Others Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard, The Retrial Assassin Game [Discussion Thread]
- Thread starter Nikamara
- Start date
- Status
btw just as an aside. The number of actions a person could do was not scum indicative whatsoever. 4 civs, the 2 neutrals and the assassins all had 3+ actions. Plus the assassin fake claims only had 2. In total, civs had 28 active abilities (14 per team) per day and assasins had 7 which is half of one civ faction which I thought is fair. Total combined civs could potentially kill 4 people per day and assasins could kill 1.5 per day but of course since they knew each other from start that gives them an advantage. Furthermore, both Depp and Heard were double voters meaning they were the vote manipulators. Anyways got off topic. So when ratchet submitted 3 actions day 1 it was just a mistake that would eventually get fixed once I stared confirming actions on my end. Little did I know that error was being used to scumread ratchet and almost mislynch him. Like where in the OP does it say more actions are scummy? It just says you can only use two unless stated otherwise. 
i want to imagine that this is why TPein was also suspected even though the only reason TPein, joygirl, tac and Johnny slot could use 3 is because they had more than 5 actives. I usually make people only have 2 and then only 1 ability use per day. With 5 ability uses as the standard, I figured close to half of that would make the game not stagnate. So everyone could use half of their abilities rounded down.
I think that's a good idea.
ToL and ToS don't have that many games so it's better to pair each one with other type of games.
I think I never saw games with less than 14 people though.
I agree that dividing the sections also into mini games/large games will give more freedom and not be so restricted.
ToL and ToS don't have that many games so it's better to pair each one with other type of games.
I think I never saw games with less than 14 people though.
I agree that dividing the sections also into mini games/large games will give more freedom and not be so restricted.
Eh I think a loss never comes down to one player. I wish someone did a DP breakdown and role gathered and realized there were more codenames than people and then start combing through what looks real and can be confirmed to be in the game and what looks fake. Plus you were onto the fact that Kate Moss and the neighbour didn't match at all. Someone would eventually match it to princess zoro if they're a one piece fan and then you'd know light is 100% lying. TPein was a close contender for best plaintiff simply because I appreciated that it was clear he read the daily post.
It's not really a way to solve the game per se, but it is information that should be accounted for. I feel like everything that has needed to be said has been said though, it's not about telling players that they're bad, but conveying why the result was as it was.
I'm not going to lie Prof I feel like you should have known better over day 1 Ratchet CFD, for the following reasons -
1 - When have you ever seen me make a mistake like a mechanical slip? You've seen me play scum enough times now to know better.
-
2 - I just mentioned this to Nika, but even if you do think I made such a slip, you have me having claimed my passives exactly to Emi, the both of you could have rubbed two braincells together and realised that you would have me dead to rights if you saw me using three actions in the writeup. By telling me I'm lying, you automatically gave me an out where I could say Nika just made a mistake and quickly changed it to only using two. So even if we discount point one, the way you both handled it was (insert insult here). Imagine if I were scum, you keep quiet, you let me claim everything thinking I'm oh so smart and have fooled everyone, and then suddenly you see three actions. You pull up my quote where I say I don't have a passive that lets me use more actions, you pull up the writeup and my claim for that part to belong to me, and you say "we have him in a lie". All I can say then is that I actually lied about only having 2 passives and didn't trust you, but my credibility is shot by that point and I am in trouble. As it was you just gave me a free out even if it were right.
-
3 - One point should not undo everything. You had two other players claim scum, if you tell me a potential "slip" like using 3 actions is more likely to flip scum than someone who claimed it and then awkwardly backtracked, you are simply being dishonest.
This is why I refuse to work with the two of you from hereon forth, and frankly anyone else who submits to this folly. I can't do it, it's impossible. For one to co-operate you need to be capable of trust, neither of you can do that here so it doesn't matter what I do or say the outcome will always be the same. I'm not going to always be able to prove myself town right away. My frustration is particular here because I knew the moment I saw the wincons required survival that I was never winning, so I spent all my efforts finding and working with my team and trying to get people to focus on the right things only to have it undone over nonsense. I'm not personally upset here or anything, it's all within the context of the game. But do you think for example that I always just implicitly trust others? That I have no paranoia around slots? That I don't second guess myself? Of course I do, you're not the only ones paranoid around co-operation. But the end result is that if it gets you burned you simply need to revise your judgement, it does not mean try and find a way for the player to maybe be scum and then lynch them because that helps you be sure of their motivations. Next ones I play I'm just lone wolfing it, it's far easier that way and probably less of a waste of time.
I'm not going to lie Prof I feel like you should have known better over day 1 Ratchet CFD, for the following reasons -
1 - When have you ever seen me make a mistake like a mechanical slip? You've seen me play scum enough times now to know better.
-
2 - I just mentioned this to Nika, but even if you do think I made such a slip, you have me having claimed my passives exactly to Emi, the both of you could have rubbed two braincells together and realised that you would have me dead to rights if you saw me using three actions in the writeup. By telling me I'm lying, you automatically gave me an out where I could say Nika just made a mistake and quickly changed it to only using two. So even if we discount point one, the way you both handled it was (insert insult here). Imagine if I were scum, you keep quiet, you let me claim everything thinking I'm oh so smart and have fooled everyone, and then suddenly you see three actions. You pull up my quote where I say I don't have a passive that lets me use more actions, you pull up the writeup and my claim for that part to belong to me, and you say "we have him in a lie". All I can say then is that I actually lied about only having 2 passives and didn't trust you, but my credibility is shot by that point and I am in trouble. As it was you just gave me a free out even if it were right.
-
3 - One point should not undo everything. You had two other players claim scum, if you tell me a potential "slip" like using 3 actions is more likely to flip scum than someone who claimed it and then awkwardly backtracked, you are simply being dishonest.
This is why I refuse to work with the two of you from hereon forth, and frankly anyone else who submits to this folly. I can't do it, it's impossible. For one to co-operate you need to be capable of trust, neither of you can do that here so it doesn't matter what I do or say the outcome will always be the same. I'm not going to always be able to prove myself town right away. My frustration is particular here because I knew the moment I saw the wincons required survival that I was never winning, so I spent all my efforts finding and working with my team and trying to get people to focus on the right things only to have it undone over nonsense. I'm not personally upset here or anything, it's all within the context of the game. But do you think for example that I always just implicitly trust others? That I have no paranoia around slots? That I don't second guess myself? Of course I do, you're not the only ones paranoid around co-operation. But the end result is that if it gets you burned you simply need to revise your judgement, it does not mean try and find a way for the player to maybe be scum and then lynch them because that helps you be sure of their motivations. Next ones I play I'm just lone wolfing it, it's far easier that way and probably less of a waste of time.
I’d like more benefit of the doubt here. (On a personal level more than a competence level really). I’m more likely to get steamrolled by you as scum in the near future than be difficult to cooperate with trying to make amends. I genuinely feel bad that you feel this way and feel I’d be losing something by not being able to work with you in future games.
It's not about feeling bad or taking it personally, if anything it's fundamentally a compliment to my supposed ability to fool you here, so to be clear it's not something that bothers me the person, but me the player. I don't mean to suggest that I will just never be agreeable or something, but co-operation has to be mutual, and it cannot be here, so it will just have to be worked around that. In terms of an AG game don't expect me to be claiming any information or sharing information until it's established from writeups that it's optimal to do so.
oh i thought u guys would spite kill me if i told u about how i had planned to betray u all lol
also i was already in the chat ready to plan actions and everything out with everyone so by then... eh
im a dumbass tho
nothing against u @Light D Lamperouge , im happy we won and we made a good team (also sry i had to kill yelan, i hope this makes it up
)
but if i realized earlier that the game doesnt end with yellows death, i probs wouldnt have teamed up with u lol
i was probs going to win no matter who i teamed with at that point (blue or yellow) but yellow required me to get my hands dirty and frame t-pein and also find out all the actions that the blues were taking so i could relay the info to u and plan our actions accordingly
whereas siding with blue just meant i had to pretend to side with u and tell u to attack a red and kill another then kick my feet up and cfd u 10 mins before eod while prof does the rest of the work and we lynch off last red the next day
also i was already in the chat ready to plan actions and everything out with everyone so by then... eh
im a dumbass tho
nothing against u @Light D Lamperouge , im happy we won and we made a good team (also sry i had to kill yelan, i hope this makes it up
)but if i realized earlier that the game doesnt end with yellows death, i probs wouldnt have teamed up with u lol
i was probs going to win no matter who i teamed with at that point (blue or yellow) but yellow required me to get my hands dirty and frame t-pein and also find out all the actions that the blues were taking so i could relay the info to u and plan our actions accordingly
whereas siding with blue just meant i had to pretend to side with u and tell u to attack a red and kill another then kick my feet up and cfd u 10 mins before eod while prof does the rest of the work and we lynch off last red the next day
- Status