Games [Danubian Federation Victory] Ausgleich '37

[Jeod]

1 minute ago, Killing_You said:

I saw that your action was ##Protect, and that you didn't have any items at the time.

Correct. I realized that with my selfish doctor actions I've been a bit scummy. I wanted to ease any possible fears and stop a hypothetical train before it could begin, especially if scum started to get scared.

Just now, OrangeP47 said:

N1 I checked your vote, N2 I checked Retal's vote, N3 I checked Cat 5's vote (this is where the notification of SSQ was) N4 I double voted, N5 (last night) I checked Irish's actions. (Today is Day 6, thread title is incorrect)

I see, so you say you used it on N4...and I also see your post where you soft claimed it.

[Jeod]

@TheIrishman, if you haven't yet, can you explain your actions taken with your gun?

[Retaliation]

3 minutes ago, Shade939 said:

And yet somehow I think you've already lost the game.

My offer yesterday still stands you know. Jeod's threat merely delayed it a day.

[Sunflower]

31 minutes ago, Jeod said:

It's my win condition after all. Even if it wouldn't have much effect, it would have been a simple recipe for discussion the following day had it won. Discobvering who was able to vote vs. who was busy with other actions would likely have led us straight to scum.

But you said your objective was reform. The only reason I announced I was changing to soft status quo was because I thought that was what you wanted. 

[Jeod]

You said it has special requirements to fire and that it isn't a killing weapon. So, what are your requirements?

[Jeod]

Just now, Sunflower said:

But you said your objective was reform. The only reason I announced I was changing to soft status quo was because I thought that was what you wanted. 

It is reform. But for the greater good, I chose to set that objective aside. It's secondary after all, and none of us can fulfill our primaries with a killing threat.

[Shade939]

3 minutes ago, Jeod said:

You said it has special requirements to fire and that it isn't a killing weapon. So, what are your requirements?

He only said the first part, he still claimed it's a killing weapon though.

[Sunflower]

17 minutes ago, OrangeP47 said:

N1 I checked your vote, N2 I checked Retal's vote, N3 I checked Cat 5's vote (this is where the notification of SSQ was) N4 I double voted, N5 (last night) I checked Irish's actions. (Today is Day 6, thread title is incorrect)

Wait, you're saying you thought you needed to double vote the night I was in jail? Why? With Retal coming out of jail and claiming pluralism, it should have been an easy win for pluralism that night.

[TheIrishman]

The player that I shoot must've been confirmed as suspicious through an investigation. So I can't kill orange, cat5, Shade or myself. If I hit a friendly player (status quo or pluralism) then stability drastically drops and I become hostile.

[OrangeP47]

Just now, Sunflower said:

Wait, you're saying you thought you needed to double vote the night I was in jail? Why? With Retal coming out of jail and claiming pluralism, it should have been an easy win for pluralism that night.

I still wasn't sure what some people were, but a lot of them have now claimed they just don't vote or can't vote :P  I was assuming pluralism was smaller than it was

[Shade939]

I do have to ask though, what item was more likely to start out in the vault?

A gun or a medkit? And which one would a player be more likely to start out with in their inventory?

[Sunflower]

14 minutes ago, Jeod said:

It is reform. But for the greater good, I chose to set that objective aside. It's secondary after all, and none of us can fulfill our primaries with a killing threat.

What greater good? I don't understand.

[Jeod]

1 minute ago, Shade939 said:

I do have to ask though, what item was more likely to start out in the vault?

A gun or a medkit? And which one would a player be more likely to start out with in their inventory?

Good question.

[Retaliation]

Other than Irish telling us he has a medkit, do we have any other indications that he has one?

[Shade939]

4 minutes ago, Retaliation said:

Other than Irish telling us he has a medkit, do we have any other indications that he has one?

@Killing_You should have seen it in his inventory I think?

[Retaliation]

IIRC KY copped him night 1, the same time he would have picked it up.

KY also saw the gun though, so my unstated took the gun from the vault theory is bunk.

[Shade939]

1 minute ago, Retaliation said:

IIRC KY copped him night 1, the same time he would have picked it up.

KY also saw the gun though, so my unstated took the gun from the vault theory is bunk.

Actually, since you don't get items from the vault until the following morning.

[Jeod]

My current running theory is that we won't find scum by just investigating. What if Snipe had never been killed? Why do we think he would have been hostile? I think we've been ignoring the evidence base mechanic for too long.

[Retaliation]

That was my point, although I butchered the logic. KY wouldn't have seen Irish pick up the medkit.

[OrangeP47]

Just now, Jeod said:

My current running theory is that we won't find scum by just investigating. What if Snipe had never been killed? Why do we think he would have been hostile? I think we've been ignoring the evidence base mechanic for too long.

If Irish isn't hostile I could theoretically push his case tonight and make him hostile.  Maybe.  I'm not entirely sure.

[Jeod]

2 minutes ago, OrangeP47 said:

If Irish isn't hostile I could theoretically push his case tonight and make him hostile.  Maybe.  I'm not entirely sure.

I take it you haven't been confident enough to push any case? Another wonder to add to the pile, if the evidence base is crucial to our win, then why haven't you mentioned it more?

[Retaliation]

Something we haven't discussed at all is how we're going to handle the gun in the vault.

[Jeod]

Just now, Retaliation said:

Something we haven't discussed at all is how we're going to handle the gun in the vault.

We don't even know yet if we're going to investigate Irish.

[OrangeP47]

Just now, Jeod said:

I take it you haven't been confident enough to push any case? Another wonder to add to the pile, if the evidence base is crucial to our win, then why haven't you mentioned it more?

There's been nothing TO push.  The way things are worded... frame is literally "frame <player> <for what>"  What's that even supposed to mean? I was hoping as we investigated people actions would show up in the log or something, but it now appears that they have to be generated by actually searching.  I was content to let FRAYDO do that but it appears that now I have to.

[OrangeP47]

But my point being, seeing ##kill used WILL show up in the log, so I take it that's a valid action to push or frame.

[Shade939]

2 minutes ago, Jeod said:

We don't even know yet if we're going to investigate Irish.

We have to investigate Irish just to see if he comes up as hostile or not.

I figure it should be rather obvious if Irish was set up though...

[Jeod]

That doesn't make any sense. Why would there be an itemized key to the evidence base if the mechanic could only work by using a search action unique to your role?

[OrangeP47]

1 minute ago, Jeod said:

That doesn't make any sense. Why would there be an itemized key to the evidence base if the mechanic could only work by using a search action unique to your role?

The searches are part of the evidence base.

[Sunflower]

I can't make heads or tails of Jeod's votes this game. First he votes radical status quo even though he says his objective his soft status quo. Then he tries to make a deal so he can vote soft pluralist. I switch to radical status quo to make a gambit to try to unite the radicals and status quoers to save the team and because he voted for it the first day, I thought maybe he would switch back. In the end, he said he abstained. Then I switch to soft status quo because I thought that was what he wanted now... I mean it's his claimed objective after all, and he goes back to radical status quo ...because reasons. He is being the most frustrating teammate ever, so much that it makes me wonder if he really is my teammate at all.

[Jeod]

1 minute ago, OrangeP47 said:

The searches are part of the evidence base.

So, is your role-specific ability just the double vote?

Just now, Sunflower said:

I can't make heads or tails of Jeod's votes this game. First he votes radical status quo even though he says his objective his soft status quo. Then he tries to make a deal so he can vote soft pluralist. I switch to radical status quo to make a gambit to try to unite the radicals and status quoers to save the team and because he voted for it the first day, I thought maybe he would switch back. In the end, he said he abstained. Then I switch to soft status quo because I thought that was what he wanted now... I mean it's his claimed objective after all, and he goes back to radical status quo ...because reasons. He is being the most frustrating teammate ever, so much that it makes me wonder if he really is my teammate at all.

We can't expect things to be peachy if we still have syndies running around. I've given a proper, logical reason for each of my votes. As for being your teammate, you want civil war and I want reform. But they are tertiary objectives, with our primary goals being status quo winning in the end.