Nah, I'm not ingoring all you've placed. I read it.
It directly opposed anything I said.
For example:
Now is when you accused me of panicking about attention and survival.
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.
Could you please point out where I panicked about survival and attention in my quote?
Now is when you called me "jumpy" when I contested your claims in an agressive manner
You asked me the best time to attack the prince. I said that it would be if either most players were dead or someone had attacked the Prince. Sure, no one knows their team, but anyone attacking the Prince is scum, and if their attacks helps you kill the Prince yourself, then it is a good thing. Why do you think it's a diversion attempt?
Did I fail to answer you question? No, I didn't. Did I say anything about my survival? No, I didn't.
So, what the hell are you on about? Are you trying to come up with bullshit to justify an attack on me?
Hello Sire Jumpy.
Of course you didn't say anything about that, but I was inferring from the last six bolded words I put, assuming 'you' meant...you, as a traitor. What the hell I'm on about, is conversation. Tell me, why would I want to attack you, from your perspective?
The bolded part is probably the biggest crap you created thus far.
You say that I didn't say anything at all about survival or attention to me. Then you go and say you assumed I meant that because I am a traitor. Without saying why I am a traitor. Or how you know what I meant when I typed that.
Now the question was an easy one. "
When would you think is the best time to attack the Prince."
You answered with "
The best scenario would be if one or more other players have already attacked him, thus attracting attention away from you."
I put in the benefit of the doubt and pushed on that point by a hunch.
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.
Because what I said by the biggest crap you pointed out, was
that 'you'. That you, meaning the hypothetical situation in which attention is diverted from the viewpoint of an assumed traitor. You responded...poorly. Because it seems that you either missed where our conversation started, or a misunderstanding happened.
In whole:
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.
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.
It's pretty obvious on that question.
I can't live in doubt and but I'm doubly sure that he is due to how he responds to my everything.
What's so interesting there?
I figured you were being rhetorical. I don't understand how an attack on a potential scum is worth more than your own hp. It's a chance of gaining strength over the traitors for a sure loss of strength for the loyalists. Assuming you are loyal, that is.
As long as the Prince lives and scum die, I'm happy. Also, you say this as if you're pretty unsure about the stance of my target. Can you tell me your read on him?