Past Ages Mafia - Game Over

[Slicey]

I don't like it. I think you're voting for him because he tentatively suggested NL, correct? IMHO, NL shouldn't automatically be thrown out the window in this situation. Granted, we have discussed it in great detail now and it most likely won't happen. I feel that UROE just wanted to see what other people thought of NL. I could be wrong though.

[Slicey]

Slicey, I like your avatar. <3

Thanks. A friend of mine made it.

[julienvonwolfe]

Is it this?

And you are on UROE for specifics, not just because he suggested the no lynch, correct?

The original vote was for suggesting no lynch, which isn't much but is better than a random lynch for my money. I then noted many others are swayed by this line of thinking, so it's even less of a scumtell for UR to suggest it. I read UR in isolation and realized he was very tentative about the whole thing, and seemed to want to throw the idea around just to gauge the town's reaction (and hopefully quietly sway everyone to no lynch) without really putting his foot down is support of the idea, so other more vocal supporters would take the fire. He also ignored my couter-arguments to his suggestion in favor of calling Santos' defense of the no lynch idea moronic. This is why I'm voting him now. His last post gives me bad vibes as well, feels overly cautious. Like he's subtly doing everything he can to avoid the negative attention resulting in his association with the no-lynch plan.

(This answers FL's question as well).

I confess that I'm not sure what to think of URoE. I've been playing with him in another, ongoing game and he's a difficult player to read. My general view of him that I got from the last game is that he isn't really a cautious player, so he's acting a bit differently in this game.

Then again, he's suggesting a no-lynch. This is normally a bad thing, but given the risk of lynching not just one, but two townies - it might be OK. Caution in suggesting such an idea is understandable.

Thus, I'm not prepared to vote for him yet. I don't know what my partner thinks.

[Raging Rabbit]

Is it this?

Yup.

Then again, he's suggesting a no-lynch. This is normally a bad thing, but given the risk of lynching not just one, but two townies - it might be OK. Caution in suggesting such an idea is understandable.

I'm talking less about caution in suggesting the idea in itself, and more about how it seems to me he did everything he can to put the idea out there without getting associated with it to an extent that could draw negative attention to him.

[julienvonwolfe]

Well, just looking through some of his posts, and these in particular seem relevant:

We would have 2/3 more people than we would if we mis-lynch if we no-lynch.

But, we would have no chance at hitting scum.

I'm for it, but I'm not sure how much support it would get...

That's why it is speculation, it is hard to know what will happen.

I won't do it without support, which is why I threw it out here.

Yes, I can see what you mean about not wanting to be associated with the idea.

[Empking]

It seems remarkable little has happened for so many pages, or maybe thats just how big games go.

That's just how big games go.

I'd like to hear people's opinion on my case on UR.

I think you presented it well but I don't think its good enough for me to vote for it.

[Kmd4390]

RR, you have a decent point, but a decent point is different from a decent case.

[BSG]

@Ortolan
The thing is that you admitted that Empking could be scum, yet you still defended him. So I'd like to know, if Empking would continue to play like this when you two are seperated, would you or would you not go for his lynch and why?

As for URoE, the only thing that bothers me about what was pointed out by RR is that he seems to like the idea of a no-lynch. But at the same time, he will only go for it when multiple players agree with it.
The reason why this bothers me, is that if you like your idea and you think that it's the best for the town, you should try to convince the others that this is the right way to go. And this gives me the idea that he's trying to look for an exit if the idea of a no-lynch was denied and if he would get attacked.

However, there's one more player that has caught my attention. And this is Braeden, due to his last two posts. So I'd like to know from him which points brought up by KMD against RR he agreed with (and why), and what about post 151 changed his mind about those points.


@Santos
Yes?

[Raging Rabbit]

RR, you have a decent point, but a decent point is different from a decent case.

Call it whatever you want, I think it's decent for early D1.

[Kmd4390]

RR, you have a decent point, but a decent point is different from a decent case.

Call it whatever you want, I think it's decent for early D1.

I'll give you that.

[Raging Rabbit]

Yes, I can see what you mean about not wanting to be associated with the idea.

But do you think it's a scumtell?

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

Is it this?

And you are on UROE for specifics, not just because he suggested the no lynch, correct?

The original vote was for suggesting no lynch, which isn't much but is better than a random lynch for my money. I then noted many others are swayed by this line of thinking, so it's even less of a scumtell for UR to suggest it. I read UR in isolation and realized he was very tentative about the whole thing, and seemed to want to throw the idea around just to gauge the town's reaction (and hopefully quietly sway everyone to no lynch) without really putting his foot down is support of the idea, so other more vocal supporters would take the fire. He also ignored my couter-arguments to his suggestion in favor of calling Santos' defense of the no lynch idea moronic. This is why I'm voting him now. His last post gives me bad vibes as well, feels overly cautious. Like he's subtly doing everything he can to avoid the negative attention resulting in his association with the no-lynch plan.

(This answers FL's question as well).

I confess that I'm not sure what to think of URoE. I've been playing with him in another, ongoing game and he's a difficult player to read. My general view of him that I got from the last game is that he isn't really a cautious player, so he's acting a bit differently in this game.

Then again, he's suggesting a no-lynch. This is normally a bad thing, but given the risk of lynching not just one, but two townies - it might be OK. Caution in suggesting such an idea is understandable.

Thus, I'm not prepared to vote for him yet. I don't know what my partner thinks.

Good lord, I hate meta-analyzing.

In the game you are talking about, I was a replacement, I have stated in that game that I play differently as a replacement and I will say it here. I'm not saying meta shouldn't be used, but scum tries to play like they would if they were a townie, so it just doesn't seem to be the reliable choice.

@RR

I'm fine with being associated with the thought of a no-lynch, but there is no point putting my vote there (Although, I guess it would be better than just setting it on a random person or not voting at all) if it wasn't going to happen.

I threw the idea out and asked people's opinions, it got shot down, I'm cool with that. What kind of scum tell are you reaching at?

[ShadowGirl]

I confess that I'm not sure what to think of URoE. I've been playing with him in another, ongoing game and he's a difficult player to read. My general view of him that I got from the last game is that he isn't really a cautious player, so he's acting a bit differently in this game.

Then again, he's suggesting a no-lynch. This is normally a bad thing, but given the risk of lynching not just one, but two townies - it might be OK. Caution in suggesting such an idea is understandable.

Thus, I'm not prepared to vote for him yet. I don't know what my partner thinks.

Er, aren't we not supposed to be talking about ongoing games?

[Santos]

@BSG,
'there you are!'

'Well, hey, do I know you?'

'No! But that's where you're,

there

!'

What should we do, other-head?

[Santos]

@Kmd, I think your other head wants your tonsils.

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

SG, referencing a game is fine, talking about specifics is the no-no, as far as I know...

[ShadowGirl]

Hn. Has your alignment been revealed in said game? Otherwise the point is moot.

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

See, that is a specific...

Look it up.

(Plus, why?)

[raider8169]

I dont get it, why is it even a big deal to talk about no lynching. Yeah it may not be a good idea but I would like to consider it.

My thoughts behind it are that is we lynch someone 2 people die. Unless one of those 2 people are scum we would be hurting really bad from the start. A no lynch in hopes that tomorrow we are no longer 2 people.

Granted at night there could be alot more deaths but those would happen with or without a no lynch.

Further more lynches are most townies only way of killing but scum could easily have control of half the votes if their other head is not around.

I am not saying we must no lynch but it would be stupid, if not scummy, not to at least consider the idea.

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

Which, is exactly why I threw it out there, so I am even more stupefied by the fact that I am being voted for doing so.

[ShadowGirl]

See, that is a specific...

Look it up.

(Plus, why?)

Otherwise the point is moot.

You can't compare your play if you haven't flipped there...

[Kmd4390]

@Kmd, I think your other head wants your tonsils.

Seems that way...

[ShadowGirl]

You = He.

[UnofficialRulerOfEveryone]

I recognize that, I was still assuming you were saying that comparing my play was breaking a rule.

Really, search it if you want to see what he is talking about.

[Kmd4390]

I recognize that, I was still assuming you were saying that comparing my play was breaking a rule.

Really, search it if you want to see what he is talking about.

I see how it could break a rule in the other game, but I'm going to keep quiet on that...