@MP, remember that game where I told you I would explain why i always think you are bad these days, but it just never happened? Remind me again after this game. I know exactly what Canuck means~ you come across as more hyperbole than anything sometimes. Back in the day, that was bad MP. But these days, that is always MP. You
didn't used to do this all the time. This is part of why you get lynched early alot these days, imo. You might want to throttle back on the drama words just a tiny bit. When you use those words & phrases, I visualize a sock dressed like Snidely Whiplash; just a bit over the top. Like that time you said, "How Dare You?" to me in the context of an internet Mafia game; overkill much? *Sees a Sock Twirling its' Mustache*
Not saying I suspect you here for that. I don't have much of an opinion yet.
Metalmarsh89 wrote:S~V~S wrote:thellama73 wrote:You really wouldn't vote for someone you thought was bad because they are new, SVS? I find that very strange.
Thats the old school way. You don't vote for nubs on Day One. They never come back if you do, lol. And being right in one game is trumped by getting a new cultist...um, player in the long term. Yeah. Plus it's just polite. It's one of those things like not voting for the silenced or insanified.
Then perhaps you should talk to Mongoose and tell her not to make consecutive Day 1's.
He got his grace day. I see an at least semi hot seat in his near future as far as Llama is concerned.
FZ. wrote:SVS, you asked why I had a problem with role analysis. I don't. I have a problem with LC's one. Period. Here it is again (below).
Give me one comment which made you actually think about things and somehow progressed the game. There is not one. And again, had I not said a thing, no one would have said a thing. Everyone just ignored that post because it basically said nothing. Now, if you're all going to tell me that his role analyses are never helpful, I might back off, but to me, the fact that it is not helpful combined with the fact he chose to focus on all the people who might turn out to be harder to lynch because they have BTSC or something like that and not on any role that is actually worth talking about, that comes very close to a baddie behaviour. And LC. I saw that you said you're done talking about it. I am only trying to get to the bottom of this. I'm sorry if it's pissing you off.
I think becasue at KSite you don't post roles, you are misconstruing the point of this.
I can't imagine what you would make of aapje~ he deconstructs all the roles in thread and asks a trillion questions on each in thread. Would it surprise you that some people don't actually read the roles? But in addition, and this is a salient point here, LC is a big fan of thread collaboration & planning. With all the civ BTS in this game, if we can do some planning in the open, it helps us to stay on track and not attack each other. Hopefully the people who could be helped by it did not ignore it.
You asked for comments I found helpful. Well, there are these:
Long Con wrote:
George Cukor wrote:American Director of Classic Comedies. Can target a player to reference a romantic comedy in each post they make.
Hilarious. Total window-dressing role, it doesn't affect the game too much. Perhaps we could increase this role's value to the Civs by having George target people he suspects.
Darren Aronofsky Another auteur who can find BTSC with David Lean using math, a common theme in his films.
Interesting. This role could probably benefit from some creative ways to use math, another BTSC Civ pair would be very useful.
Hopefully George caught the suggestion that he should choose his target based on suspicion, not on lulz. Some people like to target people with powers like his for max comic effect (I know I do
). But if George targets those he suspects, then he will be telling everyone whom he suspects. If George is not ready to make a case, or is a crap case maker, this signals the GOOD case makers to maybe take a look at the target. It also gives us the opinions of a known civ, instead of an in thread case from someone we may not trust.
As for Darren, I am hoping that those who are good at the maths can make some suggestions, or ask the host some questions that might help Darren use his powers in a creative way; this is a very vague role description. It does not say "Secrets" and I presume that Darren got some clarification. But if you don't ask the right questions, you may not get the right answers. Some good in thread speculation here will not hurt anyone, and might help Darren. It was a good suggestion, especially since the more civ BTS the better.
His question re Ingmar Bergman was spot on as well:
Long Con wrote:
Ingmar Bergman Evocative Swedish film director who often had religion as a theme in his films. May grant amnesty to a player 3x, which will result in his/her removal from the lynch that day.
Is this something that gets used the night before? Or can Ingmar remove someone from the poll mid-day?
I don't know about you, but were I Ingmar, I might not have thought to ask the host this question. Maybe after reading this, Ingmar did.
I know I had a question to ask the host about my own role, and I am someone who tends to look for loopholes to maximize my powers. It is always a good idea to keep an eye on LC, when I play with him, I never take that eye off of him, lol. I have played with LC for years & years, and I seldom trust him, he thinks very differently than I do.
He's an incredibly evil baddie when he's bad, but he's an incredibly helpful civ when he's not. Not seeing the evil at this point.
Day 1.0, for instance, he seemed fairly sure you were bad, now it seems not so much.
It has that intense "lets sit in a circle and stare at each other" feel that endgames have. 
rep. 
) a better strategy if you call it "Baddie Hunting"? Not everyone plays that way, I don't play that way. I watch and I try to draw people out if I suspect them, and see if they make a mistake. Sometimes i don't even do them the courtest of mentioning them, as BR did. 
meanie Llama