|
Rarity posted:What I'm thinking is that each scum is a different type of HK-unit. Each gunsmith's weapon only protects against one type of unit. That's possible, I guess. Any chance someone wants to collate relevant claim information for me?
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 04:53 |
|
|
Ah, Juanito was the guy stealing all the fuel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Hal Incandenza posted:DGK have any of your 5 "confirmed" people flipped yet? 1. Hideki - Mikujin 2. Blair Williams - JakeP 3. Kyle Reese - Merk/Somber 4. Barnes- Bowmore There is one more, but I'm not sure if it's a person or an alternate scum win condition.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
Rarity posted:What I'm thinking is that each scum is a different type of HK-unit. Each gunsmith's weapon only protects against one type of unit. This is probably correct. I didn't mention that detail at any point for obvious reasons, but now that it's out there. It may mean my bombs are actually useless now, as maybe Mags was the only one affected by them. Impossible to know, since the Scum have managed not to target anyone I've given BOMBs to so far, except for Bowmore who died before he could get them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
I have not been able to investigate due to not having fuel. ##vote CapnAndy pretty sure this is the right choice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
Does a 17 person game with a flipped third party make for a 3 or 4 man scum team?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
xopods posted:This is probably correct. I didn't mention that detail at any point for obvious reasons, but now that it's out there. It may mean my bombs are actually useless now, as maybe Mags was the only one affected by them. Impossible to know, since the Scum have managed not to target anyone I've given BOMBs to so far, except for Bowmore who died before he could get them. Are you sure it was you Magnus targeted and not one of us other gunsmiths?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
I might as well claim. I'm Kate Conner, resistance aligned cop. A small group of us have been hiding John Conner. Every person on my list has come up town, with the exception of Merk/Somber. There is now a strong possibility that I got a false positive, after dissecting my role PM and the results PM as well as what I've seen in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:That's possible, I guess. Here are the relevant facts: (1) I claimed before anyone else so much as hinted at their role. Byers had said he needed fuel, but nothing beyond that. (2) On D2, Byers asserted that he strongly believed my claim. He then died and flipped Town and Gunsmith. (3) I was suspicious of Rarity until she started talking about land and air units, which confirmed my suspicion that the wording of my PM implied that my bombs were only effective against certain types of Scum. At that point I suddenly declared her Town and backed off. Given the order these things happened in and the way the information came out, there's no way either my claim or Rarity's is totally invented. I suppose you could imagine that two Gunsmiths are real and one was a mod-provided Scum fakeclaim, or that Rarity and I are both Scum trying an insane gambit. But there is one more person that got my bombs and could confirm me... but in case there is still a Scum left against whom my bombs could work, it doesn't make sense to get that person to say so. I don't know if Rarity has distributed any bombs... that depends on whether she got any fuel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Are you sure it was you Magnus targeted and not one of us other gunsmiths? Yes, I got a PM from Kilran including the details of what went on... the D100 roll, etc. When I asked, he said that both parties in a bomb event get the same details, i.e. Mags would have received a similar PM (but was dead and couldn't tell his buddies) and, if Byers was killed by someone compatible with his bombs, they would have likewise gotten their results, which is why I felt comfortable revealing the probability aspect of the role on D3.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
tearshed posted:Does a 17 person game with a flipped third party make for a 3 or 4 man scum team? With three bomb distributors, I would have guessed at least 4, maybe 5. But there could also be multiple third parties... e.g. I'm not convinced that DGK is being straight with us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
DGK2000 posted:I have not been able to investigate due to not having fuel. DGK2000 posted:Every person on my list has come up town, with the exception of Merk/Somber. I don't understand. Which nights have you had/not had fuel and who have you investigated?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
xopods posted:I don't understand. Which nights have you had/not had fuel and who have you investigated? N2 was the only night I have had fuel. Have you not paid attention to the flips?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
DGK2000 posted:N2 was the only night I have had fuel. Have you not paid attention to the flips? Yes, I have. But the way you stated things it wasn't clear that Sombermerk is the only person you've actually investigated. Tell me if I've got this straight now: (1) Your role PM mentions five people, four of whom have died and flipped Town. The other one you think might be an alternate Scum win condition rather than a player. (2) You also have a Cop investigation, which requires fuel. You had fuel on N2 only and investigated merk, who came up "Not Town." But your role PM and the results PM also contain some flavor that leads you to doubt this result, so you didn't claim it. Anything I'm getting wrong or forgetting?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
xopods posted:Yes, I have. But the way you stated things it wasn't clear that Sombermerk is the only person you've actually investigated. Tell me if I've got this straight now: Mostly, I didn't doubt my result until the claim from Merk. In other news, I now have a PM that states I have received a fuel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
DGK2000 posted:N2 was the only night I have had fuel. Have you not paid attention to the flips? False. DGK2000 posted:Also, someone stole fuel from me and someone else sent me one. This was on D3, the Tokes lynch, after you announced your scum result on merk. You should have investigated someone on N3, so why didn't you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
I even asked about this yesterday, because I SPECIFICALLY remembering you mentioning during the merk debacle that you received fuel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:I even asked about this yesterday, because I SPECIFICALLY remembering you mentioning during the merk debacle that you received fuel. Also, someone stole fuel from me and someone else sent me one. I guess I should have said I was sent a fuel and then it was stolen?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 06:06
|
|
|
DGK2000 posted:Also, someone stole fuel from me and someone else sent me one. I guess I should have said I was sent a fuel and then it was stolen? To elaborate: I picked up a fuel during the day. I investigated Merk. A fuel was stolen. I was given a fuel. The fuel I was given replaced the fuel that was stolen, allowing me to investigate. I had zero fuel left over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
You're a daycop?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
DGK2000 posted:To elaborate: I picked up a fuel during the day. I investigated Merk. A fuel was stolen. I was given a fuel. You'd better tell me how I don't have that right, buddy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:You picked up a fuel, used it for an investigation and -- I'm assuming -- consumed the feul doing so, somebody stole a fuel which at this point you don't have, and then somebody gave you another fuel, which you didn't use for an investigation and presumably you still have it? Do I have that right? Ugh. The steal went a layer before the investigation, the gift of fuel went before the investigation. Steal > Gift > Investigate. As in, my action would have failed had someone not given me fuel. DGK2000 posted:To elaborate: I picked up a fuel during the day. I investigated Merk. A fuel was stolen. I was given a fuel. No, it's a night action and I think you're being willfully ignorant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 07:04
|
|
|
That still makes no sense.DGK2000 posted:To elaborate: I picked up a fuel during the day. I investigated Merk. A fuel was stolen. I was given a fuel. You are claiming your order is: 1. Got fuel 2. Investigated merk. 3. Fuel was stolen. 4. Got fuel. 5. Then somehow action went through. But this doesn't even matter because you just said it was not a day action, it was a night action. And really, the events, as you presented them, were: 1. Got fuel, investigated Merk in the night, got scum result. 2. Report scum result. 3. Report that ALSO: I had a fuel stolen from me (presumably one you got beyond the one you foraged), then I got a new one. (Meaning you had another fuel to use BEYOND the merk result.) How are we being willfully ignorant? Your claims are not lining up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
I mean you literally just said "I picked up fuel during the day and investigated Merk" followed by "I am a nightcop."
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
DGK, which night did you receive fuel? Whoever sent you the fuel should claim it now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 09:07
|
|
|
Rarity posted:DGK, which night did you receive fuel? This is unhelpful. Sending fuel is not an individual ability; everyone was able to do it. Any dead person could have sent fuel to DGK. I'm more interested in the specifics of his claim, because he is playing both sides. He is currently claiming to have investigated merk as both a day and a night action. That's what's not flying with me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 10:17
|
|
|
##vote DGK
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:This is unhelpful. Sending fuel is not an individual ability; everyone was able to do it. Any dead person could have sent fuel to DGK. I'm more interested in the specifics of his claim, because he is playing both sides. He is currently claiming to have investigated merk as both a day and a night action. That's what's not flying with me. I'm not loving claiming it as a day action. Show me explicitly where I claimed it as a day action, rather than you not having reading comprehension.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
DGK2000 posted:To elaborate: I picked up a fuel during the day. I investigated Merk. A fuel was stolen. I was given a fuel. There.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
Quidnose posted:There. FYI, there was this thing where you could forage for fuel. At the start of a day. Which I did. Which powered my night action. Or would have, except the series of events I already listed happened. That was clearly not me explicitly saying I have a day action. You're wildly misrepresenting things to make your case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
DGK2000 posted:Ugh. The steal went a layer before the investigation, the gift of fuel went before the investigation. Quid, the "during the day" there clearly only applies to the foraging for fuel, come on now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
I guess the gunsmith thing doesn't really matter. I'm still having trouble with xopods actual content. Here are some of the posts I'm having trouble reconciling: xopods posted:Mags isn't stupid, though. I can't imagine him going balls to the wall defending a scumbro like that without considering how it's going to look if one of them flips eventually. It's conceivable that, given the relatively experienced field this game, he would do it as a double-bluff, expecting everyone to make this exact argument I'm making... conceivable, but just barely. xopods posted:I'd rather lynch one of the other people I mentioned, but I really need to sleep. That's a bizarre shift, I've skimmed the thread a couple times now along with thorough rereads of xopod's post history so I hope I'm not reiterating an old point, but why this vote? I don't like the former post too because I feel like it's a big mess of wifom doubletalk that doesn't actually say anything relevant at all. Forgive the next bit since I'm more or less quoting xopod's entire post history. xopods posted:I could see CapnAndy being CapnScummy xopods posted:##vote DGK xopods posted:I'd vote QPQ. I don't want to lynch him just to test the voice, but I thought he was Scum D1 and the only thing that's changed that is the assumption that Mags wouldn't have defended him quite so hard. But that's not necessarily a correct assumption. First relevant mention of TF. xopods posted:I'd rather lynch one of the other people I mentioned, but I really need to sleep. xopods posted:Yesterday you wanted to auto-lynch QPQ to "test" the voice. Today you want to just ignore the weird role/mechanic-related info? These two posts put together in particular are weird. xopods posted:Any way we can lynch CapnAndy, Juanito AND Token Female today? xopods posted:Thing about Token is that I get the sense right now that she and CapnAndy are not scum together. It doesn't seem like bussing. I think they're both experienced enough that they could pull off a mutual bus convincingly, but neither seems engaged enough in the game to go to that effort right now. xopods posted:I would be happy lynching tearshed or maybe Mikujin. Tearshed's better though, because Miku is probably telling the truth about forgetting he was playing, and probably wouldn't forget if he were Scum, but both of those assumptions are tenuous. In all these posts, Token never feels like xopods top pick, or even really close to being his top pick. Yet when the pressure mounts, xopods hedges his bets and puts down a vote on Token that it doesn't seem like he believes in. I take a similar approach when I'm playing scum, if I cast a wide enough net when I'm scumhunting, I can move my vote with impunity. xopods posted:CapnAndy's whining reads as sincere. Xopods has been doing some town posting this game and he's definitely been engaged, but I don't buy his vote on Token. I could absolutely be wrong. It could be xopods was just working to avoid a no-lynch, or that the context is missing from these quotes, but despite that, I can't shake my gut feeling that he's just playing his heart out as scum. ##vote xopods
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I guess the gunsmith thing doesn't really matter. I'm still having trouble with xopods actual content. Dude, xopods is town.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Rarity posted:Dude, xopods is town. I feel like he's actually just scum playing really really well. I missed whether we definitively 100% for sure know that he was the one who killed Magnus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I guess the gunsmith thing doesn't really matter. I'm still having trouble with xopods actual content. ##vote xopods
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:I feel like he's actually just scum playing really really well. I missed whether we definitively 100% for sure know that he was the one who killed Magnus. He claimed gunsmith first and he knew exactly how the PGO mechanics worked and scum killing another scum on N1 is the most stupid gambit ever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:This is a damning case. Oh my God I'm surrounded by [CENSORED].
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Agh, right, he took credit for killing Magnus. ##unvote It's still a damning case, but now I want to think more about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
I don't love that Byers isn't alive to tell us if he could have possibly killed Magnus, I'm gonna go see how Byers reacted to xopod's claim.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 04:53 |
|
|
Rarity posted:He claimed gunsmith first and he knew exactly how the PGO mechanics worked and scum killing another scum on N1 is the most stupid gambit ever. My point is, how do we know that he killed Magnus for certain? Knowing how what seems to be a central mechanic of the game works doesn't really seem too odd. Kilran would be remiss to not give scum some insight into how it works when there's three gunsmiths in this game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 22:08
|
|