Normal Game Thread Full Metal Panic!: Fighting Boy Meets Girl Mafia

There was a chance one wouldnt have occurred
I guess lucky you!!!

But i did want to know what a penalty could be sigh

 

@Rotaretilbo

innocent

 

Or...
...
...
maybe
...
...
just
...
...
maybe
...
I'm the very thing I claimed in my first post.

 

Vote crispickle

I stay well with this lynch tbh. Crimson is fishy and all but i actually can remember of a miller like character so that's also why i backed down on him last dp.

Still will keep an eye on him, but flavour wise a milller character is possible.

Glob i guess with last night write ups goes towards town for now.

I don't like the whole story behind prada role so i am gonna keep an eye on him. Balance wise his role wounds way too strange IMO.

Rot is being rot tbh with his essay and all i can hardly read him but an eye on him should be kept as he can be dangerous if he is scum.

More reads about other once i am home i. 10h or so

 

I dont even know since you and prada are speaking confusing language.
He's natural to.doubt though you just make yourself seem more suspicious

 

btw majority lynch is a real obstacle. I've never played in a game of this kind before and it looks soo static.

i mean we can speculate and overanalyze all we want, but a D1 that lasts a week is still a D1. I'm not sure how to move on or to even make this time worth it. I'd much rather have died yesterday so you'd have something to talk about now.

 

My Head and the Brick Wall (open) My Head and the Brick Wall (close)

I mean, let's have a look, shall we?

Crisp: "Glob, why did you claim?"

Glob: "Cuz why not?"

pou: "No, but srs face now, why did you claim?"

Glob: "I was high priority before, so might as well make me even more appealing a target."

Glob: "Besides, this is the first step in getting confirmed."

Crisp: "That doesn't make sense."

Glob: "I was gonna die eventually, so I wanted to be confirmed in the meantime. Somehow, claiming accomplished (or helped accomplish) this."

Alright, so I want you to walk me through this logic.

You claimed. The reason you claimed was not because you might be killed, but to give you more time (because you might be killed). The reason you might be killed is because you claimed your role.

I'm...not sure I'm following. Because, it seems to me that the "problem" you solved by claiming was created by claiming, and also wasn't solved at all.

And I've already specifically addressed each "reason" and demonstrated how it fails to hold up to a slight breeze.

I'm going to assume the situation we're talking about is you stating that you claimed to preempt people suspecting others because a failed kill showed on you, and my proposal therein. So no, I'm not joking. I'm not including the next sentence because, while I think you meant it to respond to the point, it seems like you're responding to some completely separate situation. Which is weird, since I specifically outlined the situation.

So, and please read this fully and try to follow along,

Glob: "Because my ability causes a failed kill to appear on me, it could have led to others suspecting people they thought might have shot at me, when I was not the one shot at. Therefore, I claimed to preempt this."

Rot: "In this incredibly niche situation where you successfully use your action and, as a result, people (who believe you to be Town) wrongfully suspect others, you could simply say "just so you guys (who believe I am Town and are using that as the basis of suspecting others) know, the kill was not against me, it was actually against <soandso>." And, since the people you are trying to correct already believe you to be Town in order to have the wrong suspected others based on the failed kill against you, they should be willing to take you at your word without requesting a full claim."

Did you follow all that? Or am I going to have to explain this for a fourth time?

So I'm addressing this separately because it fails to be even remotely relevant to the previous point, but is also intrinsically wrong. The notion here is that, if you were being pressured, it would be weird for you to claim. I would posit that, if you were being pressured, that is the most normal time to claim. That's generally what people want when they pressure you. They want you to claim.

So no, it would not look funny if, as pressure against you mounted asking for information, you then provided that ******* information.

I mean, only if you read none of it. Which seems like par for the course thus far.

So...what you're saying is that your goal was to accomplish nothing and actively sabotage the Town?

This isn't complicated.

If pou confirms that she received a penalty, it would confirm an aspect of your role. If pou denies it, your claim remains conveniently unconfirmed, which is bad for you. If pou is Scum, she has an incentive to say she received no penalty, regardless of whether or not she received a penalty.

If you had asked pou about a penalty before explaining the full extent of your role, it would remove the incentive for Scum to lie, which would give more credence to pou's response.

Then I guess the issue is in comprehension, then. Because I'm having to repeat myself a lot, and having to correct false statements from you quite a lot more. Like you claiming I called you a Doctor, when I very specifically stated the opposite. Or you claiming that you never stated you claimed because you might die, when you very specifically stated the opposite.

Not really sure what part of my quote your responding to here. I'm going to assume, based on the number of remaining responses, that you just skipped the content accompanying my asking if you actually read my post and several points thereafter (like where I point out that I never called you a Doctor, but that you did), and assume you're responding to a later point, about being confirmed not being a reason why you claimed. I'm just going to point to the top of this post, where I quote you explicitly stating that as a reason for claiming.

Multiple posts where you've agreed to refer to the play as being bad. Nothing about those posts could be characterized as "the best path available" or anything even remotely like that. Your play cannot be simultaneously bad and the best possible action.

You really have to ask, after having read my post?

If you are Iron, then we cannot assume that the kill was on pou, because you specifically made yourself a giant ******* target yesterday, and so it seems far more likely that the Mafia decided to shoot the claimed Doctor than that you successfully guessed the same player that the Mafia chose to target.

If, however, you are only specifically immune to kills you redirect for some reason, then we can reasonably assume the kill was on pou, and it would mitigate the fact that you gave pou an incentive to lie about whether or not she got a penalty, because it would mean that you could also reasonably assume the kill was on pou, and hadn't just forgotten to account for the fact that you made yourself a giant glowing target.

Its unfortunate that I have to ask, but frankly, if we assume competence on your part, it would already be revealed. I'm not asking because I want to know your weakness. I'm asking because, in order to make the assumptions you're asking the Town to make, you would have needed to already reveal this weakness. If we accept your assumption, we also accept that you have a weakness. If you do not have a weakness, you are wrong to ask us to make the assumption.

To clarify, I don't think Glob is Scum. I stated before that Rail's claim lends a lot of credence to Glob being Town. But I need to ascertain that Glob understands what she's saying, because as a player that I feel is likely Town, she has a lot of influence, and if she's talking out her ass, it could inadvertently mislead us. And, if its not clear, my current impression is that Glob does not understand what she's saying, or is otherwise not thinking it all the way through.

Also, I'm playing a sort of meta game here, in that I hope that, by pointing out mistakes, I can help players improve for future games. It's easier to call attention to mistakes during the game, when the mistake is fresh, rather than trying to remember all the mistakes I want to point out for after the game.

I mean, its simple because neither of you actually has an argument. Prada states that lynching Miller is correct play, acts like this is "common sense" but fails to substantiate. You reply that you are Town, act like this is "common sense" but fail to substantiate. Rinse, repeat.

Honestly, while I think Prada's argument is rather silly, your decision to respond in kind with an even worse appeal to ridicule by acting incredulous that Prada doesn't just take you at your word that you are a Town Miller is actually lending credence to Prada's ultimate read of you, in my eyes. Its one thing to believe a particular strategy is common sense, and another entirely to pretend like your alignment, which you should know is unknown to the other players, is common sense.

To clarify, its normal in Trad for such an absence of notification. Generally, the only players who get a notification are those who would receive one anyway (that is, Investigators normally get a notification of their result, so they can determine if they were blocked due to a failed investigation notification).

 

Im sorry i cant read whats in the spoiler post, it's too much for each quote for my brain to process. Is there a way for you to break them up into individual spoilers or sum it? I would break it up but my brain cant even handle that. It's nothing agaisnt you but my ADHD and ADD cant handle that in that format. The normal wallies are fine because it's more wide. Sorry to ask too much.

Anyway as to the other quotes not in the spoiler

I do understand what im saying and doing, it's just how i play really

I agree with what you said about CF and Prada theyre repeating the same things and neither are really presenting their ideas effectively

 

*add : could be because im on phone the spoiler posts are more squashed but with the italic and length
BOOOMM

 

Uh, sure. Here's that with no spoiler tag.

I mean, let's have a look, shall we?

Crisp: "Glob, why did you claim?"

Glob: "Cuz why not?"

pou: "No, but srs face now, why did you claim?"

Glob: "I was high priority before, so might as well make me even more appealing a target."

Glob: "Besides, this is the first step in getting confirmed."

Crisp: "That doesn't make sense."

Glob: "I was gonna die eventually, so I wanted to be confirmed in the meantime. Somehow, claiming accomplished (or helped accomplish) this."

Alright, so I want you to walk me through this logic.

You claimed. The reason you claimed was not because you might be killed, but to give you more time (because you might be killed). The reason you might be killed is because you claimed your role.

I'm...not sure I'm following. Because, it seems to me that the "problem" you solved by claiming was created by claiming, and also wasn't solved at all.

And I've already specifically addressed each "reason" and demonstrated how it fails to hold up to a slight breeze.

I'm going to assume the situation we're talking about is you stating that you claimed to preempt people suspecting others because a failed kill showed on you, and my proposal therein. So no, I'm not joking. I'm not including the next sentence because, while I think you meant it to respond to the point, it seems like you're responding to some completely separate situation. Which is weird, since I specifically outlined the situation.

So, and please read this fully and try to follow along,

Glob: "Because my ability causes a failed kill to appear on me, it could have led to others suspecting people they thought might have shot at me, when I was not the one shot at. Therefore, I claimed to preempt this."

Rot: "In this incredibly niche situation where you successfully use your action and, as a result, people (who believe you to be Town) wrongfully suspect others, you could simply say "just so you guys (who believe I am Town and are using that as the basis of suspecting others) know, the kill was not against me, it was actually against <soandso>." And, since the people you are trying to correct already believe you to be Town in order to have the wrong suspected others based on the failed kill against you, they should be willing to take you at your word without requesting a full claim."

Did you follow all that? Or am I going to have to explain this for a fourth time?

So I'm addressing this separately because it fails to be even remotely relevant to the previous point, but is also intrinsically wrong. The notion here is that, if you were being pressured, it would be weird for you to claim. I would posit that, if you were being pressured, that is the most normal time to claim. That's generally what people want when they pressure you. They want you to claim.

So no, it would not look funny if, as pressure against you mounted asking for information, you then provided that ******* information.

I mean, only if you read none of it. Which seems like par for the course thus far.

So...what you're saying is that your goal was to accomplish nothing and actively sabotage the Town?

This isn't complicated.

If pou confirms that she received a penalty, it would confirm an aspect of your role. If pou denies it, your claim remains conveniently unconfirmed, which is bad for you. If pou is Scum, she has an incentive to say she received no penalty, regardless of whether or not she received a penalty.

If you had asked pou about a penalty before explaining the full extent of your role, it would remove the incentive for Scum to lie, which would give more credence to pou's response.

Then I guess the issue is in comprehension, then. Because I'm having to repeat myself a lot, and having to correct false statements from you quite a lot more. Like you claiming I called you a Doctor, when I very specifically stated the opposite. Or you claiming that you never stated you claimed because you might die, when you very specifically stated the opposite.

Not really sure what part of my quote your responding to here. I'm going to assume, based on the number of remaining responses, that you just skipped the content accompanying my asking if you actually read my post and several points thereafter (like where I point out that I never called you a Doctor, but that you did), and assume you're responding to a later point, about being confirmed not being a reason why you claimed. I'm just going to point to the top of this post, where I quote you explicitly stating that as a reason for claiming.

Multiple posts where you've agreed to refer to the play as being bad. Nothing about those posts could be characterized as "the best path available" or anything even remotely like that. Your play cannot be simultaneously bad and the best possible action.

You really have to ask, after having read my post?

If you are Iron, then we cannot assume that the kill was on pou, because you specifically made yourself a giant ******* target yesterday, and so it seems far more likely that the Mafia decided to shoot the claimed Doctor than that you successfully guessed the same player that the Mafia chose to target.

If, however, you are only specifically immune to kills you redirect for some reason, then we can reasonably assume the kill was on pou, and it would mitigate the fact that you gave pou an incentive to lie about whether or not she got a penalty, because it would mean that you could also reasonably assume the kill was on pou, and hadn't just forgotten to account for the fact that you made yourself a giant glowing target.

Its unfortunate that I have to ask, but frankly, if we assume competence on your part, it would already be revealed. I'm not asking because I want to know your weakness. I'm asking because, in order to make the assumptions you're asking the Town to make, you would have needed to already reveal this weakness. If we accept your assumption, we also accept that you have a weakness. If you do not have a weakness, you are wrong to ask us to make the assumption.

 

Thank you +.+

Well it's the first step but it's not a cause and react event. You can be confirmed without claiming but it can help to have it out there.

More time in the thread looking and deducing rather then trying to say i am or am not scum this way it's outta my hands now.

Well i mean if you end up finishing whatever this debate is then my problem is solved +.+

No i mean i cleared up the penalty thing and miss kill because of the maybe others will be blamed not because of claiming

No because if i was in thar position and someone was all "it wasnt against me and so on" and i knew thet could tell me more i would wanr to know more

No that paragraph i said didnt make sense didnt make sense on an english level not a game level &.&

Not at all. Anyway ive already said that i want to help town but naturally im gonna do it my way in my playstyle

But i doubt mafia wouldn't act twice in a row. So not scum.

And everything ive ever said to you ive already said in the thread so dont play the repeating card dude

Why cant my move be bad but good. People might think of it as bad but it worked for me.

Im not saying any more then - any person i decide to protect any kills on them are redirected onto me which turns them void.
I keep saying that.
: I target - if kill kill redirects onto me - i am the target - kill is voided.

That is all i will say on that

 

Are the characters on this game only from ep 1-7 or more (only the main villains are from 1-7)?

 

No, I get the impression she has a good grasp on what is going on at the very least. As for what she's saying... if we're to believe her role, she is playing a rather dangerous game. We should start thinking about forming an alliance with trusted players using Glo to protect them asap. (From what I was reading - Prada perhaps???) Hopefully from what I read about her role, that would be the most sensible course of action here? Correct me if I'm wrong.

That's fair. I don't mind. I'm not much used to playing in this format so please go easy on me senpai ;A;

 

What are you trying to do here? By protecting certain "trusted players" only, it will put other towns who are not "trusted" to be in danger. Mafia knows very well who are not part of their group. Mafia can just kill these untrusted town easily.

What do you mean with Prada perhaps is ??? Prada is Kurz Weber. Strong town claim. I doubt he's the one trying to kill last night.

You have a really weird post here

 

Alright I am home and have time to look over the game. This will be fun catching up