Jump to content

XnadrojX

New Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    0

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by XnadrojX

    Training Mafia 3.0: Advanced - GAMEOVER

    in Mafia

    Posted

    I'm going to get behind the pressure on EvanManMan to say I'd like to see something game-relevant from them too. 

    Mackc2 feels town tonally from the responses to Makaze to their probing of Fenrir. Can't really see how Makaze scumreads him.

     

     

     

     

    Training Mafia 3.0: Advanced - GAMEOVER

    in Mafia

    Posted

    12 hours ago, Rapier said:

    Hiding emotions is hard, especially so for newer scumplayers. Wouldn't annoyance be a sign of crumbling to pressure?

    This and the rest of your posts seem to be avoiding the topic of my alignment and just poking at everyone who has a read on me. Do you think I'm scum/town and why? 

    Training Mafia 3.0: Advanced - GAMEOVER

    in Mafia

    Posted

    I'm just going to ignore the Makaze and Fable thing because despite how Makaze wants their and Fable's posts to not be viewed as NAI, it literally is NAI in every sense and I don't see how you can pull meaning from something that's not supposed to have meaning.

    Training Mafia 3.0: Advanced - GAMEOVER

    in Mafia

    Posted

    Firstly, I would like to clarify that I did have suspicions about athena_57 with that early interaction and my "what are you trying to pull?" post, but I felt like I was overthinking it after they said it was a joke. I have a lot to say about it now though. Mainly:

    12 hours ago, Bartozio said:

    Disagree, I feel like being annoyed at someone trying to start an interaction with you is more likely to come from scum tbh. It felt to me like he was only reacting to you out of neccesity and broke it off as soon as possible, which is weird when you're at a point in the game where every bit of interaction you can get out of people is welcome information.

    Vote: XnadrojX

    You suddenly dropping a townread on him also felt weird to me, but your reasoning is good enough that I don't suspect you for it anymore (sheep me though).

    12 hours ago, athena_57 said:

    Okay

    ##Vote: XnadrojX

    Other people have addressed this point but I most certainly, was not in any way attempting to break off interaction. In fact, if anyone was trying to break off interaction, it was athena_57 with the "it's a joke". Regardless if it's a joke or not, which no longer matters, this "reasoning" you bring up on me is just factually wrong.

    Your reason for scumreading me is literally the reason athena_57 was townreading me, how do you view it as "good enough" for you not to suspect them?

    You seem a little too easily convinced.

     

     

    athena_57 just seems like they want to suck up to Bartozio, idk what to think about that.

    But Bartozio just has such huge leaps of logic here, I can't see him feasibly arrive at the conclusions he did with any normal flow of thinking.

    ##Vote @Bartozio

    Training Mafia 3.0: Advanced - GAMEOVER

    in Mafia

    Posted

    14 minutes ago, athena_57 said:

    I'll gladly bring up topics.

     

    Bartozio and I have been opposing alignments in all 3 games I've played in. Does this mean we have a higher or lower than random chance to roll opposing alignments?

    Perhaps this happening 3 times indicates it isn't random, but rather a law of nature and thus it will happen again.

    Or perhaps 4 is a large enough number we can reasonably expect the law of large numbers to kick in.

    In other words, what is the correct incorrect way of applying probability theory? 

     

    Don't say "Just random...", cause that's a cop out.

    Stating a fact isn't a cop out though. 

     

    Saying you have a higher than random chance to roll opposing alignments because you were rolling opposing alignments before is a logical fallacy.

    Saying you have a lower than random chance to roll opposing alignments because you were rolling opposing alignments before is also logical fallacy.

     

    The laws of probability says that each individual roll is independent of one another, what are you trying to pull here?

    Also, you mentioned "a wealth of topics", this is just one topic and is pretty irrelevant to the game state on top of that.

    Training Mafia 3.0: Advanced - GAMEOVER

    in Mafia

    Posted

    1 minute ago, athena_57 said:

    Bit of a lazy entrance imo. There's tons of game-relevant stuff to talk about.

    Like for example, why hasn't SB posted a shitpost? Is it to shield his mentee Bartozio from an untimely RVS death? Is this alignment indicative?

    A wealth of topics is available and yet you go for a pun incorporating the game's terminology.

     

    Oh, also I can't help but scumread people who use emoticons. It's an ailment quite common in my family.

     

    I mean this would be game-relevant stuff, but I don't think "tons" is an accurate amount of the game-relevant stuff before my post if you ask me.

    Maybe SB just hasn't gotten on yet?

    Maybe there is a wealth of topics, but I don't see any. Could you bring some up for me?

     

×
×
  • Create New...