-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Election 2016 [Mafia] | Everlasting GOPstoppers
- Thread starter Ourobolus
- Start date
- Status
I'm not Cabot but I think you should if Blarg wants it. It might bring about some result that we're not expecting.
So right now I still want to vote El Topo, I would place a vote right now but I don't want to bring us close to turboing the rest of the day.
Well, Blarg seems to be acting pro-town, and even though his reads cut off right where mine begins it seems he's well intentioned. I guess he can handle the silence. He can always say who he'd vote for instead of actually voting until we reach the end of the day and he wants to submit a final vote anyway I guess. I'll do it.
CornBurrito
Member
I don't think he's being 100% forthright with his plan. I don't think the purpose behind it is to clear me as town at all. We'll see.
I get that. I understand that it is worth a shot. I would rather lynch CornBurrito than you today, but I think it's important that we do not put too much emphasis on it.
Well the reason I think Fireblend is town is because he claimed his role is multi shot, which essentially acts as confirmation for me as Ouro slipped up in a PM on D2 revealing that the image macro thing could happen again.
So if he's telling the truth about his claim, why would he limit the number of uses to one so far?
Simple, because he's a townie with a bad role. I'm sure you'll all understand why I can go with this.
If not, I was a Miller in the NX game, a role which is town aligned but really anti-town.
I assume Blarg's plan is essentially to give everyone else in the game the same confirmation I feel, that Fireblend does indeed have the ability to use this multiple times, but has chosen not to after the initial time.
There's absolutely no reason to do this if you were scum. The vote limiting is actually pretty useful, and obviously limiting communication is nice as well. I think Fire ended up choosing well because I was willing to persevere and post a load of image macros to get a decent chunk of discussion across, but I can easily see others just being frustrated/not at a desktop so it's a pain (one reason I was silent at the claim madness on D2 was because I was out and on mobile it isnt easy to post image macros)
Sure, he could be saving it up for end game, but he came out with his role claim in the open, gave a reason which was....flawed but at least believable for using it on me. I've also read him as town most of this game.
Does that about cover it?
So if he's telling the truth about his claim, why would he limit the number of uses to one so far?
Simple, because he's a townie with a bad role. I'm sure you'll all understand why I can go with this.
If not, I was a Miller in the NX game, a role which is town aligned but really anti-town.
I assume Blarg's plan is essentially to give everyone else in the game the same confirmation I feel, that Fireblend does indeed have the ability to use this multiple times, but has chosen not to after the initial time.
There's absolutely no reason to do this if you were scum. The vote limiting is actually pretty useful, and obviously limiting communication is nice as well. I think Fire ended up choosing well because I was willing to persevere and post a load of image macros to get a decent chunk of discussion across, but I can easily see others just being frustrated/not at a desktop so it's a pain (one reason I was silent at the claim madness on D2 was because I was out and on mobile it isnt easy to post image macros)
Sure, he could be saving it up for end game, but he came out with his role claim in the open, gave a reason which was....flawed but at least believable for using it on me. I've also read him as town most of this game.
Does that about cover it?
CornBurrito
Member
Umm so Blarg I found another flaw in your thinking. You think Fireblend can't silence AND kill in the same night. But why? I checked Hyper's role PM just now.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=179047736&postcount=1692
There's no mention of a restriction in his post. There's nothing that says Hyper couldn't send a message AND kill in the same night.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=179047736&postcount=1692
There's no mention of a restriction in his post. There's nothing that says Hyper couldn't send a message AND kill in the same night.
Any Electorate member can make the factional kill unless otherwise specified. Just like the other games.
CornBurrito
Member
Occam's razor is that Fireblend can silence and kill in the same night.
That does make it a bit trickier as to why he would limit it. I am tempted to think that might be because it set himself up for a town claim later on. But that is admittedly conspiracy level thinking.
That does make it a bit trickier as to why he would limit it. I am tempted to think that might be because it set himself up for a town claim later on. But that is admittedly conspiracy level thinking.
Okay. Good. I assume they also know each other, like in the other games?
Well, yeah. BSP's PM said that the electorate members didn't know her, implying they do know each other.
That's privileged information.
Hyper's PM doesn't have any <REDACTED> stuff and doesn't mention a mafia chat.
Blargonaut
Banned
But can 1 member do the factional kill AND perform their individual-specific action at the same time?
CornBurrito
Member
That's BSP's pm not Hyper's, isn't it?
Do you have a point? We're 40 minutes to go and you're speculating on whether or not the Mafia know each other?
Blargonaut
Banned
damnit, you probably can't disclose that
sigh
sigh
Hyper's doesn't.
If it's not in the PM, it's not a given. If they don't know each other, that would mean someone like Kalor (just as an example) could have voted for Hyper without knowing that he is scum. That would work in Fireblend's favor, since if he was mafia he may not have necessarily known that Hyper was.
CornBurrito
Member
No restriction is mentioned in Hyper's PM. Is that a standard mafia rule?
Also Ouro just said "Any Electorate member can make the factional kill unless otherwise specified. Just like the other games."
Blargonaut
Banned
Also, my plan is very simple, people. I really don't know how to explain it any better than that post.
I'm town. You guys have shown no interest in listening to reason, even though a mislynch puts us in a very dangerous situation and you will get no information from lynching me.
All I can do is push the discussion forward as much as possible with the vague hope that you will do better tomorrow. At this point I'm not expecting much though.
Blargonaut
Banned
So you believe that 1 Electorate member can execute the kill for their faction AND perform their individual-specific action in the same Night?
CornBurrito
Member
Then I'm sorry but I just really don't get your plan at all.
CornBurrito
Member
Well that settles it then. There's likely nothing to restrict him from using silence AND killing in the same night.
Ouro's Robin Hood PM in Archer didn't technically specify that I could only use my ability once per night. I guess the player is supposed to assume some things.
Well in that case I thought it was pretty obvious that it was just one kill per night.
CornBurrito
Member
Holy shit... I just realized that huge post on the last page was Blarg's. Wtf I didn't think he'd ever post something so... serious?
I know, I know.
Well he did say he was working on a big post.
- Status