I'll
Extend for another look at combo possibilities. Also, Toaster was in here, he just didn't have much to say.
Solifuge:I've been backing my arguments up since I started making them, whether it's with a suspicions based on behavior, action history, or immutable facts. The fact that you are turning a blind eye to every bit of support I've given is evidence of YOU doing the very thing you claim I am. You're assuming people are lying, while given no reason to suspect they are... but you have to believe they are lying in order for your shit theory to work, so you do.
The support you've given is shit, and you've done nothing to reinforce it once proven as such. Your grand theory that Leaf is clearly the Vampire Lord? Others and I pointed out numerous times that it was completely stupid, and you had absolutely nothing to say in response that was relevant. No response to how a Devil could not possibly be considered a Survivor, why a Devil being convertible is highly dubious, why SK conversions last game don't automatically mean Devil conversions this one.
Your repeated insistence that you and Toaster
must be Town? No reaction to how bussing early makes perfect sense this game, or why your WIFOM is better than WIFOM any other game, other than vague assertions of "doing it all game" and "doing it too aggressively." So I guess I mean no reaction to why tapping scumpartners or bussing convincingly is verifiable proof of Towniness.
That Toaster
must be a Guard? No rebuttal to why anyone except you should believe there's a Guard at all.
In fact,
in this very quote, you're bashing me for "assuming people are lying, while given no reason to suspect they are," while
still having no response to how this is worse than the bullshit you were pulling much, much earlier. You mention it later, but you don't actually address it save for the
same scummy bullshit you've been pulling all game- vague dismissals and ad hominem attacks.
So I'll ask you AGAIN: What reason did you have to believe Jim was lying? Bdthemag? Leafsnail? Me? Oh, well, you know, easy falseclaims and scumpartners covering for them. What reason do I have to believe you and Toaster are lying? None at all, obviously, because I have no
reasons to think you're lying, just easy falseclaims and scumpartners covering for them.
You have no reason to believe there isn't a guard, but a baseless idea that you Just Don't want to believe my claim... namely because the only way your crackpot theory makes sense is if Toaster and I are scumbuddies, and everyone who ever claimed being Guarded was scum. What immutable fact is keeping you from considering that the people who were locked up by a Guard either aren't Cult (Me), or weren't Cult yet (Jim)? I see nothing that suggests that, and instead I know for a fact that I was locked up.
Once again, you give no reason why this isn't a valid line of reasoning, or at least as valid as any of
your theories regarding who's the Lord and why.
You also ignore the very convenient fact that
everyone who's been guarded HAS been scum, excepting you, who he's supposedly been guarding ever since. For my crackpot theory to work, I have to assume scum converted the confirmed-Town, still-has-a-rez priest. Wow, that is totally unreasonable!
Finally, that's great. Awesome. You are convinced that you were guarded. And this means fuck-all to the rest of us because? Go on, tell me why I or anyone else should give a rat's ass that Solifuge assures us something happened. Or better yet, tell me what makes you so special, and/or why it's stupid to suspect that people might be lying in a mafia game with a cult.
Look at Toaster's behavior; none of it is the behavior of a Vampire Lord. He reveled the presence of Cult on Day 2 by killing a teammate. He may be Scum now, but assuming that he's the Lord requires too many leaps of logic; he would have had to convert a Guard on D1, and then decided to publicly claim D2, and do so in order to kill a Vamp.Slave and reveal that the Scumteam was a Cult. You know, as well as I, that Toaster is a more canny player than that, and wouldn't shoot himself in the foot, and give up the advantage of secrecy... especially that early in the game.
This is another prime example of ignoring things you don't like. I
already explained why Toaster's behavior makes perfect sense as a Vamp Lord, and you had no interest in addressing it.
It's also a perfect example of dismissing things as too unlikely while espousing your own theories which are
considerably worse. I'm one of your top two suspects for Vamp Lord, despite that requiring both a very specific string of conversions and Leafsnail lying to cover my ass indirectly. Please, explain to us all how this is more likely than "Toaster converted the Priest and has been fakeclaiming as a Guard."
Remind me again- who was it who helped lynch Jim because of a safe fakeclaim? You. Who was it who started calling out Leaf as "clearly the Vamp Lord?" You. And who was it who considers me damned likely as the Lord, despite a web of confirmation involving said Devil, who you've evidently given up on? That's right, you, the same person who's now shocked and appalled that anyone could disbelieve someone else's roleclaim.
Irony, I can't change your mind, but I can point out how you're ignoring and re-imagining the facts to fit your little theory. I put myself way on the line to get Jim lynched, and by your theory would have had to be Scum by then. Jim is a WAY better player than I, and one I wouldn't want to lose on the Scumteam. Especially when there was no reason to do so. I fought him tooth and nail, with legitimate arguments, not bussing.
First of all, you didn't "put yourself on the line" to lynch Jim. You spearheaded the efforts to not lynch Azure, but this was not "Solifuge risks being killed and his Vamp Lord revealed if he doesn't take down Jim." This was "Solifuge points out problems, bandwagon shifts to Jim." It wouldn't even surprise me if you hadn't thought lynching Jim would work, but it did anyway.
Secondly, I'm not sure you understand the purpose of bussing. It's not to kill a teammate in a scummy fashion. It's to kill a teammate in such a way that you look Town. Unless you can provide a VERY good reason why scum wouldn't or couldn't do that, the best you can say is that you're
less likely to be scum.
Third, this has absolutely nothing to do with your original argument. You said I had no reason at all for this- now it seems I have a reason, but it's invalid because you're confirmed Town for bussing Jim. Not only is that not the same thing, it's kind of the sort of thing you'd want to explain in the first place. Why didn't you?
If you're going to sling shit, don't take potshots from the fringe. You referenced this in your above arguments, yet you're trying to discredit me with it. Explain what "Boatload of Problems" there are, or is this just passive hostility?
Off the top of my head:
-The distinction between votes on who was ultimately lynched and who wasn't. It's easy enough to read both regardless, but I consider that a marginally useful distinction at best.
-The selective vote history. You sometimes mention when someone switched their vote, but only when you deemed it bandwagony and only when it was their final switch of the day.
-The lack of other history; when they started attacking someone and for what reasons, etc. Again, mentioned in rare cases.
-In tying in with my first point, the Day 5 considerations, and accompanying insinuation that those voting scum at the end of the day probably aren't/weren't scum themselves, and possibly vice versa.
-Calling former players by their replace name, which, while sharing roles, aren't the same person.
-Your ending suspicions, which have relatively little to do with your list; you suspect both partially for vote-related reasons, but largely things that aren't really mentioned in your list.
-Your suspicion of me for Pandar not voting while he was in need of a replace.
-Your suspicion of me for various bullshit accusations that you refuse to explain ("dogma," "active players," "personal authority," etc).
Most of it stems from your intended/current use rather than factual errors, but it's nonetheless not the ultimate tool for finding scum.
Max:Max: Why so willing to shoot someone you think isn't the lord?
Because it makes for a great test to see who is the lord. It is a way to know without shooting a townie.
I don't follow.
NINJA'D:
Crown, stop that.
Oppose Shorten.
I think Solifuge might have a point, losing this many players with no good idea of whether or not we'd be getting rid of scum or losing town just seems like a bad idea.
Irony and Max seem way too eager to lower the numbers. I'm not necessarily against a Toaster lynch, I don't have a solid opinion on that yet, but I am against potentially sending town's chance to win to hell.
Do you have an opinion on anything? Day's kind of ending here, man.
What would you say to you accepting the kill and offing Solifuge instead?
Author
Topic: Supernatural Mafia 4 - Game Over! Demonic Victory (Read 281407 times)