|TJ|
-
Posts
2259 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
News
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by |TJ|
-
Bruh then like how would you know the new actions you need to put in? xD
-
I take your theory and throw it in the fireplace. I'm a Truthless who rolled Lightweaver last cycle. I swapped your role with JNV's. You should be able to confirm Edit : i'mma @JNV also because they should be able to confirm too. Also if either of you now have an evil role you know the other is evil
-
I just went back to check Order of Actions and yeah, Exile is at the top so it's possible that TUA had submitted the kills and it didn't go through because OoA.
-
Okok first off @Illwei really really sorry that vote was an accident. I had my index hovering just over the mousepad in case you (or anyone else) vote for me and I tapped it accidentally, really. I then spent time taking screenshots from developer tools to prove I was 16 seconds late in submitted the vote. I wish you can ask her and she could confirm it but this is from the developer tool datetime="2022-01-27T16:20:00Z As you see, 16 seconds passed the time. Also I was right there at rollover smh, won't make sense I don't kill.
-
Illwei
-
Or, ya know? v!TJ not trying to die
-
Bro even if they were, we're preventing a possible low info kill by the elims
-
You know what, I'm dwi TUA Archer I think they want to vote on me D1 and make sure it stays for the entire cycle for .... as long as we play together, I suppose? It's the third time it's happening But yes, slightly side-eyeing it because last times it didn't happen to put me in the lead. Edit : @Experience, vote TUA? Me and Illwei are both 2-2 and I'd rather not kill her D1 and besides I think JNV are new.
-
Re: Dannex, the last time they did this they were village and I was evil and I used this sword vote on me as a reason to vote against them. Kinda suspecting if Archer is doing the same thing. Point 2: Wondering if Dannex is evil this time around because I have no way of knowing if he'd do the same thing as evil
-
If I had a dollar for every time someone says this.... Oh c'monnnnn xD Anyway I'm suspicious of Archer because their vote on Experience because they said they like PMs. More suspicious is the vote on Striker - You're already voting for a player [Exp]. By your logic, there's already 5/11 chances they would be a good kill target, so why are you RNGing this? I feel like this is a reason manufactured to change the vote because if it's a random vote, the vote on Experience already is still the same probability. I liked Striker's vote on Archer, but dislike their vote on Illwei And if we find out Archer is evil, I'll be seriously side-eyeing that vote and unvote by Mat as distancing
-
Sign me up, I hope like 30 people join to play this lmao
-
No, I won't be able to run the QF right now, you go right ahead.
-
Yeah, they're criminally under-mentioned, always nice to see a few fans of the series!
-
Ah, sorry for the late reply. Yeah, I think I'll be a bit busy to run games.
-
In my GM PM, but yes :P. I'll never not freak out about rolling elim :P.
-
shhh no :P. you'll only be right once in twenty games because that's how rarely I roll as elim :P.
-
muahahahaha Good game village! There were definitely times where y'all had me worried you'd catch up to us. Mat, thanks for running the game!
-
Alright, here are my reads : SeaDragonet - Not likely to be elim because for earlier comment about not voting the entire game [and sorta following through, they voted in D2 but it was kinda meaningless]. If Steel is elim, unlikely to be e/e with them because of apathy towards Steel vote last cycle. Also, kinda irrelevant to discussion because we're not voting out someone who's going to be inactive-killed anyway. However, they would be a good HA candidate if we believe the absence of vote cancel is due to inactivity and not deliberate. I do believe that it is deliberate and, meta-speaking here, Mat might not make a new player as the head elim. Mage - Voted in two consecutive cycles for Venture. Did not mention any prior suspicion [or read, actually] about Araris prior to the vote. Araris - Endgame Araris is always difficult for me to read because I always tend to suspect Araris in the earlier stages of the game and always village read Araris if he makes it to the endgame. So wanting to village read, but couple of things that's ticking me off is the 'sitting back this cycle' thing. I mean, I do get the feeling of being frustrated at the other villagers for the lack of discussion, but at the same time I've seen elims lead the vote trains for cycles and then saying they'll sit back when there's heat on them. Devotary - Don't remember much of Devo tbh, the one thing I found suspicious was how far the Venture train was further from the Devo train. Steel - Last cycle's vote was very similar to first cycle's vote. Danex - Venture and TUO - Steel both at 3 - 2 votes and the absence of vote cancel in both cycles. My guess is that elims wanted to tie up Steel for the ML this cycle because it's likely we're at lylo. Since Venture ended up village, I'm leaning towards Steel being village as well. Also, chances of Steel being elim is too less because this late in the game there's no point in risking a vote shift, especially since there was evidence of vote shift in the previous cycle. Tani - Again, I've got nothing, but still kinda gut reading them village. Voting for Mage. Devotary > Araris >= SeaDragonet > Steel > Tani - Willingness to shift to others in the decreasing order.
-
What does this mean, you're suspecting Mage because of your suspicion on TUO? Also, I'm shifting to TUO, vote on him didn't pick up last cycle and it looks like it's not gonna pick up this cycle too, so I'm sensing resistance. [Steel]
-
It was 2-2 when I went to sleep but that was from the post count in Venture's post which I just realised, is missing your vote. But basically yeah, I thought it was 2-2 and felt the need to preserve myself. With regards to TUO, yeah I still suspect them, preferred their vote to Venture's last cycle. I think for TUO to propose 2-3 players within the 6 players who voted D1, it doesn't make much sense, especially since it was V-V so the elims don't feel the need to involve themselves as well as don't feel the need to go outside their usual voting patterns for D1. And TUO himself did admit that not voting D1 is their usual play so it fits their pattern :P. Thinking about it, I feel I suspect TUO more than Steel, all I have is gut feeling about similarity to another elim game play by Steel. I'll keep my vote for now so it remains diverse. Also, starting to feel a tiny bit sus about Mage only because they voted for Venture in consecutive cycles. So makes me slightly uneasy voting for Steel with them.
-
Hmm? I really did not want to vote for Venture but I didn't really have a choice. My choice would have been TUO or Steel. Not feeling as good as I did about Araris last cycle, especially considering if he's village, the entire Danex train is village as well. I'll start with Steel for reasonings given in last cycle.
-
Yeah, was about to type a response but basically what Araris said + we will need you to vote at least later in the game if you're village because if villagers not voting basically means elims get the thread control and majority vote earlier and their won becomes inevitable. I'm going to sleep so I want to vote in self preservation here and it looks like there's no other alternative to Venture at this point. 90% sure of villager is still not as good as 100% self-certainty. Ed Venture
-
This statement is probably from a village mindset because I can't see an elim team recommend a new elim player to say this because now they're trapped and cannot vote in the future to save their teammate and if they do, it will likely be perceived as such and they'll be sussed. Huh, not sure what you misunderstood from this because - Here's my clear thought process, if you are an elim then when you became an option, your teammates would have either - tried to open up new vote options or tried to pile on to Dannex keeping the vote away from you. Since, either of those did not happen, it's not likely you are elim. Third point is you are 3-2 with Dannex, so if you are an elim, all it would have taken was one vote shift to make it 3-2 towards you and elims would have tried to cancelled a vote on you to negate that possibility. So how is it that all these stuff points towards evil!you? Misregarding the fact that an elim is questioning why I'm defending him, because you look like you're going to get eliminated and me defending an elim would just make me look bad for the next cycle, so an elim go along with it rather than question it? Though all this assumes ideal elim and elim team behavior it was enough for me not to vote for you this cycle. I gave proof here that I genuinely did not see posts from page 2 : Not sure what more could I do to prove that I did not see them. I reached the end of the page, failed to notice the [2] next to the [1] and started typing up my thoughts. I mentioned my suspicion here - Also, not feeling good about Steel's vote tbh. He feels similar to that game in which he was replaced Connie. Prior to that, I believed he was better at elim game to play dormant, but in that game he played the less-active elim game well. Would be willing to go here too.
-
Danex really kept up his sword vote smh, he didn't even change his vote in self-preservation. I think elims were last cycle's vote quite comfortable with last cycle's vote because a. vote did not diversify much b. no effort was made to push Danex farther from Venture and c. the lack of vote cancel from elim HA because all it would have taken was the vote shift to get Venture killed. So, circumstantially, I'm reading Venture as village. There are only few of us active, so I'm finding it difficult to gauge motives. Mainly no other strong village reads other than Venture, slightly feel good in the gut about Araris, and do not feel good about TUO and Tani. Active and felt comfortable not to vote, stuff from C1 I was willing to overlook for C1 and seeking confirmation about existence of suspicion.
-
For further proof, I spoke about Orlok ignoring village vote manipulation which was brought up by TUO and replied to by Orlok in page 2, so there wouldn't have been any need for me to bring up an issue already closed. Also, all my quotes from the post would only be from page 1. My question is why are you making this point?? is this not the most blatant elim tell you've ever read? About this - this is what I meant when I said Venture's wordings sound performative. While it's not 'the most blatant elim tell', it does stand out. Edit: Yeah, just go here and click on the Elim Doc link.
