Jump to content

TheIrishman

Forum Game Masters
  • Posts

    2,439
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9
  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

Everything posted by TheIrishman

  1. My guess is that if scum can't nightkill until 60%, perhaps they can plant evidence on others without them knowing.
  2. Give it your best shot :b More participation is better.
  3. Nope, I'm innocent, I just said it because I like everyone to be aware of all possibilities rather than be confined in their own self imposed rules. Think about it though, if a person was suspicious and that meant the same thing as being scum, then we'd automatically know to lynch them as soon as we could. It would be almost pointless for there to be innocent, suspicious, and guilty statuses if suspicious meant pretty much the same thing as guilty. And based on the rules, this game seems more focused on building the evidence towards figuring out the events rather than killing scum ASAP.
  4. That is a possibility. But I don't agree with the conversion of players (the way you worded it initially made it sound more cult-y). And I don't think we'll come up with a guilty member, no matter their alignment, until we get more evidence, either through investigations or evidence submitted directly to the vault. Because, like Orange said, that'd be too easy. Here's what I'd take from your hypothesis. There could be one 100% guilty player right now, the one who shot the archduke, plus 1 or 2 suspicious or innocent players who are also warmongers, but until they do something or we uncover the right evidence, they'll stay as they are in status. Although I do want to clarify that there might be some suspicious players who are Town, either through false evidence or that might be their starting status.
  5. I'm confused by the whole "requiring them to be warmongers" part. They would either start as warmongers or town. There should be at most 3 scum in this game and at least 2, imo. And I also believe the statuses can be changed through evidence. Both true and false evidence, since one of our goals is to place the evidence in the correct box. Meaning their has to be falsified evidence and it could potentially mislead us to believe a Warmonger to be innocent or a Town member to be Scum.
  6. So from that I gather Nodlied is basing our current status - Innocent, Suspicious, and Guilty - by a standard of our actual in-game actions or based on how they are perceived. I think he's more likely to base them in the first one though, since the latter is too subjective. So if either scum or a vigilante kills someone, they could become suspicious, or if we have a protector, that protects a guilty player, they could become suspicious. Those are my thoughts at least. And no, Jeod, "alignments are set in stone."
  7. I accidentally looked at the first example post instead of the actual post >.> My bad. The example says 10% evidence.
  8. Huh, due to that logic, I'd probably nominate FRAYDO. He seems to always die before he can do anything (praise be to RNGesus) and I've never seen him act scummy before. You say that no evidence exists, but how do you know that? The evidence meter is already at 10%, so there could be evidence in there initially.
  9. I think I'll actually choose Cat5 here. 2 reasons. I vaguely (almost entirely indistinct) feel bad for Jeod. But more importantly, the sooner we know we can trust Cat5, the sooner he can help us whole-heartedly. And I think it'll be more helpful than finding whether or not Jeod is trolling us, but I think we should investigate him D2. ##Investigate Category 5
  10. That doesn't mean anything, since he said he's not following the actual events, so anybody can be scum. Even people who are Austro-Hungarian are suspects. It'd be too easy to target people who're Yugoslavian.
  11. Jeod being Jeod is slowly skewing my view to always suspect him >.> (granted he was great town in stein's gate). Not sure if I'd rather investigate Jeod, the best scum player, or Cat5, the best town player first.
  12. I'm confused, where was this posted before? And the silo that Kosygin helped sabotage wasn't destroyed??? I watched the endgame video and It was the missile itself that misfired into a rather small explosion (impact alone won't detonate a nuke, and if the nuke went off in the base, everyone would be dead) >.> So it should still exist.
  13. True, we all accomplished our goals to at least some extent, but I find solace in the fact that although your victory was the most complete, your freedom was still taken away.
  14. That reminds me, did you even really win? You're still our prisoner >.>
  15. Took me over an hour to read the scum doc >.> fun stuff, I felt only compliments towards me from scum :b and I'm glad they didn't lynch me when they had the chance. Forgot that I was the first to put forward artillery instead of a TP. It was a pretty good game, I'll try to work off your advice, Vert.
  16. Um, steins;gate is my example. Hidden rules allowed members to break into the lab and use it even after I kicked out everyone. And I thought Scum's goal was to destroy the silos, not disable them? Even if it was to disable them, it wasn't their main goal which was to equal or outnumber town, right? Maybe I'm wrong. Edit: I misread that, I thought you were asking for an example where they were given another chance.
  17. It was a failsafe since you were an lynchproof building that could kill. Otherwise it'd be impossible to get rid of you once all shots were fired.
  18. Yep, I won't reveal too much, but have fun trying to kill the rest of us with me alive.
  19. Ugh, I should've increased my odds at successfully shooting when I made my role.
×
×
  • Create New...