Mini 684: Quacks and Masons Mafia- Game Over

pacman281292 · Post Post #10 (isolation #0) » Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:43 am

/QUACK

pacman281292 · Post Post #19 (isolation #1) » Tue Oct 07, 2008 12:05 pm

Dattebayo, Mayor, killed N1
(you know where

)

Vote: raider8169

for considering that if someone says QUACK in his first post then he roleclaimed.

pacman281292 · Post Post #22 (isolation #2) » Tue Oct 07, 2008 12:16 pm

ugh, I have V/LA during the whole week. Sorry

pacman281292 · Post Post #51 (isolation #3) » Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:36 am

hmm... I have V/la during the whole week (as noted on other games I'm playing). Sorry.

pacman281292 · Post Post #86 (isolation #4) » Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:03 am

wait WAIT I HAVE AN IDEA:

I don't know if docs and/or quacks can target themselves, but if they can, they might then target themselves:
Docs will not die.
Quacks will instantly die; we get rid of them.
There is a 2/3 probability of scum targetting doc or quack (no effects) and 1/3 of scum targetting mason (unlucky).
I hope this works. It's just an idea, and might not work, and it might not be possible, but if it is, then we have a great advantage with two less town-killers. Thoughts?

pacman281292 · Post Post #89 (isolation #5) » Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:12 am

That was just an idea. Quacks can be potentially dangerous for town, because they only kill pro-town players, not scum. In case they find out their sanity (near-impossible) they might work as Xdaamno's Colonel Witchhunter. But it's possible that a quack would never find out their sanity.
But, I think that it's still something very risky, and if the quacks die, we would be left with lots of doctors and a mason group, better than having two weird killing roles that might confuse the doctors.
and, in a last point, questions to mod can just be made via PM.

pacman281292 · Post Post #96 (isolation #6) » Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:42 am

nevermind posts 86 and 89, then.

raider8169 wrote: My plan most likely wont allow docs to start protecting until late in the game when
they may not be as useful.
I still think that has a better chance of success.

At the end of the game, a doc protection/quack fail would be catastrophic and might be the definitive move.

pacman281292 · Post Post #147 (isolation #7) » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:00 pm

oh well, clammy is at L-1.
Hammer? not hammer? Thoughts?

pacman281292 · Post Post #177 (isolation #8) » Sat Oct 18, 2008 4:02 am

I agree with all townies targetting someone (possibly SL), because it would be a sure supercop, but I think that we must be careful, becuase we would waste 4 doc protections.
clammy, I don't get your 174 and 176. Please explain.

pacman281292 · Post Post #187 (isolation #9) » Wed Oct 22, 2008 1:08 pm

OH CRAP

Being busy. Possibly not able to post tomorrow. Sorry.

pacman281292 · Post Post #198 (isolation #10) » Fri Oct 24, 2008 2:05 pm

hmm... this is not funny...
I have no idea about what to do...
FAR AWAY WARNING: I'll be busy next week. I will possibly have none access oct 30-nov 3. Sorry (that's what I have for being smart

)

pacman281292 · Post Post #203 (isolation #11) » Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:04 am

I agree; we are on a dangerous situation, and if we commit a mistake, then we will lose the game

hmm... what must we do now...

pacman281292 · Post Post #207 (isolation #12) » Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:18 am

Riceballtail wrote:Or if we lynch the quack, we have doctors to protect at night. Two doctors can still give us the advantage.

But neither quacks know that they are quacks...

pacman281292 · Post Post #228 (isolation #13) » Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:18 pm

Ouch.
I'm extremely confused, and I'm going into V/LA soon (as my sig says).
I'll make a complete reread later, and then come up with useful content.
Sorry.

pacman281292 · Post Post #258 (isolation #14) » Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:38 am

Sun, do you need to quadruple-post? that's annoying.
Me confused

pacman281292 · Post Post #287 (isolation #15) » Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:11 pm

sorry, flooded of games... Currently 2 over my limit-o-games...
@Netlava: Why is not overdefensiveness a valid scum tell?
@rofl: Funny note: mod's color is BLUE!
Currently, there are lots of cases and cases, really damn hard to interprete and sometimes really weak. I hadn't checked which of these are strong and which of these are weak; we have just 12 pages, but all them full of really annoying (and scary) quote walls. Another factor which makes the game hard to read is the "fragmentation" on discussion, and the long periods of inactivity. I really need to make a damn hard reread on this. Sorry.

pacman281292 · Post Post #299 (isolation #16) » Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:15 am

militant wrote:Pacman, I think you are doing something I just learnt about in another game known as "active lurking". You post irrelevant messages every now and then perhaps to aviod being prodded,

I understand this perfectly. I recognise my lack of content. I'll try hardly and I'll be more productive.

@ALL: Please calm down. We have only 9 alive now, and if we mislynch a doc and the quack commits a mistake, the game will be over before daybreak.

roflcopter's temper is definitely not cool (not means exactly scummy, but...). There were some sarcasms (mostly 279's) I didn't like at all.
hmm... and this activity sucks...
aww

pacman281292 · Post Post #316 (isolation #17) » Mon Nov 10, 2008 4:25 pm

I receive a bad vibe from rofl, but it might rather be his playstyle. His sarcasms are sometimes hidden, and there are posts where I can't find well what is sarcasm or what is content.
I found Netlava's D1 someway scummy. However, his play D2 does not seem scummy... hmm...
Not complete thoughts, sorry. Tired now

pacman281292 · Post Post #339 (isolation #18) » Sun Nov 16, 2008 6:02 am

Example of strawmanning:
There is only one scum.
A: I can't be scum; I had no access during the night, and I couldn't have had performed a kill...
B: So, you are lurking. Vote A DIESCUMDIE

hmm... Sun is lurking (OH HYPOCRISY)... or he is V/LA? Have someone seen him lately?

pacman281292 · Post Post #354 (isolation #19) » Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:36 pm

Riceballtail wrote:@Masons: Don't claim right now. I do not see any real benefit to it.

QFT
Neither me. Claiming mason is nothing more than WIFOM, and it's really a BAD, BAD idea.

BTW, I'm 80% sure of my role:

I AM A QUACK.

I'M A "DOC", AND I TARGETTED DATTEBAYO TONIGHT. FEEL FREE TO LYNCH ME IF YOU WANT.

That's good

. And mostly because I'm falling into a near-to-none-activity period of 2 weeks.
@MOD: If you consider that my V/LA period is just too long, feel free to replace me.

pacman281292 · Post Post #386 (isolation #20) » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:56 am

Jazzmyn wrote:
pacman281292 wrote:
I AM A QUACK.

I'M A "DOC", AND I TARGETTED DATTEBAYO TONIGHT. FEEL FREE TO LYNCH ME IF YOU WANT.
Why would you target Dattebayo during the night after reading this:

In the event Sun is scum - Good. Doctors should hold night actions.
In the event Sun is a doc - Bad. Doctors should hold night actions.
In the event Sun is the quack - Moderate. Doctors should protect, as they are now confirmed to be protectors.
??

I didn't see that *facepalm*. But at least that makes me be still more sure of the fact I'm quack.
Second question: same stuff.
I like raider's reasoning. If you want you may lynch me and confirm that I'm quack, and then doc can protect free. WEE!
@rofl: That's not a gambit. Yeah, WIFOMy statement, but truthful.

pacman281292 · Post Post #394 (isolation #21) » Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:33 am

Netlava wrote:Crap, sorry for taking so long to post. No mason claim please.

Pacman's targetting of Dattebayo seems like a desperate gambit. First of all, violating the plan = no good. And if he's somehow actually a quack, then we can use the doc protects.

Vote: pacman

@read 386, and you'll find why did I use my action tonight.

pacman281292 · Post Post #397 (isolation #22) » Mon Dec 01, 2008 10:45 am

raider8169 wrote:
pacman281292 wrote:
Netlava wrote:Crap, sorry for taking so long to post. No mason claim please.

Pacman's targetting of Dattebayo seems like a desperate gambit. First of all, violating the plan = no good. And if he's somehow actually a quack, then we can use the doc protects.

Vote: pacman
@read 386, and you'll find why did I use my action tonight.
Are you saying you are going to use your action tonight?

If that is the case please do not as it can not help us out in any way. Also please vote so we can move on.

nay. I didn't say that.
@Jazz: Yeah, I'm an idiot, but at least the doc can now protect free.
So... do you want me to hammer?

pacman281292 · Post Post #399 (isolation #23) » Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:11 am

OK

I'm leaving today, and this may me my last post before V/LA. Bye, see you in one week.

pacman281292 · Post Post #401 (isolation #24) » Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:13 am

just realized a mistake:

pacman281292's 397 wrote:
raider8169 wrote:
pacman281292 wrote:
Netlava wrote:Crap, sorry for taking so long to post. No mason claim please.

Pacman's targetting of Dattebayo seems like a desperate gambit. First of all, violating the plan = no good. And if he's somehow actually a quack, then we can use the doc protects.

Vote: pacman
@read 386, and you'll find why did I use my action tonight.
Are you saying you are going to use your action tonight?

If that is the case please do not as it can not help us out in any way. Also please vote so we can move on.
nay. I didn't say that.
@
militant
: Yeah, I'm an idiot, but at least the doc can now protect free.
So... do you want me to hammer?

pacman281292 · Post Post #404 (isolation #25) » Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:14 pm

raider8169 wrote:@Pacman I want you to hammer

Why? I also see rofl scummy, but I also see you trigger-happy...
If you can convince me of hammering in the next 20 minutes, I'll do. If not... I would leave the computer where I am and not to post again 'till Dec 9...

pacman281292 · Post Post #448 (isolation #26) » Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:04 am

Sorry guys. I'm V/LA again, and I'll have a pretty damn low access (just when I have cash to go to an internet cafe, and I don't have infinite money...)
Sorry you all. I'm officially requesting replacement.

Legacy: I'm suspicious from rofl, but not enough sure to cast a vote. I'm a quack. Bye bye.

pacman281292 · Post Post #453 (isolation #27) » Thu Dec 18, 2008 6:18 am

Netlava wrote:Meh, pacman's last post is shady with his legacy thing.

At this point, I think it is either Netlava or you.
What makes you think I'm scum?

Still like my pacman vote.

Vague answer: some weird comments D1 made me receive a strong scum vibe from you, but it's not that strong now (your actual behaviour is not scummy...)
Bye bye (posted because got access)