...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.]).
How does the massclaim help anything? You assert that it won't help mafia, but I couldn't disagree more. For instance, let's say an Infallible Alignment Cop claims. The mafia can now easily neutralize them with a recycle or a conversion.
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.
Scum can't get miller, it is a town only ability.
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.
I think you are scum. You made an error yesterday by claiming an impossible result, and you've spent today panicking and trying to cover it up.
I did not say that he was explicitly town, I said he was explicitly innocent.
>_>
Oh. Well that is a pedantic non-point and it doesn't deserve a response.
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!
"Upon reflection"?
Did you want to make it look like an inspect at the time or not? This is the core contradiction here.
Also note that, if it was meant to look like an inspection result, yes, you were trying to be misleading. Again this wouldn't be a problem if you had a clear explanation for what you were doing.
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.
Lying and then failing to explain why is a major contradiction. Yes, I'm aware your blatantness means you couldn't have made an inspection day one. But I think you forgot about that or didn't realize that blatant triggered for day actions too, and only realized your mistake after Jack AT's result was displayed. Alternatively you were always planning to back down and smugly go "Nuh uh, I wasn't implying anything! I can't be blamed if you make simple logical inferences and mislead yourselves!"
... >_>
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.
You could easily have misunderstood the way blatant worked too - possibly thinking it only worked at night. In any case there is still a major contradiction in your actions which you haven't addressed.
Oh wow! You did notice it! You noticed I said 'part'! And 'I guess'!
That you're falling back on the vagueness of "I guess" just baffles me even more! How can you be unsure as to your own motivations?
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 >_>)
That was not at the foremost of your mind, but also at the same time you "guess part of that [your] intent was to make it look like an inspect result". How do I reconcile these ideas? Are you claiming to have Dissociative Identity Disorder? Are you saying you go into some kind of trance when making your posts? Help me out here.
...Because I did not think of it as a gambit?
I do daresay that you totally missed the note in parenthesis after that.
Yes that was the part where you contradicted yourself and confused me.
And what about that inflate thing? I'm mentioning my power.
You mentioned it and then lied about your use of it.
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.
That isn't remotely worth spending 5 points on though.
...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?
I guess, but I don't think it's a major issue if everyone makes a clear decision at the end of the day. The town doesn't make better decisions if all its votes are spead out (I'd say it makes worse decisions due to mafia having more influence).
Why would that "explain" my earlier behavior?
Any consistent string of thought processes. Even "Oh shit, I messed up by making that post, oops" or "There was nothing wrong with that post, go away". But the thing is you haven't given me that. You've given me multiple explanations that don't match up with each other.
Though I quite do like how you somehow got what I'm thinking before I even proposed a massclaim.
Hello? That's me thinking out loud! Why're you flanderizing me there? "Whoever said Tiruin vouches for LET'S ALL CLAIM? HELLO?1"
I don't see why you'd claim if you weren't trying to encourage a massclaim.
Author
Topic: Choose-Your-Own-Mafia - GAME OVER - TOWN VICTORY! (Read 97442 times)