Fritz's Fav Fictional Figures Faction Fest - Game over

[Thin_Man]

vote glork

[Thin_Man]

unvote, vote JordanA24

[Thin_Man]

Okay, yeah, I like crazy bandwagons as much as the next person, but I'm not a huge fan of the ones that are on me. Could people start giving actual reasons for their votes? Or even, y'know, write related sentences? I would really appreciate it.

Calling people on your wagon stupid without good reason doesn't exactly inspire me.

I consider you the best vote at present, and I'd likely vote you if the wagon on you already wasn't so big. My second large temptation is a vote on theo.

@Flameaxe: I'm don't think it's necessary.

[Thin_Man]

Where did I call anyone stupid? As far as I can tell, I was complaining that nobody was giving any sort of reason for voting me, an easily verifiable fact. Don't put words in my mouth, thanks.

You said that people on you were having trouble stringing related sentences together. That hardly strikes me as a compliment.

You consider me the best vote at present? Really now? And why would that be? Because it's the easiest vote, given that a bandwagon has inexplicably developed on me?

No, that's not the reason at all.

So if I'm the best vote, why aren't you voting me? While we're at it, why is your first real sentence of the game a lame attempt at making me look scummy by lying about what I've said? On day one all you did was vote for Glork and then for Jordan, without any attempt at explanation in either case. But now you've stopped to defend a vote you haven't even placed. Don't feel like sticking your neck out too much? Was it easier hopping on the Jordanwagon because PJ gave a reason for it? Do you feel safer just quietly supporting this one?

No, not really. I was voting for Glork and Jordan because they had the most votes on. Nevertheless, and whilst I feel bandwagons are good up until a point, I only really want them to get near an actual lynch if I'm fairly sure the person is scum. Jordan was just a day 1 wagon, and the reason PJ cited wasn't deserving at all of a lynch, regardless. Likewise, you aren't deserving of a lynch yet, and I'm not really in the mood to stick you up all the way to 7 without a pretty fucking good reason for it.

My reason for being suspicious of you is your attitude. I see a fairly strong "if I keep attacking this guy and making it out to be a joke then I just look like a bit of an idiot when he gets lynched and during the interim I look town and active" scumchatesque vibe. You then proceed to not just get a claim out of him, but do so in a way that implies you will be likely suspicious of him regardless of what he claims, which is pretty ridiculous considering not only have you not brought up any opinions like this previous, he also hasn't actually really done anything deserving of claiming, let alone the attitude you aim at him. Call it a persona if you want, but I still dislike the fact it seems to be centered around driving past the claim as opposed to actually ripping it from him then analyzing it. Day 2 you belittle the first vote on you as a joke, attempting to make the wagon on you seem less credible (though I doubt that amount of thought was put into it). Beyond that, everythings pretty much neutral. I dislike your other posts, but that's mostly a gut thing, and I only trust my gut so far. Thing is, though, no-one has really posted enough to analyse, either, and most of the people on the big wagon were people who would have joined a wagon like that even if town.

[Thin_Man]

I like the cut of your gib, even if you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

First things first: please, stop putting words in my mouth. I didn't say "they have trouble stringing sentences together", I said that they should write sentences related to their votes. Look at some of the people who've voted for me. Half of them have not only not given a good reason, but have not even written

anything

besides a vote for me.

For clarification, who's "this guy"? Flameaxe? I'm not really sure what you're accusing me of doing, and I'm not really sure why you consider it scummy. I'm sorry, but your last paragraph is not at all clear.

That's not how I read it. I read it as sentences related to each other, and that you were implying that people were just rambling on without coherent thought.

And 'this guy' was Jordan in that instance (which I considered fairly obvious, considering I was talking about claims, but hey)

You think that Sarc's the best place to put a vote, but you don't vote for him yourself? Your second biggest "temptation" is voting Theo, but there's still no vote. That seems like a pretty passive play to me. You have two people that you think should be targetted, but you don't want to place your vote on them yourselves.

I have a fairly well documented policy of refusing to explain why I'm voting for the person I'm voting for. I don't want to tie myself down quite yet, in a big game. Another reasonless vote on sarc at this point is not really constructive at all, and a reasonless vote on theo would just be useless.

If it makes you feel any better, Sarc, I voted for you because of what Joshua wrote in the opening of day 2.

I'm not a fan of following the note. There's too much information in it for me to think it's a genuine, sane (or whatever) information role, and if all it's doing is relaying the suspicions of a random townie or group of townies to me, then I'll bear that in mind, but I'm not going to follow their suspicions to the exclusion of my own.

[Thin_Man]

And 'this guy' was Jordan in that instance (which I considered fairly obvious, considering I was talking about claims, but hey)

Who cares about Jordan's claim. He's dead. We're concerned about *gasp* BBM's claim.

I have a fairly well documented policy of refusing to explain why I'm voting for the person I'm voting for. I don't want to tie myself down quite yet, in a big game. Another reasonless vote on sarc at this point is not really constructive at all, and a reasonless vote on theo would just be useless.

So you vote one guy, and attack someone else completly......ya. That totally makes sense. I don't know why no one else does it. Hell, I'll do it right now.

Unvote Vote: Glork

Because Zindaras changed his avatar

You should probably learn to read. It would help your mafia playing quite a bit.

[Thin_Man]

I have a reason for bandwagoning. It is a part of my role.

Defining wagoning = subjective
+ Vague
+ Convenient
-------
= Scum

Q.E.D.

Why is he not dead?

Because, as far as I'm concerned, he came out far too soon, and actively tried to avoid the worst of the 'vague' and 'convenient' situations you mentioned. It strikes me as fairly plausible that a role like this

could

exist, and if it was in the game on FA, then I think he picked the right way to play it. I also don't think that coming out an claiming a major part of your role in that fashion is something that someone who didn't have that ability would do, and I consider it an unlikely ability for a scum. It could be one massive gambit, but I don't really reckon FA is that type of player, and it's not even a particularly beneficial gambit anyway.

[Thin_Man]

That role makes no sense.

Why not?

[Thin_Man]

That role makes no sense.

Why not?

1. If a wagon were to happen, say OMG RIGHT NOW, and Flame were not here for it, he would be lynched for no other reason than not being here.

2. Why does the rolename make sense with the role itself? Think about it; most everyone whom has died so far has had a role that fits; this one doesn't seem to.

Unvote, vote Flameaxe

BTW

Oh come on. A mod shouldn't have to plan for 'what if a wagon happened

now

', as in within a couple of hours. As long as we're at a remotely reasonable pace, there should be easily enough time for him to move his vote on to avoid death. Hell, now we know, you'd have to be an idiot not to wait for him.

And the role fits fine. He's a bloodthirsty robot that dies if he can't kill people.

So this has nothing to do with those... uh... killings we've had in the night?

Not only is 'he claimed an evil character gettim' pretty lame reasoning, none of the kill methods match a futuristic robot, really. Not to the extent I'd imagine something like this to do anyway. (As a purely theoretical point, I would also imagine that if he needs people to die during the day, he isn't killing them at night, but that's baseless flavour speculation)

[Thin_Man]

That role makes no sense.

Why not?

1. If a wagon were to happen, say OMG RIGHT NOW, and Flame were not here for it, he would be lynched for no other reason than not being here.

2. Why does the rolename make sense with the role itself? Think about it; most everyone whom has died so far has had a role that fits; this one doesn't seem to.

Unvote, vote Flameaxe

BTW

Oh come on. A mod shouldn't have to plan for 'what if a wagon happened

now

', as in within a couple of hours. As long as we're at a remotely reasonable pace, there should be easily enough time for him to move his vote on to avoid death. Hell, now we know, you'd have to be an idiot not to wait for him.

And the role fits fine. He's a bloodthirsty robot that dies if he can't kill people.

Yeah. Mods shouldn't have to plan ahead.

Yes, and a bloodthirsty robot wouldn't go around at night killing people, either.

Get a brain.

"LOL YEAH. AND WHAT IF WE ALL SIT AROUND JACKING OFF AND VOTING OURSELVES UNTIL THE DEADLINE. THEN WE'S GONNA LOSE THE GAME. MODS SHOULD PLAN FOR RETARDS LIKE US. PLAN AROUND US DOING RETARDED THINGS LIKE FORMING A FULL BANDWAGON IN HALF A DAY DERFDERFDERFDERF"

And I don't get that you're this experienced at mafia and you seem to think the optimum play is to simply vote the person who claimed a role that, in the game, has killed someone, then you are being exceptionally lazy with this.

So this has nothing to do with those... uh... killings we've had in the night?

Not only is 'he claimed an evil character gettim' pretty lame reasoning, none of the kill methods match a futuristic robot, really. Not to the extent I'd imagine something like this to do anyway. (As a purely theoretical point, I would also imagine that if he needs people to die during the day, he isn't killing them at night, but that's baseless flavour speculation)

You assume that he was the one doing the killing, and not a member of the scumgroup. Y'fail.

So you don't deny that 'he claimed an evil character gettim' is bad reasoning?

Oh ya. Except for:
1.) Slashing ("assassin robot")
2.) Inexplicable death ("he directly or indirectly kills his employer")
3.) Teammates

Their possible, but they ain't likely. A star wars droid would use a blaster weapon of some sort, and the wiki says he is fond of explosives. I'd expect either of those as much more likely than something that I guess he could do but isn't really very likely. That's like saying that superman would kill by dropping large rocks on people. It's technically possible, but it's not really in flavour. And the entire point was a rebuttal to your 'nothing to do with the killings in the night' bit, and I thought it fairly obvious that he has nothing to do with them if his scumbuddies are committing them.

It just seems like your entire argument is

"He's not a very nice character so we should lynch him"

And I think that's really weak.

[Thin_Man]

I didn't sign up for this game to be told how to play by someone who clearly has at most a loose grasp on how games work themselves. Go take your little notions and shove them up your ass, because I don't want to hear them.

Mods should plan for everything. Not doing so is foolish. I'm experienced enough to know that.

You're saying that the mod should place in countermeasures that means that it doesn't matter as much if the town act like idiots. I say to that it doesn't matter. If the town acts like idiots they deserve all they get. I'm not going to put in my game something to help townies out if they have actively fucked themselves over. They deserve to lose. And whilst that's a gamewide thing, the same principle hits here. Forming a lynching bandwagon over half a day is a grand majority of the time an exceptionally stupid thing to do, and I don't get why you're objecting to a role that will

only

hurt the town if they do something stupid like this. You can't plan for everything, jdodge. Planning for everything would eliminate all random factors from the game and leave you with a shitty game. You have to leave it at a point and let the players make their own game, not set up safety nets where none are needed, like you are suggesting.

No, I don't. And before you say "OH YOU'RE VOTING HIM BECAUSE HIS CHARACTER WOULD MAKE SENSE THAT WAY", that assumes that is my only reason for thinking that.

So what is your other, supa sekrit reasoning then?

[Thin_Man]

Not that I'm objecting to you moving off him, but 178 doesn't work if he's scum. He just hammers the other guy, and with three kills an night, the night will likely hurt us much more than it'll hurt the scums. A scum for a townie is a good trade, I guess, but if you genuinely think he's scum, it's really not that great a play.

And I explained why I think you hanging to the claim like a liferaft and completely ignoring how the guy is actually acting is a bit dim, in relation to 168.

I'll leave off, though, but I'm fairly sure we're going to have this argument again at the end of the day. No harm in leaving a day more of his activities before we make our decision on him though.

I'm not suggesting safety nets. I'm suggesting not assuming that your players are going to be able to watch the thread 24/7. Try again jackass.

How is this really all that relevant?

And I'm suggesting that the players should never create a situation in which watching the thread 24/7 is necessary. If the players ever get to a point in which watching the thread 24/7 is necessary in order to comment on the day's lynch, they are lynching

too fucking fast

and it is their own fault for anything that happens as a result of that (deadlines are a different animal). And that's before he's even claimed his voting disability. Once he's claimed it, there's no way in hell any sensible town would lynch without making allowances for their one member who will

die

if they don't sort out what they do with him.

And you can call off the argument any time you want, I won't take it as a concession or anything. I just like arguing when I know I'm right.

His eagerness to claim without actually claiming for a while.

And how is that scummy?

[Thin_Man]

@Peej: I do, however think that your point regarding the vintage of bandwagonner roles is fairly sound, though. I suspect there actually have been roles similar to the ones you pointed to actually existing on the town side of the fence, but I can't remember any games offhand, so I can't really prove it or anything. I'll browse again at some point, cause I'm fairly sure I remember at least one, but there's no guarantee I'm right.

[Thin_Man]

Well, we all know that Sarcs been a frankly godawful player since he came back.

Actually, it's currently on UA because I'm thinking that the SlasherScum is probably a scumchatter. Admittedly, now that I think about it, UA has been relatively scarce in ScumChat as of late, and my vote is probably better suited to somebody who has actually been active in ScumChat recently, such as yourself or IH.

I don't see why someone would kill scumchatters. I get what you're saying, but the players killed have been sub-par chatters. I don't really see them killing a sub-par chatter just for being a chatter.

It is undisclosed at this time. And it shall remain that way.

I reckon the other one, tbh. Depends on the number of mafias.

Yeah, well, I'm sure my meta on Thok probably sucks too, but I was still right about him in Royal Family.

Dude, that's not much of an achievement. Hellen Keller could have told you Thok was scum on the last day of Royal Family.

[Thin_Man]

Is Thin Man an alt?

Who are you addressing, fucking Santa Claus?

[Thin_Man]

PS: The best way to ask someones name is not to go into a crowded room and yell "HEY GUYS DOES ANYONE KNOW THIS GUYS NAME". You ask them, politely.

[Thin_Man]

In all honesty, I don't want it to get out. My playstyle isn't hugely different in most areas that matter, but I've changed some fairly large things, and I've noticed a fair few unconscious changes too. I do insult people a lot more, so I

really

don't want my regular account to be tarred with the same brush. That said, I slipped up and posted with my regular account in WildWest mafia, which I'm also in, after I'd signed up for this game, so someone in this game is bound to notice it sooner or later. Go and have a look if you really feel the need.

PS: You have genuinely been a shitty player since you got back though. You've really just been lazy and conceited and really just stalled out at OK.

[Thin_Man]

meh.

Vote Theopr

[Thin_Man]

PS: You have genuinely been a shitty player since you got back though. You've really just been lazy and conceited and really just stalled out at OK.

And this is based on what, this one game? Have we even been in a game together?

So you like hiding behind your alt while you throw ad hominem attacks at people for no reason. Well, geez, that's mature.

If you really care, I don't think I've played as well since I came back either, but I really don't appreciate you just insulting me.

This is based on a fair few games. I read a lot of other games, and, mostly by coincidence, I admit, I think I've read enough games with you to form a decent opinion as to how your playstyle has evolved. This is mostly immaterial, anyway, seeing as how you admit I'm right. Fact is, though, I'll continue pointing out your flaws as a player until you start to fix them.

And assuming people have no reason for doing something is just more of this lazy play. Don't make me out to be an idiot just because you took something you read in a game on the internet too seriously.

I do find it curious that Sarc was the one wagonned out of all the other people mentiond in the opening Day 2 post though.

Again, you fail at reading. JDodge was only mentioned as a connection to the copmason thing from Day 1 and the other two people are dead.

[Thin_Man]

happy with my vote

But Kscope always plays like this. What separates this game from the others where he has played like this as town?

@Cephwagon. It's ok. I prefer to wait a until bit later in the game before I read ceph.

I'm personally curious and trying to deduce what kind of kill it was. I'm usually not one for uselss Nightkill speculation but the guy had two posts. I won't press it, but I will leave it out for contemplation.

I'm not a fan of nightkill speculation normally, but I must admit I'm a little curious as to why players like Oman and Scot (probly the best out the people who've died) are dying whilst there's about 10 better players who haven't been touched. No point in speculating about that though.

[Thin_Man]

What the heck. I swear, every single time I get lynched, it's for no apparent reason/without a case. It's really annoying. I guess all I can say is that some people really need to recalibrate their scumdars.

And every other time you seem to just sigh about it and not really put up much of a fight. Don't think I've ever seen you whine about it before.

[Thin_Man]

I think we'd be more productive lynching Sarcastro or Glork at this point. Probably more Sarcastro, but either way we could make a lynch today that would provide useful information, unlike that Day 1 lynch.

Okay, I'll bite. Why would a lynch on each of us provide significant useful information?

Because you have discussion. Because people have opinions about you two. Because I'd rather lynch someone that we've talked about instead of another quick bandwagon that will leave us equally informationless on Day 3.

Unless you think quicklynching Cephrir is the better play. *shrug*

So you're planning to start catching scum tomorrow then?

[Thin_Man]

I'm curious.
This "Must wagon or die" thing, that effectively makes that player USEless in an endgame situation, right? Five players - 2 mafia, 3 town (one of which is this robot) - thet two scum vote a townie,t eh robot pretty much has to hammer. Otherwise, even if scum is lynched, if he doesn't hammer (or isn't ont eh wagon) scum win. Hell, scum could bus one of hteir own with a quick lynch, the robot dies, scum wins even after losing one of their own.

Worth considering.

No, that's not the case. I mean, what you state is kind of true, but the town can easily just make sure he's the first person to vote, negating that downside totally.

And I wouldn't mind knowing why you voted me, Skruffs.

Unvote Theo

He's got better since I voted.

I'll revote later today.

[Thin_Man]

It's the equivalent of a survivor, if it's true, and a very cheesy, bad fake-claim, if not true, and either way, it's not helpful to town.

Also, note that he's spent the bulk of his game on band-wagoning senselessly or defending his band wagoning. Even if his role was scummy like that in nature, he's not acting town of his own will anyways, and is hiding behind the role as an excuse to not help scum hunt. He wouldn't have 'had to claim' if he actually endorsed wagons that he himself came up with. But he's not coming up with wagons of his own, is he?


IS HE???


no. SOmething smells like caught scum and/or crusty vajayjay.

It's absolutely nothing like a survivor role in any way.

And you're asking too much from him, to my mind. You're saying he's scum for not playing extremely well, whilst not holding anyone else up to that light.

[Thin_Man]

O, ur rite.
*patpats flameaxe*
Sorry for being suspicious of you, robot. It seems it was unmannerly of me to expect you to act in a protown manner.
Sowweeeee.

It's more the fact that you're picking on him for bandwagonning when the grand majority of the town was bandwagonning, for no reason other than he claimed a role that means that he has to bandwagon. But that should really be irrelevant, considering the reason you're stating.

And, no offence, Skruffs, but you more than anyone should know that town players frequently play badly.

[Thin_Man]

Ok, so my game's finally up and I have no other modding commitments.

It's 7:30am here and I'm rather drunk, so I won't post tonight. Soon as I wake up, though, I'll post in all the games I've been neglecting.