January 14th, 2013, 01:16
Posts: 12,335
Threads: 46
Joined: Jan 2011
(January 14th, 2013, 01:14)Azza Wrote: (January 14th, 2013, 01:06)Lewwyn Wrote: (January 14th, 2013, 01:01)Azza Wrote: (January 14th, 2013, 00:45)Lewwyn Wrote: (January 14th, 2013, 00:43)Azza Wrote: This feels like a similar post to the infamous "useless vote" on me in WW18 where you were scum.
I've been pretty down about this game after both Tasunke and Ryan flipped town. Been lurking pretty bad as a result. But, despite this, I still have almost 20 more posts than Mattimeo does. Why no attention for him?
To help rectify this, Mattimeo
Day 2 Zak was trying to get one of Mattimeo or Mero lynched over Selrahc.
Could've been distancing? As scum, I wouldn't post a one of X must be scum post, like Zak's three Ms post, without including at least one of my team mates in it. I'd expect Zak to have similar thinking.
Yes, except that he started the day off by pushing Mattimeo. On a rather ridiculous premise that Mattimeo voted for Bigger as Mayor. To think that he would start the day pushing a scumbuddy and then return to trying to push a scumbuddy more
when there wasn't any reason to at the beginning of the day doesn't fit. I given both this and the manner in which Mattimeo was pushed by Zak is clear indication that Mattimeo is unlikely to be scum.
Fair enough. I'd still like to hear from him though.
Me too considering he has the double vote.
“The wind went mute and the trees in the forest stood still. It was time for the last tale.”
January 14th, 2013, 01:22
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Right now I lean town for you Q, but I want to make one comment on your post still:
(January 14th, 2013, 01:01)Qgqqqqq Wrote: 2) I wasn't policy lynching then (the only reason one would automatically lynch a lurker D1), there was a genuine case on Rowain due to his "fool card die" arguments,
Have you checked how many of our wolves were on Rowain D1? If not, go do it. And then, please, re-evaluate if you really still think there was a case on Rowain. The error happened this game, nothing we can do about, but at least for next, learn something from it. I do the same about letting Selrahc get away 2 days in a row and nearly the 3rd as well.
January 14th, 2013, 01:25
Posts: 12,335
Threads: 46
Joined: Jan 2011
(January 14th, 2013, 01:22)Serdoa Wrote: Have you checked how many of our wolves were on Rowain D1? If not, go do it. And then, please, re-evaluate if you really still think there was a case on Rowain. The error happened this game, nothing we can do about, but at least for next, learn something from it. I do the same about letting Selrahc get away 2 days in a row and nearly the 3rd as well.
You know who else was on Rowain? Uberfish.
“The wind went mute and the trees in the forest stood still. It was time for the last tale.”
January 14th, 2013, 01:30
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
Here as a reminder the official vote count for Day1
Quote:Rowain - 7 - uberfish, novice, pindicator, Tasunke, Selrahc, Qgqqqqq, Bigger
Tasunke - 6 - zakalwe, Mattimeo, Ryan, Azza, Serdoa, MJW
Selrahc - 3 - Rowain, Lewwyn, Merovech
zakalwe - 1 - waterbat
And remember, zak was on Rowain till shortly before deadline. He only switched 6 minutes before deadline. I think that was for the chance to actually get Rowain saved, so they can lynch him the next day - because I am certain they would have made him responsible for the lynch of our vig/gas can/whatever else item guy. They didn't know at that time that Tasunke was lying.
Anyhow. Looking at that, we had for quite some time at least 3 out of 4 scum on Rowain. But Mattimeo is not. He is also not using his doublevote. That is what gives me a slight town-lean right now. If they really wanted to make certain that Selrahc isn't lynched, they should have used that double-vote. But I don't know if Mattimeo would have had to cast it himself or if the other wolves were allowed to do it for him. In the former case, it might really be just that Mattimeo was not around at that time and so it doesn't clear him. Still, something to keep in mind for todays lynch.
January 14th, 2013, 01:51
Posts: 10,107
Threads: 82
Joined: May 2012
Yes I still think there was a case.
In my experience as scum, you vote for those you think there's a case on if they're on the block (and both villagers.)
Erebus in the Balance - a FFH Modmod based around balancing and polishing FFH for streamlined competitive play.
January 14th, 2013, 02:01
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
Official Lynch Vote Count
Azza - 3 - uberfish, Serdoa, waterbat
MJW - 2 - Mattimeo, Qgqqqqq
uberfish - 2 - Lewwyn, MJW
Mattimeo - 1 - Azza
Players not voting: None
15 hours remaining
January 14th, 2013, 02:02
Posts: 7,916
Threads: 158
Joined: Jan 2012
(January 14th, 2013, 00:59)Serdoa Wrote: BRick
Please, for the fairness of this game, I want to know for certain now what was the rule for item passing? Am I right that it was
N1: Scum may not pass to their night kill target. If village passes to nightkill, item is lost.
N2: Everyone can pass everyone everything. If nightkill gets something passed, it is randomly distributed.
?
Yes
January 14th, 2013, 02:20
Posts: 2,511
Threads: 4
Joined: Mar 2012
well that wasnt clear - but it doesnt matter in my case - i passed it to novice - and had nothing to do with any night kills.
--
Best dating advice on RB: When you can't hide your unit, go in fast and hard. -- Sullla
January 14th, 2013, 08:54
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
(January 5th, 2013, 02:09)waterbat Wrote: @pin: you are saying novice (and subsequent holders) would tell us who he passed it to before possibly being night killed? interesting - this might force the scum to use the jailer card depending on the timing of the reveal - but that also would be information we could use.
waterbat, would you care to explain the bolded part of this post from D1? Especially how you knew that scum had the jailer...
waterbat
January 14th, 2013, 08:55
Posts: 6,630
Threads: 47
Joined: Apr 2010
That didn't came out right
waterbat
|