I propose a massclaim....Because really. Sap and Recycle? If we're to fix this up-then the best note I've got is the massclaim. It doesn't help scum in anyway given the amount of malevolent powers compared to positive ones (and 3 protects as opposed to one kill--supposing that the Free powers do not poke at either Recycle or Kill [in which that's one darn expensive kill.]).
Judging by Tack's premise: That's a Day Sap/Day Recycle, most possibly by two different persons who did not take Blatant (or one person with at least ~-5) flaws to back that point counter up. Not considering whatever happened last night as the case: The more I think about this, the more I see a setup of the 3 players as distinct roles of:
A Converter; A saboteur [daysap/day recycle] and another one who could interchange with the second person here.
...Granted, we've 5 Miller picks and 9 claimants.
Compare that with 2 choices for Innocent (WITH INNOCENT NOT BEING A pre-game-start-choice!), I'd fathom that either scum claimed miller D1 and bought it off (2 points, wow.) then switched to innocent, that they went for a low-point buy early in game with aims onto the convert/saboteur theory above.
Anyways:
Leafsnail: Could I get your
whole opinion on me? Are you still curious about me? Because I take it that you're more rather a concrete thinker and like putting things as they are instead of checking them out as passing ideas.
Point for formatting...I honestly can't see how this relates to what I posted at all. As Jack said I didn't use those words or anything like them.
>
...You're insinuating negatives over anything else, huh. But matters first, explicitly town?
Interesting wording.
Sentence in question being:
Addendum: Lied?
...
You're really jumping to conclusions here. Could you in the very least be more detailed in your posts? Because you know that I'll keep on asking you afterwards.
...And then in your next post say you weren't. Look, a post just saying "X is town" clearly, clearly implies that you have an inspection result that suggests someone is town. You've played in games with cops before. You know this. So why did you do it? You didn't explain in your previous post.
But what did I say?
Quickpost
P-Luke is innocent.
I did not say that he was explicitly town, I said he was explicitly innocent.
>_>
What part of what I'm saying is contradicted by what part of what you said?
| > | ...And then in your next post say you weren't. Look, a post just saying "X is town" clearly, clearly implies that you have an inspection result that suggests someone is town. You've played in games with cops before. You know this. So why did you do it? You didn't explain in your previous post. |
"OK, so you're saying you were trying to mislead the town."In which Leafsnail takes everything at face value and does not bother to think about it-labeling it thusly as malevolent instead of questioning it thoroughly.
PS:
I never said I
was doing anything against the 'town', which you do love explicitly mentioning, but that
part of the damn intent, in that scenario upon reflection, was that it would look like an investigate result via the note of the whole post!
Problem being: Hey look I'm Blatant let's make this look like an investigate oh let's not say what the repercussions of that are and instead debate on this tangent instead!
You never say
what the reason behind the argument you put there led to. You put the label of misleading and drifted from there.
That is where I see you contradict me. In making something look bigger than it is, or making a trivial part of the argument into the main focus.
I don't get the first part, but I'm implying that you were trying to falsely say you had a day power. Only now that you've realized that would be impossible, you're trying to pretend you never made such an implication.
... >_>
Oh how smart of you. Like I'd forget that I took Blatant. Why, yes Leafsnail! I only now realized that it would be impossible! :O
OMG!
Can you fix your logical processor, please? You imply a wrong where there is no wrong, however I do take note that you aren't capitalizing on it.
I did indeed infer that you had a day inspection from your post. That was due to the fact that you strongly implied you had one. Heck, you said that you were doing so a few posts ago:
Oh wow! You did notice it! You noticed I said 'part'! And 'I guess'!
And in any case you've played enough games to realize that a bare post stating simply "X is innocent" (as opposed to, eg, "X is probably innocent") should be read as "I have an inspection result on this person which says they're innocent".
Ah, right-I do admit this is my fault, however I
do stand on the ground that I did not think of that as the foremost thought when I posted it. I posted that as a quickpost from the ideas on my notes. That PLuke was innocent compared to what allegations were leveled against him (oh and his posts >_>)
What can you draw from that compared to what's going on now?Now, if you'd just said "Well that was a gambit that didn't work due to the quickhammer" afterwards I'd accept that as a reason. But instead you're making strange and contradictory excuses ("Yeah, I was implying I had an inspect" vs "No I never implied anything you're crazy!"). And there's also the whole inflate thing which I still don't get.
...Because I did not think of it as a gambit?
I do daresay that you totally missed the note in parenthesis after that.
And what about that inflate thing? I'm mentioning my power.
Not really. Scum can just evade the inspection with innocent for a single point. And even if we accept that alignment cop has some (absolutely miniscule) utility there's no way it has anywhere near as much as either Ability Cop or Infallible.
Aye, but that costs them - from the perspective of numbers as paranoia - one point against the alignment cop possibility. Said cop could also pick at his/her discretion on the matter in which it doesn't make the scenario wholly
worthless.
It gets you more points. More points can be used to buy more powers. Powers can be used by townies to find, hinder or even kill mafia members. If mafia members are exposed, weakened or dead it is more likely that the town will win. Therefore it is a good auto for townies.
If people all played like idiots and quickhammered with it that would be a problem, but if you only shifted your vote towards the end of the day that wouldn't be too bad a thing. Especially since it would prevent the scum from fucking with the vote as much.
...Ah, now that makes more sense. If near day end-pile all votes on the lynched.
However what if the scenario presents itself that the people are divided on the matter? Wouldn't that be an incentive towards...insane (lacking holistic) thinking?
PPE: Oh dear gods 6 replies.
Author
Topic: Choose-Your-Own-Mafia - GAME OVER - TOWN VICTORY! (Read 97433 times)