Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
I was unsure about my expectations, but the fact he argued back seems town-ish, if he tried to divert it onto someone else I would have thought he was mafia-ish. I'm unsure about swiss at the mo but leaning towards him being mafia
I'm aware of that. I was referring to the fact that the post ends with the word "and," which makes it look like you were going to add more to it. Was there supposed to be more, or should I just consider it a typo?
Why do you think that having less people on your team causes panic? How would being aggressive cause confusion, as compared to drawing attention to the aggressor?X1-12 said:
Calling a person's (Swiss) arguments against the case against them legitimate, then deciding that he is the best person to vote without a specific question or topic on which you are pressuring them is either really stupid and/or lacks thoughtfulness, or is blatantly contradictory, i.e. how Swiss acted. Put more simply, if his arguments are legit, why are you trying to lynch him/why do you think he is mafia?X1-12 said:
oh typo, sorry if there was something else I was going to say I would have covered it in my later posts anyway
I asked just to ensure there was nothing I has missed, Someone near the start was talking about a godfather and I just wanted to make sure I was not left in the dark about certain things. Especially since all of the first post looked copypasta from a previous game I assume, just wanted to make sure nothing had changed
Less people on your team means you will be scared and rushed right? and want to do everything fast. Aggressive play, by way of throwing around accusations, does create confusion, if suddenly people are all accusing different people of different things it does get a bit hectic, or confusing
what seems to be randomly asking swiss questions about deadlus and kupo seems a bit like you were trying to dodge. Having re-read it I ask you this question: Why were you askign about deadlus and kupo?
I said Swiss' arguments were FAIRLY LEGIT, not 100% foolproof or anything, I said I voted to pressure him, it was cheeky, I said that, all I wanted to see how he reacted? is it not 'correct play' merely to see how people respond to certain situations?
same as above:
No, he didn't. He had you/Isu locked in his sights the whole time his was defending himself.
Disagree. His jump on you looks more like an easy opportunity to jump on you. More likely "scum" than "idiot".
That's true. Sometimes. I think the former is more common at the game's start.
Where did this come from?! o_O
He has evidence. But it's really WIFOM-ish and anot very good.
Hmmmm.
Why ask Daedalus?
Because I think your the play? I know I don't have any support, but I think your haste to lynch Swiss was genuinely a scummy move. You seem to be trying really hard to manipulate town and I think chances are high that you are scum.cello_marl said:
I think its scummy. And since when am I riding on the backbones of it. I brought it up first.
Widdle Riddle do you have a case on Cello besides this? Can you point out actual flaws in his argument against Swiss? What about Swiss? What do you think of him? If Cello isn't the lynch for toDay who else would you pick?
By riding on the backbones of it, I simply meant that's the only thing you have against him.
While it is true that he counter-tunneled me, he did not do so while providing anything new. Comparing my efforts against him to mine, I poked and prodded at his statements and beliefs continually, whereas he simply said he couldn't see a townie wanting a quicklynchVult said:
Cello said:
Wait. "The former is more common"? In my experience, people vote for pressure more often than "evidence" early on in the game, rather than the reverse that you suggest. Also, when you say "it is for me", did you mean that you tend to vote for people early on based on new evidence compared to pressure, or that that is more often the case in games that you play?Vult_Redux said:
This is exactly what Swiss said he was doing. Why do you find his explanations only "fairly legit" (now, at least. You're original wording was simply "legit", making you, ironically, wishy-washy), and as such leaned toward considering him mafia, and then turn around and do exactly what he did? This is compounded by the fact that you said Swiss's style was "oddly very forward [implied: aggressive]" and that you believe aggression is scummy, and yet you emulated him.X1-12 said:
It's pretty obvious that's what you've been doing to anything that has a pulse. First, you vote Swiss for ******** reasons, then switch around and call me wishy-washy (attacking a person's beliefs is attacking that person) and say Swiss's arguments are "legit". I would have been wrong if you had dropped it here (I had originally assumed you agreed with me), since you explained that you thought aggression = scum (which it doesn't), but then you kept pushing against Swiss for "pressure". But, that pressure is meaningless. If you are dead-set on believing he is scum from his former aggression, then nothing could persuade you otherwise, which means your pressure-claim is a ruse. If you've forgiven his aggression, then you have no reason to continue to pressure/vote-to-lynch him since his arguments are legitimate.X1-12 said:
How is it a contradiction?
No I don't. I'm not even trying to pretend that I do. I am getting a definite town read from Swiss. I've just seen too many situations when (dumb) gambitting town gets lynched.
Its not a contradiction at all, but being expressly okay with a quicklynch is a scumtell. At least I think it is. And no, cello isn't being pressured because noone else thinks hes scummy.
Why aren't you pressuring Cello if you find him scummy? If you are town and you find someone to be scum, it's your job as town to convince us said person needs to be lynched. If Cello is scum and runs gambit on the entire town, you can't rightly say "I told you so" if you are not being productive to help serving his lynch.
I find an open lynch queue like that to be fairly dangerous. However, I like your addition of "the scum has to select from a pool of possible doctor protects" which gambles heavily with them losing their night kill, and would aid town. Anyway, at this point, it's not like we haven't made it obvious these are the people we are finding most suspicious anyway, and are most likely that scum would not kill. In this case of "Doctor protect this pool, Cop investigate that pool" I can see it working. Although without this setup, I would have found that a dangerous and bad play.
X1-12, where did you read you could not use bold?X1-12 said:
Because quicklynches are scummy. The faster the lynch the less info town gets. He had reasoning for a lynch but definitely not for a QUICKlynch.
He quoted a vote
underline: yet in this game there seems to have been forming two very different almost 'factions'. I am getting asked where I stand on cello vs swiss, which doesn't sound like a town working together, unless you think he is scum?
I will stand and apologise about skimming a few things, I will avoid it in the future. but please read the next quote
FAIRLY LEGIT - one post after I was asked about it. Did you skim that bit? how ironic. I never used the word legit without 'fairly' infront of it
I said I thought agression = scum, well actually thought that aggression suggested scum. I was corrected by swiss (with good reasons). at the moment i feel on its own it has no real weight, but if there is suggestions that the player is scum. then it holds a little weight (only a little though)
although from your reaction I assume bold is okay
Okay maybe the first two ARE only guidelines but you sound like you are trying to lynch me pretty fast here:
It wasn't quoted...
This is nice and all, but I didn't want to hear it from you.
Which is nice and all, again.
I think we've steered from the point. The only thing I'm saying about his offense is that it was there. He showed initiative to scumhunt (?) even while being on the defense.
In this game, for example, everyone crowded around the Swiss wagon at the start because that was where the most evidence lay.
Stance on The Guide, please.
Although i feel I am saying this too much, I am undecided, hence why I removed my vote
How do you feel about this quote [it refers to Swiss's defense of the wagon against him]?
I think its perfectly normal to not want to get lynched, defending yourself does not equate to town OR mafia in my eyes. No-one wants to get lynched as it puts their side at a disadvantage
erm.. No previous experience of any kind - hence why I have been quite very wrong about a few things..
) but had to question the mod about the setup in your first post when it clearly states:Hence my questions towards you.
I just wanted to make sure, I wasn't trying to look like a newbie, infact I was, at the start, trying to look like I was used to playing mafia to avoid being ganged up on or something, But since you ask me I won't lie, and I feel since this IS the newbie Mafia I now feel its not a big deal to admit to.I find it strange that you have reviewed the rules enough to understand that no code or any sort is allowed (which I'm glad you have done so!
Hence my questions towards you.
If you have a defense against this, I would like to hear it. Although I understand that it's an odd thing to defend against, and frankly I don't think you can.
However, it leads me to believe that you asked that question in your beginning post to either
1) appear newbie/clueless
or
2) tried to feebly use it against Swiss, as you use it rather in a lengthy discussion with him.
The heart rule was relevant to confirmation, not replacement. Moreover, that doesn't really support your position. If you had asked earlier about whether or not we could bold, it would have supported your story. However, some rules you chose to believe (bold isn't allowed) and others you disbelieved/cast doubt upon (set-up of the game). Why was this? Also, the conversation with the mod that you alluded to must have taken place via private message or AIM since it did not take place here. Why did you choose to publicly announce those questions instead of asking privately, especially when you "weren't sure it was ok to ask"?X1-12 said:
firstly all it says is 'ONCE role PMs have been sent', where does it say not for replacements? I never said it was a solid defence but its what happened. I also never cast doubt on OR disbelieved any rule, I asked for confirmation. Stop strawmanning
