attacking the player that believes you to be a traitor?

You're right, he's not scumhunting. He hasn't even attacked a player he thought was a traitor or explained why.

I think your lazy bandwagon makes you more of a traitor than Deathsword is. Attack Caz.

You quote my post explaining my reasoning then go on to mock my lack of reasoning? Ok then.

So you attack Deathsword because of the lack of time?

I'm attacking him now to avoid attacking him later and so that more people are likely to see it and be able to react before the day's end. Have you considered that the remaining non-actioning guards may be keeping their attacks ready to assassinate the prince at the last possible moment?

If I have my timezone-tell skills right, we've got about ~29 hours and 40 minutes from this post until day end.

I counted it to be 15 hours until the end of the turn. PST is (-8) right?

[Caz]

Yeah I can't count. It is 26 hours or so.

[Teneb]

Jim:

Jim

I didn't ask you anything about that. Where'd you get the idea that I did?

Got distracted and added your name by accident. Apologies.

Caz:

Caz: Why do you think I am a traitor? Are you going to accuse me without any case to back it?

You seem to spend all your time defending yourself and trying to look town.

Weak answer. How am I looking town? Can you give any examples? And I guess you would love if I completely ignored any and all accusations against me, wouldn't you?

Tiruin: You asked a hipotetical question, which I answered. Then you somehow linked my answer to a hipotetical question to an outright confession from me. You did say exactly that your defend action at the start was a "Reaction Test". Which I still think is an excuse created to justify that slip.

While everyone does read each post (in theory), not everyone pays the same attention to each. By deflecting the attention you make sure the posts of someone else are examined in detail, while yours are not.

OMGUS... Yeah, because I totally didn't bring up a case on you more than once before attacking, unlike the two that attacked me.

Also: Your post formatting is hard to read.

IO: Turin tried to look Loyal, and when I called him on it, came the loads of fecal matter. I can't help but become angry at this. As to why I brought it up twice (before the post I am answering to, #76), it was because his crap about "me being worried about my survival" was new, while the "too town" part was weak by itself. When I made my first full case on him, I did include his "reaction test".

[Tiruin]

Tiruin: You asked a hipotetical question, which I answered. Then you somehow linked my answer to a hipotetical question to an outright confession from me. You did say exactly that your defend action at the start was a "Reaction Test". Which I still think is an excuse created to justify that slip.

While everyone does read each post (in theory), not everyone pays the same attention to each. By deflecting the attention you make sure the posts of someone else are examined in detail, while yours are not.

OMGUS... Yeah, because I totally didn't bring up a case on you more than once before attacking, unlike the two that attacked me.

Can you please explain how @ bolded part. Next, explain how my formatting is hard to read. There are only THREE SPOILERS and paragraphs.

Also, it seems you're turning the notion of deflecting to another idea entirely, when the context was 'jumpy'.

Next, you outright accuse me in front of yon Prince as if I'M the one spouting crap? How quaint. Can you explain, in all your entirety, how, with quotes. Then compare. Then justify.

I did not link an 'outright' confession, if you can see how you worded your own posts, by the way.

Caz

So you attack Deathsword because of the lack of time?

I'm attacking him now to avoid attacking him later and so that more people are likely to see it and be able to react before the day's end. Have you considered that the remaining non-actioning guards may be keeping their attacks ready to assassinate the prince at the last possible moment?

While this may be a probability to be looked out for, I don't think every traitor would be sacrificing their RL time to stay up until the brink of the timer to do so. Seeing as we have eight people, they won't win even if they did such. 8-1[prince] = 7, roughly 3 traitors.

[Tiruin]

EBWOP: ...Preview =/= Post.


Deathsword

Tiruin: You asked a hipotetical question, which I answered. Then you somehow linked my answer to a hipotetical question to an outright confession from me. You did say exactly that your defend action at the start was a "Reaction Test". Which I still think is an excuse created to justify that slip.

While everyone does read each post (in theory), not everyone pays the same attention to each. By deflecting the attention you make sure the posts of someone else are examined in detail, while yours are not.

OMGUS... Yeah, because I totally didn't bring up a case on you more than once before attacking, unlike the two that attacked me.

Can you please explain how @ bolded part. Next, explain how my formatting is hard to read. There are only THREE SPOILERS and paragraphs.

Also, it seems you're turning the notion of deflecting to another idea entirely, when the context was 'jumpy'.

Next, you outright accuse me in front of yon Prince as if I'M the one spouting crap? How quaint. Can you explain, in all your entirety, how, with quotes. Then compare. Then justify. Please?

I did not link an 'outright' confession, if you can see how you worded your own posts, by the way.

Can you sum up your defense then, so there will be no trivialities in the posting?

For me:
> Attitude shift to a defensive nature, as if provoked by simple questioning which leads on.
> Says that my statement [which I guess is this] is along the lines of an 'attack'; an interrogative statement does not seem like an attack to me. It could easily be answered by an explanation. Seems much more to be fearing for own life.
> Faulty logic. 'Says' link. Assuming we have roleflips [which I bet we do], and you turn up Loyalist//Town, then I'd be pretty stupid to have attacked you based on what you state, and in general, aye? I say nay.



Caz

So you attack Deathsword because of the lack of time?

I'm attacking him now to avoid attacking him later and so that more people are likely to see it and be able to react before the day's end. Have you considered that the remaining non-actioning guards may be keeping their attacks ready to assassinate the prince at the last possible moment?

While this may be a probability to be looked out for, I don't think every traitor would be sacrificing their RL time to stay up until the brink of the timer to do so. Seeing as we have eight people, they won't win even if they did such. 8-1[prince] = 7, roughly 3 traitors.

Are you acting on the assumption posed by your question, and is that why you're attacking DS?

[Caz]

Weak answer. How am I looking town? Can you give any examples? And I guess you would love if I completely ignored any and all accusations against me, wouldn't you?

You aren't, but you are trying to stress your innocence and place the blame on people who suspect you to be scum. Have you suspected anyone yet who hasn't already suspected you? Why are you so concerned that people attacking you must be scum?
[/quote]

While this may be a probability to be looked out for, I don't think every traitor would be sacrificing their RL time to stay up until the brink of the timer to do so. Seeing as we have eight people, they won't win even if they did such. 8-1[prince] = 7, roughly 3 traitors.

Noted. Maybe it will be more applicable if the balance of power slips towards the traitors.

Are you acting on the assumption posed by your question, and is that why you're attacking DS?

A little. I am more interested in his reactions to being attacked and in getting others to post something of substance so that I can get a read on them.

[ToonyMan]

We have nine players, not counting the Prince would make eight guards.  Four of which should be traitors.  There shouldn't be a conniving heir from my understanding.