Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
Aww, dangit! I was so close... oh well, that was a good first terrorist run for me...
All I have to say is, you're all dead.
jrsh92 is apparently unfamiliar with both the one post per death and not influencing the game rules.
It seems I have a choice here. As the only person I know to be innocent, I'm not going to wait for both of you to vote for me, I'm going to get my vote in early and hope to convince the remaining player who doesn't get my vote the same. Actually, since neither one of you has voted the last 2 or 3 rounds, as far as I can tell I'm the only player in this game.
I'm going to go with darth_vader, simply because of his first round vote against Rebelious, the only person we know is guilty. It is a classic strategy for evil players to create evidence that they are not together. Eugene Chin, I know, usually prefers to simply snipe at his cohort, not actually vote for them. I see no evidence of that behavior, and if we are forced to believe Eugene Chin is evil, Rebelious made no attempt at disconnecting himself from him. Therefore, I must conclude darth_vader is evil, and I hope Eugene Chin comes along to vote with me.
RJC Ultra: any chance you could just kill both of them for inactivity and give the innocents a win right now?
I still think you're faking it.
Again, seems JacaByte doesn't know the rules either about death posts.
sigh I guess I'm the only vote. You people should've listened to me and voted out the lurkers early on. We would have already killed the other terrorist and probably already won.
mrxak , it's time to end this. I believe you ate are the terrorist, and this is why: (EDIT) I'm accusing him of terrorism, not cannibalism.
jrsh92's night kill: Killing jrsh92 in the first round was a safe bet for you, as he'd wound up voting against you and alongside you in the same round; what could be read into that?
And none of that would be immediately visible from a glance at the end-of-round tallies, as you switched from SoItBegins to Shlimazel right at the end.
This tendency to switch their vote away from a killing bandwagon to try and mask their involvement is something else terrorists do.
kickme's night kill: With the potential of a face-off with JacaByte looming, killing kickme was clever of you. Because it seemed so obvious that it was an attempt to frame you, people ignored the possibility that you'd done it anyway, just to throw them off.
And since it was so obvious you were being set up, people started looking for who might be setting you up, and looked towards JacaByte. A clever way of taking two problems, and turning them against each other, while sneaking crap past all of us.
First Round Voting: In the first round, you went to the trouble of building up attention on SoItBegins. And, over what? That people were making assumptions?
Then, when SIB tried to roll back the votes against the two of you, you switched from SIB to jrsh92.
jrsh92, who was voting against you.
jrsh92, who has a history of throwing his vote in whatever direction he believes can save himself.
So, jrsh92 switched to SoItBegins to save himself. Once it was clear that SIB had a marginal lead, and as the round end drew near, you switched from jrsh92 to Shlimazel, leaving any possible passers-by who might have noticed no option for saving him.
Last Round's Voting: What really should have tipped everybody off was your behavior last round. You tried to vote darth_vader at first, but when it looked like that might cause a tie, you switched to JacaByte since you 'hate ties.'
What would a tie really have done though? Give the terrorists a "Free Kill"? The numbers just don't agree with that, mrxak.
With six players, and two terrorists, they'd only need one more innocent lynched to win.
But a tie? A tie would have forced the game into one final round, and with a smaller pool of potential terrorists.
A tie may have given the terrorists one "Free Kill," but an innocent lynched would have given them the Game. There's no rational justification for you to have abhorred a tie in that case.
Unless you were a terrorist.
And when JacaByte tried to argue against voting for him, you responded that his vote for you 'no choice.'
Despite the fact that you voted for himFirst.
Causality would like to have a little chat with you.
You could have gone after whoever you wanted, as JacaByte pointed out. But instead, you chose whatever was expedient towards killing an innocent, and winning the game for the terrorists.
Casualties: Anyone who has opposed you has wound up dying. Frankly, Everyone who has died, except for orca, had voted against you at some point.
The last time I saw a pattern of death this clear was in Game 25. You know the one.
Hell, Templar98921 even said he'd thought you had links to Rebelious, before we knew who was evil.
It's striking that you've put so much effort into going after lurkers, and yet that Rebelious was not one such a target.
Conclusion: Everything you have done in this game has been to the detriment of the innocents. The only reason we're in this final round is because orcaloverbri9 was right about Rebelious. Were it not for him, the terrorists would have won this game; not because of JacaByte or lurkers, as you would have us believe, but because of you.
With classes starting for many of us, this probably wasn't the best time of the year for a game, hence the participation problems. But since this round is ending on a weekend, I strongly hope darth_vader will show up, and be your unmaking.
Vote Tally: darth_vader: (1) mrxak
mrxak: (1) Eugene Chin
No Vote: (1) darth_vader
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 05 September 2008 - 10:12 AM
A tie is surely going to doom the innocents. We got about an hour maybe before this thing ends. I urge you to reconsider your vote. If you are innocent, and have any doubt whatsoever, please vote for darth_vader. darth_vader's not showing up, so if you're innocent you're dooming us, and if I'm guilty you lost anyway. If darth_vader is the guilty party, as I'm pretty sure he is, you should change your vote to him. That is the only way the innocents can win this game if you are innocent.
You're probably guilty anyway :(. Figures, you're smart enough to know your vote is going to make the bad guys win.
Your fancy list of evidence is interesting. I'll be happy to go point-by-point about why you're wrong when this is all over.
@mrxak, on Sep 5 2008, 05:14 PM, said in GTW Game 30:
We got about an hour maybe before this thing ends.
You mean 24, right? This round ends tomorrow.
Oh does it? I keep losing track of time, heh.
Well, I guess the innocents lose.
Round 4 is over. Stand by.
darth_vader - Eugene Chin - mrxak - tied mrxak - darth_vader - tied
_Once again, RJC Ultra enters the conference room. "Guards, kill mrxak at once and nuke his country," he orders his guards as he sees the vote tally. "It's about time to end this madness, right?" "What the hell are you talking about?" mrxak asks. "It's a tie, isn't it? I swear I'm innocent! Why won't you kill darth_vader instead? I'm sure he's evil!" "Don't worry," RJC Ultra says, "I would have killed darth_vader also, but his country is already nuked by the terrorists. And yes, I'm a terrorist too, so you can stop wandering about what's going on. It won't make a difference anyway, since nothing can stop us now. Soon, this world wiil be utterly destroyed! Hah!" RJC Ultra grabs a rifle from behind the door and kills mrxak and darth_vader by himself. "Sweet!"Eugene Chin exclaims. "Let's kill everyone else on this planet!" _
Game over. Eugene Chin, being the last terrorist, wins.
I must apologize for not following the rules of game 29 as I said I would. Eugene Chin and darth_vader both failed to vote two rounds in a row, but I didn't remove them because it would immediately end the game in an innocent(mrxak) victory. Sorry for that.
This post has been edited by RJC Ultra : 06 September 2008 - 11:30 AM
@rjc-ultra, on Sep 6 2008, 12:28 PM, said in GTW Game 30:
And yet a rule against inactivity deserves a more explicit mention than "same rules as last game." It's much too easy to miss that way; I thought you weren't doing it, or I'd have been (or at least appeared ) more active.
This post has been edited by Eugene Chin : 06 September 2008 - 11:41 AM
Darn, that was not a good game, in my opinion. We needed to have more active participation. Even once a day would be satisfactory.
The interesting part of all this is that I had set my first investigation target to be Eugene-- if I had been, you know, 'left alive' for a round or two, things might have gone a bit differently.
Instead, SIB, you used your death post to accuse me. And then others did as well later on. So many wasted rounds because people went after me instead of targeting the dead weight that surely led to the terrorist win.
....... .......
Dead weight?! I thought you actually were a terrorist! You certainly acted badly erratically enough for Eugene Chin to make a righteous harangue at you (that would have convinced me, had I been alive at the time)-- and that was only the icing on the cake! Killing me by manipulating the vote? Showing no care for anyone but yourself? Were you trying to screw the game over, or did you just do it by accident?!
I'm going to agree with SIB here, even if I'm guilty of driving the game into the dirt as well.
@soitbegins, on Sep 6 2008, 08:55 PM, said in GTW Game 30:
First of all, it doesn't matter what you believe, you should never attempt to influence the game after you have died.
Secondly, as promised, my rebuttal to Eugene Chin...
@eugene-chin, on Sep 5 2008, 11:10 AM, said in GTW Game 30:
I voted against jrsh92 purely as insurance against a SoItBegins backstab. I switched from SIB to jrsh92 because if SIB didn't change his vote, it would at least maintain a tie. JacaByte then threw a wrench into the works by voting for SIB, and SIB changed to jrsh92 to save himself and then jrsh92 changed to SIB to save himself. By then it was safe to vote my true conscience, I did so. I voted Shlimazel because he was lurking. I have nothing to to be ashamed of in that vote since the last terrorist by the end of the last round was obviously among the lurkers. Shlimazel could have easily been one of them as that was a strategy clearly in use by the terrorists.
Apparently there's a new fallacy in the game. It used to be people that voted in bandwagons were considered terrorists, now it's the people who change their votes away from bandwagons that are considered terrorists. I hope this fallacy is debunked soon if it's not already.
I might also point out that prophile does not approve of reading into nightkills.
Quote
Doublethink does not help anything. As both a host and as a past terrorist, I know terrorists often kill people completely at random. Again, as both, I know it's often the terrorists that try to point out a possible reasoning behind a nightkill, not the innocents. Usually the more convoluted it is, as it is in your case here, the more likely the person making the argument is the bad guy.
I believed I had to make a statement after people were making assumptions on role assignments based on previous games, a major fallacy. I planned to change my vote quickly, but the situation forced on me by other people kept me from changing my vote sooner, and forced me to do it in a roundabout way. We've been over this.
I don't know about jrsh92's history of throwing his vote in whichever direction he believes he can save himself, but in any case I wasn't going to vote against him unless I had to. You can blame the misguided people like JacaByte who piled on SoItBegins late in the round, but don't blame me for not leaving SoItBegins an out. It's not my responsibility to save anybody, especially when I have no reason to believe they are innocent (no reason to believe they were guilty either). I did not believe jrsh92 was guilty, so I changed my vote when it was safe to somebody I believed was guilty. As I said, we've been over this.
But a tie? A tie would have forced the game into one final round, and with a smaller pool of potential terrorists. A tie may have given the terrorists one "Free Kill," but an innocent lynched would have given them the Game. There's no rational justification for you to have abhorred a tie in that case.
I hate ties because yes, they give the terrorists a free kill. The numbers agree with me, actually. Chance of killing a terrorist at random when there are 2 in a group of 6 = 1/3. Chance of killing a terrorist at random when there are 2 in a group of 6 and you don't kill anybody = 0.
An extra round would not have mattered. People were all pretty clearly either lurking or had forgotten there was a game on. Terrorists would have killed another one of us, we'd have no shot at killing one of them, and then the next rounds would just be a bunch of empty folks. Better to take a chance while there were active people still left.
I had no choice because if I changed my vote, it would be a tie and ties are bad. We've been over this countless times in countless games. Had JacaByte voted for anyone else, I'd be free to change my vote for that person, and JacaByte would not have died. JacaByte, you, and everyone else knows that I won't vote in a situation causing a tie unless there's reasonable expectation somebody else will break it. When you've got a situation with only 3 people voting, the options are very limited. People can only change their votes in specific orders. It was JacaByte's or orcaloverbri9's turn to change, but they didn't so I could not. If more people had participated in the game, things would have been much looser.
Just because everyone has voted against me, and many of them died, does not make me the one who killed them. Another explanation is that SIB's and other people's accusations against me in their death posts, combined with a general expectation for me to be evil since I've been evil so many times, has led to people thinking I'm evil and voting for me. Separate and unrelated, we've gotten down to the last three people. Perhaps it's a cascading frame-job, with more people thinking I'm guilty as people who thought I was guilty die. Perhaps it's just coincidence. Either way you're reading into nightkills, and prophile does not approve.
Conclusion: Everything you have done in this game has been to the detriment of the innocents. The only reason we're in this final round is because orcaloverbri9 was right about Rebelious. Were it not for him, the terrorists would have won this game; not because of JacaByte or lurkers, as you would have us believe, but because of you. With classes starting for many of us, this probably wasn't the best time of the year for a game, hence the participation problems. But since this round is ending on a weekend, I strongly hope darth_vader will show up, and be your unmaking.
I've done plenty of things in this game. Some may be argued as being to the detriment of innocents, others are certainly not. Don't blame me if people ignored me when I was right. The real guilty parties in this game are the people who never participated in the game when it mattered.
Despite the loss for the innocents, I'm pleased to say I was the last innocent standing. Any game when I die to something I can't avoid, it's a win. I only really feel bad about getting voted out when I'm innocent. Hopefully next game I'm innocent in, we'll have enough participation to give us a chance at winning, though. And maybe those of you who thought I was guilty for basically no reason at all will go a little easier on me, eh?
And yeah, as promised I blame JacaByte for the loss. He made the game about me instead of about the people who were lurking and acting suspiciously. I still have no idea why he was so against me.
Against you? Against you?!? I'm against anybody who plays the same when they're innocent as when they're a terrorist; they're far too dangerous to keep around.
Besides that, I have no idea why you're so against me!
Have at thee!