Super Touhou RPG ~ Abandoned due to mod (Pesco's) screwups

[Seian Verian]

I'd already stated before that it meant "Tackle Serp"...

[UncertainJakutten]

My views really haven't changed. Serpy hasn't taken enough damage

##Tackle Serpy

That means he'll have taken 3 damage. If he would like, he should warn us if this takes him down a bit low.

[Edible]

Given I saw you online several hours earlier and you said nothing...

I'm only going to say things when I have something worthwhile to say.  Commenting on your tirade vs UK (which is now turning into a tirade vs me, thanks for that) wouldn't do anyone any good.  I also doubt you saw me on earlier than ~2PM EST, because I wasn't awake then.

The case stands that UK managed to make a sizable case on Serp. Why did you only produce one line of reasoning before hopping on?

UK made some good points.  I added on to her case with a point she may have overlooked, and one I happened to find more significant.  I seem to recall that's how we play Mafia around here.

[WHMZakeri]

That means he'll have taken 3 damage. If he would like, he should warn us if this takes him down a bit low.

OH MY GOD! THREE DAMAGE?! WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CRAZY, YOU SHOULD BE THINKING MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT THIS!

I know this is rather uncalled for, but it'll keep nagging at me if I don't post this exaggerated reenactment of UK's day two behavior right now.

that said, I understand what the case on Serpentaruis is, but I'm thinking he really is taking a bit too much damage for what it's worth. I want to let Serpentarius come on and explain for himself what I see in his posts, but if he takes any more damage without better reasoning, I will step in.

My feeling is that some of the people tackling Serp, or wanting to tackle Serp is largely playing off of a misrepresentation of his words. Out of all the people attacking him, I think the only person who's reasoning I can't disagree with is Edible's 131.

I heavily dislike Serp's assertion  that healing is anti-town.  That entire post feels like he knows more about the game setup than we do.

Aside from that, Ramus hasn't done anything to make me feel easier on him. Since my tackle, all he's done is a tackle on Affinity, near useless set up speculation (that distracted me no less, shame on you!) and later another call for Affinity to respond. He hasn't done anything to rest my suspicion on him so far.

I'll decide my action for today later.

[Ramus]

Aside from that, Ramus hasn't done anything to make me feel easier on him. Since my tackle, all he's done is a tackle on Affinity, near useless set up speculation (that distracted me no less, shame on you!) and later another call for Affinity to respond. He hasn't done anything to rest my suspicion on him so far.

What was your problem with me again?

[UncertainJakutten]

OH MY GOD! THREE DAMAGE?! WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CRAZY, YOU SHOULD BE THINKING MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT THIS!

I know this is rather uncalled for, but it'll keep nagging at me if I don't post this exaggerated reenactment of UK's day two behavior right now.

At least it wasn't all at once by one person

And it had far better reasoning.

that said, I understand what the case on Serpentaruis is, but I'm thinking he really is taking a bit too much damage for what it's worth. I want to let Serpentarius come on and explain for himself what I see in his posts, but if he takes any more damage without better reasoning, I will step in.

I agree, actually.

[?q]

Confetti edits added to Page 5.
The only really important ones are:

Yes, I'm the one in lime green and Pesco's the one in yellow.
You can use different names for people as long as I know who you're talking about.  The only person who has a different name is Zakeri IIRC.

[FinnKaenbyou]

I'm only going to say things when I have something worthwhile to say.  Commenting on your tirade vs UK (which is now turning into a tirade vs me, thanks for that) wouldn't do anyone any good.  I also doubt you saw me on earlier than ~2PM EST, because I wasn't awake then.

I saw that you were last active at 11am my time. T_T

And deciding that 'UK vs Rou wasn't worth commenting on' is a terrible attitude to take because - get this - there was nothing else to talk about. It's talking about things like that that gives us real topics of conversation.

UK made some good points.  I added on to her case with a point she may have overlooked, and one I happened to find more significant.  I seem to recall that's how we play Mafia around here.

Points for patronisation, first of all. My main problem is given that most of your earlier content was setup speculation/attempted manipulation, I sort of expected a little more out of your first actual vote.

Jeez, I'm mad because I have valid reasons to attack about hald the players right now. I don't like UK for going nuts over one vote, I don't like Edible for agreeing with UK on every point, exaggerating the situation as much as she did and spending more time reading into the setup than actually playing it, I don't like Serp for saying 'healing = obvscum' and saying we should just get a whole bunch of people down to low HP at random, and I don't like Nietz for engaging in blatant self-preservation. (Seriously, why is no-one even considering his last post? Valuing himself ahead of attacking potential targets is blatant obvscum, isn't it?)

Of all the above, I'd probably like to tackle Nietz first right now because his actions are so absurdly out of order. Edible is next, with Serp/UK in third equal.

Drake has been sort of 'eh' this whole game, but it looks like a new player trying their hardest so they're getting a tentative clear. Ramus also gets this to an extent since he's pretty rusty.

Don't think Zak's been that bad so far. Affinity needs to talk more.

[Affinity]

@Ramus:

More so, what's wrong with my reason that I don't want anyone to die too soon because of a stupid accusations, like the UK and Roukanken fight.  In fact, if you really don't like what I'm doing build a case on it instead of making tiny little posts once or twice a day.

I agree with Serp's 'no-healing' playstyle at the moment.  And lol at building cases because that's what I have been doing all along.  Rou hit UK.  UK at that time announced her intention to hit Rou 3 times, so what makes UK better than Roukanken or even less scummy?  Your view is to simply cancel out their actions so as to make UK have a better chance IF she's town, but your action has no scumhunting value attached to it at all, making you give the impression that you are scum trying to skip on the scumhunting.  This is further excaberated by the facts that

1. You merely healed UK without explanation until prompted, not commenting on how their catfight was one.
2. The only one you find suspicious now is me, and this is bordering on OMGUS since, well, UK voted Rou and Rou voted for UK for no good reasons on D1, and you do not see them as scummy at all.  You have absolutely no opinions on anyone else.

Drake is better as he fits neither of the two points above.  I also agree with what Zakeri said, that he sounded more genuine, though I'm not entirely happy with him either.

---

On Serp, I have to agree with Zakeri that people seem to be misinterpreting his words, but I will leave him to defend himself.  I agree with his idea that healing should be relegated only to very special circumstances, and that the only 'healing' which is to be done is in choosing who to tackle.  Note that on each person, every subsequent tackle should be harder and harder to do as in voting; it's not as if Rou would tackle UK automatically again without good reasons in future days; if he did, he would be considered scummy.  By healing and hurting, town is simply wasting its actions and going nowhere.

Furthermore, Serp has only stated a playstyle and he gets so much flak for it without any regards to his case on UK.  I find this horribly laughable, or laughably horrible, and I find all participants on that wagon scummy.  Especially UK and Drake.  Edible sounds better, but not by much.  I agree with his points on Rou, a la this post.

---

On an off-note, I think the game is getting a little messy, but mostly on the part of the players.  I would suggest that mods stick to deadlines to the minute and that players take note because gah, sorting out the actions people seem to be doing is irritating.
I'm working this out with Pesqomod presently.

[UncertainJakutten]

I don't like UK for going nuts over one vote Three damage from one source for weak ass reasoning

Fixed for you my dearest Rou

with Serp/UK in third equal.

At least master and servant are together

Furthermore, Serp has only stated a playstyle and he gets so much flak for it without any regards to his case on UK

What case? The one that was probably really fucking retarded?

[Nietz]

Nietz: Okay good god WHAT.
You heal yourself FOR NO REASON WHEN YOU TOOK NO DAMAGE AT ALL?

You will read Rule 3a and be glad. Healing myself is the only action right now I can be sure is helping a townie, I should have done it Day 1 or 2, but I was pissed for missing the chance and did it anyway.

I haven't changed my opinion on UK, a lot of OMGUS and a lot of RAGE to justify contradictory actions. As I said before, I think it's very likely that she's acting like that on purpose to get away with causing as much damage as possible.

As was going to talk Serp's case on UK and his idea, but the noticed they were exactly the same things I already said. He hasn't elaborated or explained his point further since then, and yet people are pilling up damage on him. The validity of his idea aside, I don't like how he's become such an easy target for saying something disagreeable.

I can agree with Rou's case on Edible as well, he was doing mostly setup speculation and telling people how they should act before, then suddenly he jumps on Serp's wagon just adding that what Serp did (setup speculation and telling people how they should act) was scummy. The point of using personal attacks on Rou is also a valid one.

Of these three, UK is probably the best choice for lynch for being, if not terribly scummy, outright anti-town. I'm inclined to think Edible looks worse than Serp, but I'd rather wait for Serp to post more. And I also want to see what Ramus has to say now that Affinity has answered.

[UncertainJakutten]

I haven't changed my opinion on UK, a lot of OMGUS and a lot of RAGE to justify contradictory actions. As I said before, I think it's very likely that she's acting like that on purpose to get away with causing as much damage as possible.

There's no way to really refute this, is there? But can you prove it?

As was going to talk Serp's case on UK and his idea, but the noticed they were exactly the same things I already said. He hasn't elaborated or explained his point further since then, and yet people are pilling up damage on him. The validity of his idea aside, I don't like how he's become such an easy target for saying something disagreeable.

Hey, what are the odds of having 3 scum in a 9 player set up? Cause we got em in Serpy, Zak, and Nietz right thar

Of these three, UK is probably the best choice for lynch for being, if not terribly scummy, outright anti-town.

Please further your explanation of this, scummy boy.

[WHMZakeri]

Confetti edits added to Page 5.
The only really important ones are:

Yes, I'm the one in lime green and Pesco's the one in yellow.
You can use different names for people as long as I know who you're talking about.  The only person who has a different name is Zakeri IIRC.

I think he was talking about people using character names (Nazrin, Etc.)

What was your problem with me again?

Healing UK without considering her alignment, the way you danced around answering Rou's question in post 66, maybe something else I might have forgotten. I think I also mentioned that you only really talk about Affinity.

Of all the above, I'd probably like to tackle Nietz first right now because his actions are so absurdly out of order. Edible is next, with Serp/UK in third equal.

Neitz healed himself in response to the day phase changing, so I think he just got fed up with missing out on the action, and used the healing as a placeholder so he doesn't miss doing something today. It might be worth a tap since this says a lot about his involvement with the game.

cut:

Adhominim on Serp

umm ... okay.

I haven't changed my opinion on UK, a lot of OMGUS and a lot of RAGE to justify contradictory actions. As I said before, I think it's very likely that she's acting like that on purpose to get away with causing as much damage as possible.

I have to agree with this, considering evidence of this presented itself seven minutes earlier. was it really called for to describe a case on yourself as "Retarded"?

Hey, what are the odds of having 3 scum in a 9 player set up? Cause we got em in Serpy, Zak, and Nietz right thar

...okay, am I really seeing this?
could you at least ... you know ... provide reasoning for why we are all scum at the same time?

[UncertainJakutten]

...okay, am I really seeing this?
could you at least ... you know ... provide reasoning for why we are all scum at the same time?

You two are the only two I see rallying directly for Serp's cause, as well as attacking me for attacking him. It's a classic chainsaw.

umm ... okay.

Hmm?

[Serp]

I thought it was implied that the people we would be putting in peril would be people we thought were scum. Of course, that just might be my common sense talking.

Well, one would like to think that. But in a later post I quoted Serpy said he would go with random.

Here's the relevant quote, in context:

The way you word this, it sounds like you want to pick these people at random. T_T

If we didn't have any evidence to go on, then I'd settle for it, but evidence always piles up one way or the other, so the point is moot.

I hardly even know what to say.  I can only read this as deliberate misrep, and I can't imagine how anyone could honestly see that statement as scummy.  UncertainKitten is trying too hard to scrape up scummy points from decent statements, and if she had just called her tackle a pressure tactic, I might have called it a fair point, but her rhetoric alternates between acting like she really wants to see me lynched, and trying to avoid contradicting her earlier point about not bringing anyone's health low without decisive proof of scumminess.  I don't see any townie intent here.  People parroting this point like it actually makes sense aren't much better.

While I agree with most things Serpentarius said, I'm not comfortable with the idea of dropping multiple players into low HP. I agree that it will make the game  more agile but, not knowing how scum operates, I think it's too risky to leave a lot of potential targets around that could be easily taken out by them. Specially early in the game when suspicions on players are not yet so well established. It might be a better idea later on when we have more of a clue about the scum modus operandi and which players are more scummy/confirmed.

I don't think this is any more risky than bringing two players to L-2 or L-3, and the only reason we limit ourselves to two players in that case is that it's impossible to put more on the edge when each player has only one vote.  I'm not saying that we should necessarily bring three people close to death, but I do think it's an option we should consider.  Going for the triple lynch D1 in Yume Nikki mafia is probably what led us to such a quick victory.

Compounded with the fact that spellcards are a one shot deal.  So we only get to guess what they can do before they go off.  Think of it as a random effect NUKE.  This makes killing someone and surviving crapshoot unless it's done fast, meaning that if we weaken someone, they may find themselves down to one option of using the spellcard.  And note, that both townies and scum will have a reason to do this, but only scum will have 100% accuracy for hitting someone they know is an enemy.  Thus, the pressure tactic doesn't work in this set up.

So, uh, what's your proposed alternative?  Don't lynch anyone at all?

That said, Serp saying 'randomly weakening people is okay if we have no leads' when we've already got PLENTY TO WORK WITH is also ringing alarms, along with attacking UK who is (no offense) a pretty easy target today.

Does the fact that I explicitly said that attacking people at random is not necessary due to having evidence to work with mean anything to you? :V  And considering that a significant fraction of the players are apparently so certain that she's town that they're willing to heal her, I don't think you can really call her an easy target.

Regarding the "healing = anti-town" comment, there's a reason I prefixed that with "very generally speaking."  There are situations where healing is a good thing.  The beginning of the game is not one of them.  In a standard mafia game with nine living players, it takes five votes in a single day to lynch someone.  It looks like most players start with over half a dozen HP.  Dropping a few hurts on people we find even vaguely scummy just puts them in the running to get lynched, and makes sure that everyone must weigh in either for or against that lynch.  Healing them to full effectively removes them from danger, which should only be done if you have good reason to think them town - and no, simple statistical likelihood doesn't count.  As to the point that I look scummy for actually acting on my setup speculation, that seems like the sort of point calculated to scare the town into inaction.

So, we have UncertainKitten making a case on me based on disliking my strategy in Hurt and Heal games.  Never mind that I'm far from the only person to believe in this strategy - since I put my neck out there making my stance explicit, she would have you believe that I'm most likely to be scum among all the players.  Then, despite her tentative claim that her case on me isn't that strong in 123, she pushes my bandwagon into the lead when it becomes clear that others are actually buying her BS...  Yet when called out on it, in 155, she agrees that I'm taking too much damage.  Even after she's the one who attacked me last. :V  And now, she tries to disuade people from agreeing with my strategy by claiming that it makes them obvscumbuddies.  I have a hard time seeing any of this as sincere case, and that means it's a scummy tactic.  Hence, I'm willing to lynch UK.

##Tackle UncertainKitten

Other notes:  ShiningDrake is acting ridiculously opportunistic, and is the obvious pick for UK's scumbuddy.  I'm seeing Ramus as more strategically misguided than scummy, as his actions so far are at least internally consistent with his claimed mindset, and scum-Ramus would probably have taken the opportunity to jump on my wagon (a point which is contingent on my own townflip, I know, but it's worth mentioning).  Nietz's selfheal makes me reflexively facepalm, but I guess if he's not intending to take any other action today, and he actually is a townie, then it's better than nothing.  I don't think it's any worse than the bystanderism that's reigning so far.

[Affinity]

@Ramus:

Why don't you heal Edible since Rou tackled him?  After all, it's 'early' in the game, and you don't have a problem with him (or anyone else except me for that matter).

---

@Zakeri:

What you said on Ramus:

I think it would be much safer to test Ramus's theory on the nightkill first TBH.

Setup speculation is nice, but really we need to go about finding out what is actually happening behind the scenes rather than spouting random theories.

Since my tackle, all he's done is a tackle on Affinity, near useless set up speculation (that distracted me no less, shame on you!) and later another call for Affinity to respond.

Zakeri, why this change? 

[FinnKaenbyou]

I agree with Serp's 'no-healing' playstyle at the moment.

And...despite this, you have absolutely no problem with Nietz self-healing at the start of the day? Delicious paradox is delicious.

UK - Once again, tank tackles aren't that bad. You're not dead, you're not dying, and other people are attacking you right now, so why are you still coming back to me? I don't even understand why you're continuing this point anymore given that you have said several times that you think it's a nulltell.

You will read Rule 3a and be glad. Healing myself is the only action right now I can be sure is helping a townie, I should have done it Day 1 or 2, but I was pissed for missing the chance and did it anyway.

No. No, no, NO. This is horrible reasoning right now. This is being able to remove votes from the tally, and promptly removing votes from yourself (when in no danger whatsoever) because 'it's the only thing I can do that's sure to help a townie'.
My point is that the Town objective is to kill Mafiosi. The Mafia objective is to not die. Guess which of these causes healing helps out more. T_T

There's no way to really refute this, is there? But can you prove it?

Translation: "I admit that my argument contains a good deal of OMGUS and RAEG, but because you can't PROVE that I'm not being genuine you can't do anything to me! ^_^"
This line alone is sending UK back up my suspicion list.

Please further your explanation of this, scummy boy.

I also adore how you suddenly decide that Nietz is scum from, well, literally nowhere. As in besides you saying he's scum here, you made no mention of him anywhere at all beforehand. Are you honestly trying to argue that 'attacking me for making a really stupid rage OMGUS case against Rou makes you obvscum' or are you just desperation bussing?

Neitz healed himself in response to the day phase changing, so I think he just got fed up with missing out on the action, and used the healing as a placeholder so he doesn't miss doing something today.

Given that he's already explained himself as doing it simply because it'll help out a Townie, I don't think this reasoning really works.

If we're going all the way with UK today, I'll lend a hand to the cause. These last few posts from her have killed off the last doubts I had about her.

[FinnKaenbyou]

EBWOP: Actually, Nietz, for a better analogy, this is like a doc who does nothing but protect himself.

[Affinity]

Eh, I didn't read Nietz's post recently and read his self-heal as more of an attempt to a last minute action of sorts for D2 to use up that day's action.  Alright, I'll concede and I will say that Nietz's self-heal is rather bad, though I feel that if I only had 15 minutes left in the day or something I would heal myself just to use up that free action.

Of course, this is counterbalanced by your rather silly call for people to heal UK if they thought that your action was wrong, but oh well.  Also, way to go 180 on what you said about Serp without answering his counters, which is again, standard Rou play.

[Affinity]

UK's denial of the standard points that have been put forward here and the 'Nietz, Serp, and Zak are scum and I don't care about what they are saying about people are than me' attitude makes poor Aki rather sad, and this is rather deserving of a vote.  Yoshi has also entered my radar with that awful 'agreeing with UK Serp is bad' stance that he had at the end of D2.  Thus,

##Tackle: UK

[Ramus]

@Ramus:

I agree with Serp's 'no-healing' playstyle at the moment.  And lol at building cases because that's what I have been doing all along.  Rou hit UK.  UK at that time announced her intention to hit Rou 3 times, so what makes UK better than Roukanken or even less scummy?  Your view is to simply cancel out their actions so as to make UK have a better chance IF she's town, but your action has no scumhunting value attached to it at all, making you give the impression that you are scum trying to skip on the scumhunting.  This is further excaberated by the facts that

1. You merely healed UK without explanation until prompted, not commenting on how their catfight was one.
2. The only one you find suspicious now is me, and this is bordering on OMGUS since, well, UK voted Rou and Rou voted for UK for no good reasons on D1, and you do not see them as scummy at all.  You have absolutely no opinions on anyone else.

Drake is better as he fits neither of the two points above.  I also agree with what Zakeri said, that he sounded more genuine, though I'm not entirely happy with him either.

I've decided on UK and Roukanken via metagaming.  Hate me for that if you want, but let's face it, Roukanken always plays as the rash acting townie and UK is just dramatic about stuff.  The drama doesn't actually mean jack and it's just UK feeling an extreme need to OMGUS Roukanken because of a slight panic.  She's since blown it out of proportion to get justification for it.  Roukanken I find townie out of repetition, UK I find neutral for the lack of doing much besides attacking Roukanken.  I've seen both town and scum focus on one target using circular logic and ad hominem.  I don't really see reason to bat an eye towards either right now.

EDIT:  Ignore the above about UK, I just saw her scumdar claim.  I need to have another look at this before deciding my position on her.

1.  Some slight hypocrisy that you happened to tackle me without stating reasons clearly first either.  Make that major hypocrisy.  Last time I checked, you didn't explain yourself about tackling me too clearly until I gave a few prompts.
2.  Just because I haven't posted all of the people who I think are scummy doesn't mean I don't find anyone scummy.  Now, if you can give a reason to actually make those thoughts public, then sure, I'll do so, but understand, I don't feel much need to give possible scum headway knowing that I'm the target to go for.  AKA, don't play your hand until you know you're ready.

I just happen to dislike you the most since you seem to be lurking and just took a potshot at me.  That may be some OMGUS, but let's face it, until today, you've largely been lurking.  And I don't really see any reason to be believe you came out besides me calling you out.

So, uh, what's your proposed alternative?  Don't lynch anyone at all?

I've already explained this one.  You put many bullets into (tackle?) the person quickly so that that person died before having a chance to off one of us. Which means you'll have to kill off people all at once to avoid these problems.

Why don't you heal Edible since Rou tackled him?  After all, it's 'early' in the game, and you don't have a problem with him (or anyone else except me for that matter).

You and I have different interpretations of early game.  At this point, it's a few days in and at least people are grounded where they are in their opinions.  This is not early game since people are reasoning things instead of shouting at UK and Roukanken for their little drama.  And to be honest, looking at my own character, 3 HP is a lot of damage and had me a bit taken a back for at the beginning.  However, now I can see it's not all that much as apparently people have sufficient HP to survive some hits and more so, people are being cautious about how they're using their tackles.



And yes Zakeri, your change, why did that happen?

On Nietz's healing.  I find it kinda pointless and stupid, but I really can't draw anything from it as I see both legit townie and scum reasons to heal yourself.  But the thing is, I see it more townie at this point to save the action for something more worthwhile, so a kinda negative view on Nietz right now, but not enough to run with it.

[Ramus]

Okay, UK's know attempting to play the smart ass in which you post clever one liners and get an internet accent.  Can I request a reason why you're doing that UK?







And Serp, when did you stop being Mafian?

[Edible]

I'm sitting in an airport waiting for a connecting flight.  Go me!

Regarding the "healing = anti-town" comment, there's a reason I prefixed that with "very generally speaking."  There are situations where healing is a good thing.  The beginning of the game is not one of them.  In a standard mafia game with nine living players, it takes five votes in a single day to lynch someone.  It looks like most players start with over half a dozen HP.  Dropping a few hurts on people we find even vaguely scummy just puts them in the running to get lynched, and makes sure that everyone must weigh in either for or against that lynch.  Healing them to full effectively removes them from danger, which should only be done if you have good reason to think them town - and no, simple statistical likelihood doesn't count.  As to the point that I look scummy for actually acting on my setup speculation, that seems like the sort of point calculated to scare the town into inaction.

Thank you for clarifying.  I didn't really view your statement like this originally.  So your basic strategy is to keep people in the red zone unless we're confident they're town, which is kind of the opposite approach of the one I would take - keeping everyone healthy and announcing intent to assault once we've discussed our target for the "day".  I'm willing to try either one, but it looks like the former is more natural progression for this setup, whereas mine is trying to cement it into more standard rules of mafia.

Reread of certain individuals pending, but my flight is boarding soon so I'm not sure if I'll have time to chime in again before leaving.

[UncertainJakutten]

I hardly even know what to say.  I can only read this as deliberate misrep, and I can't imagine how anyone could honestly see that statement as scummy.  UncertainKitten is trying too hard to scrape up scummy points from decent statements, and if she had just called her tackle a pressure tactic, I might have called it a fair point, but her rhetoric alternates between acting like she really wants to see me lynched, and trying to avoid contradicting her earlier point about not bringing anyone's health low without decisive proof of scumminess.  I don't see any townie intent here.  People parroting this point like it actually makes sense aren't much better.

Actually, it wasn't really misrep. At best, misread. And no, I don't see any alternation. I'd like you lynched eventually. I'd like a better idea of the set up before that and rather NOT have you spellcard off on us and kill a townie.

FURTHER, I know my reasoning was weak, but it was the best I had. Further, I'm more worried about you sounding the same as last game, to be honest.

So, we have UncertainKitten making a case on me based on disliking my strategy in Hurt and Heal games.  Never mind that I'm far from the only person to believe in this strategy - since I put my neck out there making my stance explicit, she would have you believe that I'm most likely to be scum among all the players.  Then, despite her tentative claim that her case on me isn't that strong in 123, she pushes my bandwagon into the lead when it becomes clear that others are actually buying her BS...  Yet when called out on it, in 155, she agrees that I'm taking too much damage.  Even after she's the one who attacked me last. :V  And now, she tries to disuade people from agreeing with my strategy by claiming that it makes them obvscumbuddies.  I have a hard time seeing any of this as sincere case, and that means it's a scummy tactic.  Hence, I'm willing to lynch UK.

-UncertainKitten is making a case disliking your cavalier theory that taking people down to low health is a GOOD IDEA with unknown scum abilities. Edible actually had a very good point that you seem to know more about the set up than you should.

-UncertainKitten didn't just dislike that, but also disliked how you sounded in tone, but that would probably get her lynched quicker.

-UncertainKitten in 155 does not contradict previous statements, but instead has STATED she doesn't want the wagon to go too fast so that you can respond as well as tell us if you were in peril.

-UncertainKitten will appeal to meta and state that she would not have much trouble finding scummy statements to frame people with were she looking for them, as evidenced by last game.

I disagree with your case and you should feel bad. Further, I feel that you are doing the very things you accuse me of. I am a little more fine with you dying.

UK - Once again, tank tackles aren't that bad. You're not dead, you're not dying, and other people are attacking you right now, so why are you still coming back to me? I don't even understand why you're continuing this point anymore given that you have said several times that you think it's a nulltell.

Haven't we dropped this already? And the reason I haven't dropped it is because YOU haven't dropped it.

If we both drop it it's dead, lok?

Translation: "I admit that my argument contains a good deal of OMGUS and RAEG, but because you can't PROVE that I'm not being genuine you can't do anything to me! ^_^"
This line alone is sending UK back up my suspicion list.

More like how the FUCK am I supposed to refute "faking emotional reactions"

I can't! So I'm merely counterattacking with the fact he can't prove it and I'd prefer more solid evidence.

I also adore how you suddenly decide that Nietz is scum from, well, literally nowhere. As in besides you saying he's scum here, you made no mention of him anywhere at all beforehand. Are you honestly trying to argue that 'attacking me for making a really stupid rage OMGUS case against Rou makes you obvscum' or are you just desperation bussing?

You know I bus far better than that.

Actually, I wasn't very lucid then. So I'll conveniently backstep and go back to Serpy Zak like I was originally thinking. And before you say something about how I've never mentioned Zakeri before, I'll freely admit you're right and say so?

If we're going all the way with UK today, I'll lend a hand to the cause. These last few posts from her have killed off the last doubts I had about her.

Honestly, it's a statement like this that makes me think you're town. I'll state that I really hope you don't repeat last games performance and get yourself rightly lynched as a townie.

UK's denial of the standard points that have been put forward here and the 'Nietz, Serp, and Zak are scum and I don't care about what they are saying about people are than me' attitude makes poor Aki rather sad, and this is rather deserving of a vote.  Yoshi has also entered my radar with that awful 'agreeing with UK Serp is bad' stance that he had at the end of D2.  Thus,

I admit that was ill advised on those three. Please explain why my denial of the "standard points" is bad?

Honestly, I don't understand why this game is pissing me off so much. I shouldn't be so reactive, I agree. And it's just digging me deeper. While I don't expect you all to lay off, I'll at least try to be more lucid and less RAEG.

Okay, UK's know attempting to play the smart ass in which you post clever one liners and get an internet accent.  Can I request a reason why you're doing that UK?

Ah well, try not to kill me before I return from church.

[FinnKaenbyou]

Of course, this is counterbalanced by your rather silly call for people to heal UK if they thought that your action was wrong, but oh well.  Also, way to go 180 on what you said about Serp without answering his counters, which is again, standard Rou play.

Firstly, there's a difference between healing someone who you feel is being unfairly attacked late in the day, and healing yourself early in the day therefore removing your ability to help out in discussion. Also his whole 'I was going to contribute but it's too late now so I'm not going to bother commenting' reeks of laziness, which is anti-Town.
And not mentioning Serp <> going 180. I feel his earlier point is still iffy, but given that he's got some decent reasoning behind it there's definitely a lot
worse out there. Namely, UK, Edible and Nietz.

FURTHER, I know my reasoning was weak, but it was the best I had.

And you're mad at how I attacked you for...weak reasoning. Hm.

-UncertainKitten is making a case disliking your cavalier theory that taking people down to low health is a GOOD IDEA with unknown scum abilities. Edible actually had a very good point that you seem to know more about the set up than you should.

To be fair, this is verging on paranoia. This is like 'what if scum have hidden votes, we can't let people get ANY VOTES AT ALL'. It was the seeming randomness of it that worried me, not the actual process of weakening people.

-UncertainKitten will appeal to meta and state that she would not have much trouble finding scummy statements to frame people with were she looking for them, as evidenced by last game.

Okay, seriously. WHAT IS THIS. Are you trying to argue that if you were scum you'd actually be doing more attacking?

I can't! So I'm merely counterattacking with the fact he can't prove it and I'd prefer more solid evidence.

Well, the easy way to solve this problem is by not RAGING, isn't it. T_T

You know I bus far better than that.

After the last game, implying that anyone in MotK is competent (myself included) is probably the worst mistake I could make. This bleeds 'too scummy to be scum'.

ctually, I wasn't very lucid then. So I'll conveniently backstep and go back to Serpy Zak like I was originally thinking. And before you say something about how I've never mentioned Zakeri before, I'll freely admit you're right and say so?

'Admitting my mistakes before I make them makes it okay! ^_^'

[Serp]

2.  Just because I haven't posted all of the people who I think are scummy doesn't mean I don't find anyone scummy.  Now, if you can give a reason to actually make those thoughts public, then sure, I'll do so, but understand, I don't feel much need to give possible scum headway knowing that I'm the target to go for.  AKA, don't play your hand until you know you're ready.

Withholding your opinions is anti-town on multiple levels.  Firstly, for all we know, you could get OHKO'd any moment, and whatever analysis you've done on the game so far would then be lost.  Secondly, if you don't list who you find scummy and your reasons why, then the town has fewer clues to determine whether you're town or scum.  Thirdly, if you don't push for the lynches of people you find scummy, and resist the lynches of those you don't find scummy, then even if you're a townie, you're just dead weight, i.e. vigbait. 

This may be Hurt and Heal, but that doesn't mean you can just sit back and expect to be called helpful to the town.  We're still playing mafia.

I've already explained this one.  You put many bullets into (tackle?) the person quickly so that that person died before having a chance to off one of us. Which means you'll have to kill off people all at once to avoid these problems.

Tackles only resolve at the end of the day.  If someone is brought to zero HP during the day, and then activates his spellcard, then he'll still be able to get it off.  The only way to lynch someone without giving him that chance would be to pile a bunch of votes on him at the end of the day, so that the actions that killed him would be resolved before he had a chance to see them.  Leaving someone at full health, then publicly (that is, in full view of the accused) planning to pile on him during a particular day, does nothing to prevent him from using his spellcard.

And Serp, when did you stop being Mafian?

What do you mean?

Thank you for clarifying.  I didn't really view your statement like this originally.  So your basic strategy is to keep people in the red zone unless we're confident they're town, which is kind of the opposite approach of the one I would take - keeping everyone healthy and announcing intent to assault once we've discussed our target for the "day".  I'm willing to try either one, but it looks like the former is more natural progression for this setup, whereas mine is trying to cement it into more standard rules of mafia.

Well, it's probably a bad idea to keep everyone in the red zone, but as I see it, keeping two or three people there at once basically just increases the likelihood that scum will end up playing their hand to save a scumbuddy.

Actually, it wasn't really misrep. At best, misread. And no, I don't see any alternation. I'd like you lynched eventually. I'd like a better idea of the set up before that and rather NOT have you spellcard off on us and kill a townie.

This makes no sense.  If you think I'm scum, you should be pushing to lynch me.  If anything, lynching me slowly instead of quickly only gives me a larger window of opportunity to fire off my spellcard.  And I don't see how we can learn anything else about the setup without lynching someone, so shouldn't you be pushing to get it over with already?

[WHMZakeri]

You two are the only two I see rallying directly for Serp's cause, as well as attacking me for attacking him. It's a classic chainsaw.

So basically, you make a case on Serpentarius that largely consists of completely misrepresenting something Serpentarius said, and anyone who notices that you basically just twisted his words around to force him to sound scummy is automatically Serpentarius's Scum Buddy, whether or not the Town:Scum ratio is balanced.

This makes perfect Sense.

So, we have UncertainKitten making a case on me based on disliking my strategy in Hurt and Heal games.  Never mind that I'm far from the only person to believe in this strategy

Oh, don't worry about that. She's got that covered.

I'm agree with the Case on UK now, as if it wasn't glaringly obvious.

Zakeri, why this change?

I knew someone would bring that up, which is why I put what I said in parenthesis. I admit, I will get caught up in the moment when it comes to setup speculation, but the point still stands that Ramus does not seem interested enough in finding and lynching, well, anyone besides the first person who targeted him.

The Case on Serpentarius

Your first point is basically that Edible had a good point
Your second point is actually just the first point worded in a way that would get hate on you, so there's no reason to include it.
The rest is just defense, half of which is both meta and brought up by you, so it is subject to wifom.

Honestly, it's a statement like this that makes me think you're town. I'll state that I really hope you don't repeat last games performance and get yourself rightly lynched as a townie.

Would it be too rude to call this out on appeal to Naivete?

Rou and Serp have already picked up on the other points I wanted to make against UK and Ramus (Rou's "Admiting to mistakes does not solve mistakes" and Serp's "not providing all analysis" I both agree with).

I'm willing to throw my full weight behind a UK lynch today.

[Ramus]

Withholding your opinions is anti-town on multiple levels.  Firstly, for all we know, you could get OHKO'd any moment, and whatever analysis you've done on the game so far would then be lost.  Secondly, if you don't list who you find scummy and your reasons why, then the town has fewer clues to determine whether you're town or scum.  Thirdly, if you don't push for the lynches of people you find scummy, and resist the lynches of those you don't find scummy, then even if you're a townie, you're just dead weight, i.e. vigbait.

This may be Hurt and Heal, but that doesn't mean you can just sit back and expect to be called helpful to the town.  We're still playing mafia.

Hmmm... true.  I guess I've really forgotten how to play this game properly.  Here's my list and reasons why:

1.  Affinity:  Tackling on an early post with limited reason to do so.  Unlike Roukanken, I still don't find he's justified himself in why he's done it.  Not to mention I have a personal vendetta against anyone who lurks as this has caused me to lose enough Mafia games.  He's also a jerk.
2.  UK:  Recently anyway, I've seen a lack of effort at analyzing the situation, scum hunting, or even getting past the Roukanken tackle.  She's a bitch.
3.  Serp:  I'm not sure how you can agree with me on not keeping everyone in red but not agree with taking down someone quickly.  If someone is down to zero HP, I'm pretty sure they can't activate a spellcard.  While they may be able to talk before the end of the day, that person is pretty dead.  Basically, you're on the list for being a logic bomb.  Also, you failed to answer a perfectly simple question, so can you try again?  When did you stop being a Mafian?
4.  Nietz, keeping himself alive by using healing first thing in the day.  Congrats, you wasted your power to kill a Mafian.  To boot, I'm sure Nietz knows that special roles shouldn't do things like to avoid attention, so the self-preservation screams something is wrong.  However, I can't get him on anything besides that since he hasn't done anything else scummy.
5.  Zakeri 5:  Calls me out on giving a simplistic answer to the question about healing given by Roukanken.  You can K.I.S.S. my ass if that's such a bad thing.  Has some rather contradictory positions through the game so far about whether or not healing is good or bad.  Overall, fails to establish a position on what he feels is right or wrong in my opinion.
6.  Edible:  Kinda moldy and not that edible.  I need to look him over again as nothing comes to mind but I haven't been paying him as much attention as I should have been.
7.  Drake, I actually like Drake.  He's logic is consistent and hasn't really done anything that I can call anti-town.  Heck, he's better than me since he can getting away with being the nice guy and healing someone.
8.  Roukanken:  Again, townie by meta.  If I need to explain this one more time I'll tackle someone.
9.  Ramus:  Generally trying to be sarcastic and straightforward at the same time.  He really annoys me for healing UK and taking that approach that everyone is innocent until proven otherwise.  Completely detrimental to the town since he prefers to look at percentages of winning via straight up logic instead of psychology like this game is made for.  Needs to give deeper explanations in general when asked a question and needs to get off his rear to go hunt scum.  He's also immature.

[Serp]

3.  Serp:  I'm not sure how you can agree with me on not keeping everyone in red but not agree with taking down someone quickly.  If someone is down to zero HP, I'm pretty sure they can't activate a spellcard.  While they may be able to talk before the end of the day, that person is pretty dead.  Basically, you're on the list for being a logic bomb.

Re-read Rule 4.  The logical error is on your end.  So, with that out of the way, where would you put me on your list of suspicions?

Also, you failed to answer a perfectly simple question, so can you try again?  When did you stop being a Mafian?

I don't do nonsense questions, however simple.

[Ramus]

Hmm, well, I guess you're right.  Regardless, that list was in no particular order, it was just whoever first came to mind.

And there's nothing nonsensical about the question.  It's a simple question with a straightforward answer. Now quit avoiding the question and answer to the best of your abilities.