5401
Mafia Game Threads / Re: M75: Cupcake Mafia (Day 1)
« on: February 04, 2016, 10:22:51 am »
Why do you like wasting our time?
ADK I don't want to lynch. I also still haven't looked up what Fruit Vendor does. Even in a case where scum knows its a safe claim (I haven't checked myself to see if that's possible), I'm not sure scum!ADK is the kind of player that does this. Though we've had a string of early town claims lately.
In fact. Fruit Vendor is guaranteed to be counterclaimable.I'm not sure about Lekkit's last point against Teproc (regarding counterclaiming).. at most I see that it implies Teproc does not have a PR that can counterclaim ADK; I don't see where the rest comes from. He also claims Teproc is kind of posting without contributing. I'm not really sure if this is true or not. Nothing Teproc has done so far has made me want to reaction-vote him.
Here's the thing. If Teproc is a PR, there are basically two possibilities.
1. He's a PR from another row. He'll by his own argument counterclaim.
2. He's a PR from the same rows as Fruit Vendor. That would be Even Night Tracker, Jailkeeper, Watcher or Cop. ANY other PR would be able to counterclaim Fruit Vendor. Since nobody did, we can assume that ADK is in fact Fruit Vendor. Yet, he's still hesitant.
If Teproc is VT, then saying he thought about the claiming thing and then getting things messed up seems unlikely to me. Why would he say that? He knew some of the results of someone claiming, namely that scum would know which setup was rolled. But the IC part that faust laid out for him he missed. Basically he knew what would happen if a PR became known for scum but not for town. Not even why town would want to claim. And saying he "thought about that as well" while seemingly only having thought about it from a scum perspective seems... Not like something a VT would really do.
Oh, I see. That is a better point than I thought.
It is ?
Do I really have to explain what's wrong here ?
I guess I'll do : "I've thought about it", doesn't mean "I've thought about every possible angle and have made no mistake". It just means that I've thought about it.
ADK I don't want to lynch. I also still haven't looked up what Fruit Vendor does. Even in a case where scum knows its a safe claim (I haven't checked myself to see if that's possible), I'm not sure scum!ADK is the kind of player that does this. Though we've had a string of early town claims lately.
In fact. Fruit Vendor is guaranteed to be counterclaimable.I'm not sure about Lekkit's last point against Teproc (regarding counterclaiming).. at most I see that it implies Teproc does not have a PR that can counterclaim ADK; I don't see where the rest comes from. He also claims Teproc is kind of posting without contributing. I'm not really sure if this is true or not. Nothing Teproc has done so far has made me want to reaction-vote him.
Here's the thing. If Teproc is a PR, there are basically two possibilities.
1. He's a PR from another row. He'll by his own argument counterclaim.
2. He's a PR from the same rows as Fruit Vendor. That would be Even Night Tracker, Jailkeeper, Watcher or Cop. ANY other PR would be able to counterclaim Fruit Vendor. Since nobody did, we can assume that ADK is in fact Fruit Vendor. Yet, he's still hesitant.
If Teproc is VT, then saying he thought about the claiming thing and then getting things messed up seems unlikely to me. Why would he say that? He knew some of the results of someone claiming, namely that scum would know which setup was rolled. But the IC part that faust laid out for him he missed. Basically he knew what would happen if a PR became known for scum but not for town. Not even why town would want to claim. And saying he "thought about that as well" while seemingly only having thought about it from a scum perspective seems... Not like something a VT would really do.
A few thingsUm, because you are pulling a reinoe on your scum partners? I would have done the same thing (banned you from my games).
I don't think this is the same at all. I think he'd either be replaced or the game would be restarted. Since this is a game-deciding rule change that has been deployed right after the game started, it'd be annoying but fair.
The Lekkit case is... very inaccurate I think. I completely disagree with everything. I was going to say doing such a case is scummy, but other people agree, so I don't know what to think. They can't all be scum... or can they?
In yuma's reread of faust I think there was a point if misunderstanding. faust commented on every post - often it was just saying 'this is XX' without judging it, but yuma treated it as if every 'this is XX' comment also implied 'this is bad'.
I agree with the consent that faust is town based on all this. Teproc is also town for his slip and a bit because of Lekkit's case.
RR is being super anti town. vote: RR and stop joking about being scum. try to play for your win con please. Unless you are scum, then you should play against your win con.
I like Lekkit's argument for scum!Teproc, but WW you say you don't. What makes you think he's wrong?
What?
That's what I thought too, but does that really make yuma scummy?
Yes. Whenever I think "What? ", it makes that person scummy.
Ah, so you're explaining your vote. That solves it, Awaclus has to be scum.
Really, I'm being dead serious here. If I was scum, I would have /outted immediately upon seeing the rule clarification.
Well Fruit Vendor only occurs if they have JOAT/Roleblocker or Rolecop/2-Shot Strongman...
So ... all the other ones. Right ?
I don't think it's likely to be a fakeclaim for reasons outlined above, but it's a "safe fakeclaim" in most setups.
No. Take, for instance, a setup where scum has JOAT/Goon. One of those setups has a Tracker, and one has a Commuter, both roles that cannot appear together with Fruit Vendor. So if scum were to claim Fruit Vendor, they would immediately get countered. You can go through all scenarios and see that there will always be the chance of a counterclaim.
What?
That's what I thought too, but does that really make yuma scummy?
Yes. Whenever I think "What? ", it makes that person scummy.
I think faust gets townier. I don't think he goes to all this trouble as scum. He might hope it gets the old "town v town, let's move on" treatment, but I don't know, I think his yuma reread was too aggressive to come from scum, as I don't buy the "riling up" argument.
Hm, ok
Vote: yuma
You said yourself in recent game that you was mislynched once. Now you say that you are easy to be manipulated into self destruction?
With Trader in hand and Stonemason in the supply, you can pay $4 for three Silvers.
I believe the main issue people have is the gratuitous hyphen use in 'no-one'.
So your point is that you don't trust everyone to be play fair?
Not sure if joking....
not joking
I believe the main issue people have is the gratuitous hyphen use in 'no-one'.
So your point is that you don't trust everyone to be play fair?
I don't understand what's happening.
When I opened my RMM, I made this ruleQuote- It is not allowed to quote from QTs, nor is it allowed to use a substitute in order to quote from (this does not include writing posts somewhere else with the intention of posting them later). Paraphrasing is acceptable. Since this rule is exploitable, I hope that no-one tries to do so.
How does this not solve everything? Why does anyone want to do anything other than puting an equivalent of this rule in the basic rule set and then move on? That's all we need to do, and the issue is closed. The rule is exploitable, who cares, no-one is going to exploit it, everyone knows what the intent is. I don't understand why no-one sees how easy it is.
I think it absolutely will, and it will be very hard for scum to deal with it. Both people who don(t need to do it (like Awaclus) and people like me, simply because it will create ICs. I don't think it's easy to fake. People will try, of course they will, but I think they'll get caught.
If I'm wrong, then yes, this is a non-issue.