I don't like it. Just as I don't like the same type of statements from MP, Timmer, or Rox. These are all experienced players too, which I find even more concerning. However, I will say that I did not even recall that comment from TH when I made my point. The ones I have found most baffling are the people who have seemed intent on continuing to believe this or who started the belief this was the way the game is set up later in the game. Because I am not the first person to point this fact out. I would need to look back at the context of that one quote you pulled to say if I trust him more than the other people perpetuating this misconception or less to determine if he would be the person I would want to put my vote on. I find your post directed at me to be odd as TH obviously did. It looked like you wanted someone else to build a case for you.DharmaHelper wrote:Not a bad place to put your vote. What do you think of this post from TH?Spacedaisy wrote:Ok people this is clearly not a LMS game. Allow me to demonstrate...
From the hosts posts:
"Win Conditions
Civvie group 1 needs to defeat baddie group 1 and 2
Civvie group 2 needs to defeat baddie group 1 and 2
Baddie group 1 needs to defeat civvie group 1 and baddie group 2
Baddie group 2 needs to defeat civvie group 2 and baddie group 1"
So Civvie group 1 can win with Civvie group 2, and they both share the same enemies. In fact their win cons are exactly the same which makes them one standard civ team in every sense of the word. The only difference is only ones of the baddie teams is out to kill them.
Additionally, they set the teams up like a traditional civ team, meaning the recruiters for the civ team get limited amount of btsc, see the below quite from the hosts posts...
"If someone gets recruited, do they gain BTSC with the Leader?
Some Civvies get BTSC with the Leader, but it is a very limited number because too much Civvie BTSC would ruin the game. Baddies always get BTSC with their recruits.."
I am rethinking my bwt vote at the moment, leaning towards one of these people who keep billing this as a no civ game when it has been made clear by the hosts in multiple ways that there are civ aligned recruiters.Turnip Head wrote:All the recruiters are equally naughty. What makes half of them more civvie than the others, other than that's what we're told to call them? They all seem nearly equal in power.
Rico, I am well aware of the fact a large number of us are neutral, and the teams build progressively, but it doesn't change the fact that this IS a civ vs bad set up. Do you see the danger in that mind set being accepted as true? It is an easy mind set for baddies to hide in.
Agreed. However I think the more pertinent question had already been asked. Was it actually random or was it a minor suspicion. His vote reasoning is unclear.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I can't say much at work, but one point I want to make is this: the importance of a lynch extends beyond just the alignment of the victim. Randomization ensures that a vote is not readable whatsoever and that it cannot progress the game.