pancakemix wrote:@Storr's response to my post: This is why I hate in-post responses to some extent, because they're really hard to respond to themselves. In broad points, I think our lines on what defines "mechanical" are in different places, as are our interpretations of the extent to which mechanical discussion can be indicative. That itself could become considered mechanical discussion, so I'm not gonna delve too deep there lest I risk of being accused of starting another.
its probably true. I think the reads by themselves that you develped off what i call mechanics, can be ok, when died with something else. but that alone i can't relate to. ok, so then it's filler in your post. Not to mention I'm sure no one thought it was a joke.
Sorry, I'll include these guys more in the future.
you probably should. it looked like an incredibly late comment, to a subject that had resolved itself, + add in following posts that seemed to repeat the same behavior made it look worse. You responses to my reads are basically that there are two sides to each coin. And that's true. But saying that interpretation could go one way or the other doesn't really generate anything.
ok? you recall when people pushed against my reads? i kept fighting, kept trying to make people see the way i saw things. Or maybe my read was misguided, so now i've cleared up a wrong impulse who knows. Seems more like an reason to not continue your pressure. Moving on from there:
Zivel wrote:You bring up the joke vote a lot, that happened a long time ago in the day. Basing you reads of that far ago goes against what you state as reading the game as you go along as you seem to be still using information from early in the day to relate to what is happening now.
The joke was directly addressed by Storr, so it warranted response. Outside of that, it is much involved in the reads on certain players, such as Anam, whose first post had a great deal to do with that. My point really is that it's moot and we shouldn't keep talking about it or reading into it. As for using early day info (and in Anam's case that's basically all there is), you wanted reads on particular people and that requires research/citations to double check that I'm refering to the correct person. Plus, the idea is we get the whole field of info about everyone and have that for reference. Isn't that why the "no-edit" rule is in place?
On Ultra's claim: I'll agree with aage that there is a tendency for opposite alignment lovers to be a thing, but that also proves to be untrue as often as it is actually true. Which kinda blows. 1:1 town to mafia is typically a good trade for town, but the question is is that worth the gamble? For ultra's part, I doubt he'd be the scum side of such an arrangement. That said, it's also the type of claim that would spook anyone who might dare challenge it. Oh, but that's a whole other dance...
Is it a thing? who else has done it besides my got game? and why are you talking about opposite alignments. Fairly certain all lover pairs claimed to know for certain they are all the same alignment. Zivel wrote:Hmmm I am a lover, and my partner and I are confirmed town. And no, you are not my partner....
Scum slip? Tell me why the hell would you pick lovers to fake claim in a group this large of non vanilla? Did you really think there would not be a pair of lovers to counter claim you?
Oh, now THAT is interesting...
This is the big thing, that makes me feel you are really behind in this game. tons of discussion has been had about lovers, and it seems you are just looking into it, with out reading the developmentsStreaker wrote:@PCM, I can understand you feeling i'm too agressive on Ultra, but don't accuse me of going for an 'easy' case. It's anything but easy as nobody is giving a crap to lynch him, while i'm trying to persuade everyone to lynch him.
With the situation as it is, I don't feel we can let go of Ultra's claim (and the counterclaim that followed). Would there be 2 pairs of lovers in this game? Unlikely, not impossible. Mafia would never counterclaim here (I think).
"Easy" is relative, to be sure. My concern is less about the difficulty and more about pounding the hammer.
As for your second question, no. Two sets of lovers is bastard modding unless BOTH of the lovers have a scum pairing, which is bastard modding the other way.
again its even more clear this post is being written as you read the game, you haven't caught up to the discussion, and i really don't think you are adding anything productive with this, it just looks like a big fluffy postDD wrote:Also, if you believe it's unlikely that there are two pairs of lovers, it's more unlikely that there are 3... And no neither Ultra or Ziv is my lover. Ultra seems very scummy for claiming that he is a lover first. Ziv gets townie points for coming forward to counterclaim.
...
'Kay, I need to
Unvote and take a step back here for a minute...
yeahSo, some analysis for a moment. There are 6 lovers now in the mix:
1. Ultra/Virus
2. Zivel/???
3. DD/???
Of those six, the likelihood that at least one of them is mafia is very high just based on numbers alone (think: if we had 6 people whose deaths were tied together and they were all town, we'd be boned from the get-go). I think it behooves us then to roll the dice lynch at least one set of lovers today because we probably have like a 1/3 chance of finding a scum in the process, which is decent odds. The downside here is guessing wrong, in which case it's at worst a 6:1 trade. That's reeeally bad. Also, we're basically going to have 4 deaths by tomorrow if we do that, but at this point we're probably going to have 3 deaths minimum anyway.
yet we are not even certain lovers die as pairs, since none of them are sure if they both die if one dies... strike wolf wrote:So virus doesnt believe he dies with his lover. DD seems confident he does. Virus says hes been talking to his lover today, DD says they can only communicate at night. DD says he has another ability. Virus dodged the question. Did I miss anything?
Don't think so. It's awful fishy.
UltrasPlot wrote:Unvote dd
Lynch Ultra
Best course of action.
Of course, this is assuming we have a bg to keep me alive til tomorrow.
nopenopenope
I think you're the scum and you're totes bussing your townie lover. Which becomes a strange conundrum. Actually, his entire power makes no sense. Are you lovers or not? Because him saving you would make you die anyway, the way you tell it.
can you explain pcm how they could be different alignments, when they are certain they are the same alignment? God, this is totally baffling. Some consistency at the very least would be nice...
Zivel wrote:Want to hear more from others. PCM what is your read on all this?
Oh, how I love being picked on.
This isn't picking on, and this shouldn't be a surprise. YOu had been under pressure from him, you made a good post, relieving pressure, and so further involvment of you shouldn't be a surprise. mtamburini wrote:Ultra wants to self sacrifice himself to prove himself, thats retarded if hes mafia or 3rd party.
The first CC might be the most scummy of the 3 if there is any,
DD counter counter claiming is the most towny.
Either that or he's crazy like a fox. It's very possible he's taking a huge gamble here/doesn't care about virus.
UltrasPlot wrote:Virus can only take the bullet himself the first time I die. Essentially he can only revive me.
So if you have no value, what use is it to keep you around? Or rather, why should we sacrifice another townie if you are our only reward for it? Also, how do you feel about the fact that the more you throw your partner under the bus, the more you paint a target on his back should he live through the night? I'm pretty certain there's more to this than you're actually telling us.
