Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Mafia: Lombardy

Rate this topic


Zfetch

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Master Radishes said:

Nah, I always dismissed most of what you guys said. I was just better at hiding it, I guess. ;)

 

 

 

What am I dismissing - your argument with SS? I'm not. I followed it as it happened, and I've made a judgement on both of your alignments based on it.

Oh please. You even said you stopped reading our posts. And you won't even take the minimal effort to address my main point against SS. 

For some reason you flippantly declared it not ever w/v, which is silly as well.

Link to comment
Just now, Ceres said:

Oh please. You even said you stopped reading our posts. And you won't even take the minimal effort to address my main point against SS. 

For some reason you flippantly declared it not ever w/v, which is silly as well.

Oh, okay, well I stopped reading towards the end. But I read the bit that mattered - how it evolved from a joke to not a joke.

 

This is how I read it: SS tried to continue the joke and keep needling you, got frustrated when you wouldn't let it go, and started to actually tunnel you instead of pretending to. You did the exact same to him.

 

If either of you were a wolf, you would have tried to disentangle yourself or at least not continue the argument in great detail. Instead, both of you are feeling righteous in your indignation and won't let it go. This, to me, suggests you either both believe it (v/v), or, outside change, are faking it (w/w).

Link to comment

The first CDC Mafia rivalry was @Baldy.Auldy vs @MastahTJv2.0 (formerly Hugh Jass). Both thought they were the hot sh** at this game in its earliest days (we're talking first five games ever) and constantly tried to outdo each other.

 

In my first game (which I remember being game 6) I randed scum and survived to near the end because everyone ignored the newbie. Those two figured out they were town together for once and quickly rooted me out. I tried in vain to persuade one of them to turn on the other but it didn't work.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment

Another memory: in one of my early games not long after I randed Sheriff, and those two were my first two investigations because they were the best players. Both were scum. I nearly revealed myself in thread to take them both down, but found a townie (@mrgreer) on my third try and he became my spokesperson as we led the town to victory.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
27 minutes ago, Master Radishes said:

Oh, okay, well I stopped reading towards the end. But I read the bit that mattered - how it evolved from a joke to not a joke.

 

This is how I read it: SS tried to continue the joke and keep needling you, got frustrated when you wouldn't let it go, and started to actually tunnel you instead of pretending to. You did the exact same to him.

 

If either of you were a wolf, you would have tried to disentangle yourself or at least not continue the argument in great detail. Instead, both of you are feeling righteous in your indignation and won't let it go. This, to me, suggests you either both believe it (v/v), or, outside change, are faking it (w/w).

Ok fair. But why are you sure he was "continuing the joke" at the outset?

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Ceres said:

Ok fair. But why are you sure he was "continuing the joke" at the outset?

Because he kept the exact same fake-confident tone and over-the-top conclusions. Even the post you quoted earlier was, to me, just him playing up to the joke he had created.

 

Then you made him crack. (Well done, by the way.) This was the post where it became something more:

 

 

Different tone to that one. He's now showing his frustration like it's genuine now instead of a persona he had adopted.

Link to comment

There was also the shorter follow-up post to that, instead of the longer and more carefully constructed posts he normally had that were designed to needle you/us.

 

Other people also 'kept' their reads, e.g. Aladeen on me, as jokes. SS did too, IMO. Then neither of you would let it go and it escalated into a 'real' argument.

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Master Radishes said:

Because he kept the exact same fake-confident tone and over-the-top conclusions. Even the post you quoted earlier was, to me, just him playing up to the joke he had created.

 

 

I'm interested in what @Sharpshooter has to say about this. 

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Zfetch said:

 

-There was always a limit of 2 inactive that would die in Round A. Unfortunately I have decided to exercise both.


Dead:
Sane33(no role/VT)
Phil_314(no role/VT)
Otherwise(no role/VT)

After reading fake nightfall I don't see why otherwise was killed. Even the report said that the limit was 2 and otherwise wasn't even in the bottom 3 posters.

 

3vvqh2.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment

We stand at 3 mafia; 1 SK (AV); and 8 villagers. Those are already dire numbers for us because we don't have PMing as a cushion. The specials will need to come up large. And we need to cover from them. i.e. don't hard claim VT unless you have to. 

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...