RolStoppable said:
hatmoza said: I've been itching to say this ever since the day ended.
Everyone who believed that baalz deliberatly claimed miller, in an attempt to create fruitful discussion is a complete waste of breathe. As a matter of fact I was going to start this day by reminding Prof how backwards he is for believeing baalz did that on purpose. I'm not going to deny it created discussion but I DON'T BELIEVE for one second it was an intentional plan. Baalz is scum, he tried to squeeze in a fakeclaim miller, and it backfired. If we didn't have a miller he would have drove that claim to his grave.
I know you are scum baalz, the problem is you ar unlynchable, so I put my faith in the vigilante to shoot you in the face.
Also, HUGE HOS on Danne for easily believing baalz and telling him "good plan" or some shit like that. Danne irked me so much as well as prof. But prof is dead and Cartel so good ridance. |
Wouldn't an unlynchable scum player lead to a broken combination in the game? Suppose our vigilante gets killed early on in the game, then town would have no chance to win anymore, except through sheer dumb luck that another anti-town faction kills baalz somewhere down the line. Would Linkz really implement something like this?
The other problem with the "baalz is scum" theory is: What would an unlynchable scum gain by claiming miller? You claim miller to avoid a lynch due to a guilty scan. But baalz can't be lynched anyway.
|
To have a pre-emptive excuse if he was scanned by a cop. It's not unusual. And if it worked and no one countered his miller? You think he would have came forward about lying? And yes, he claimed miller to avoid the lynch BECAUSE he's scum.
I just don't buy it, I'm sorry. The whole, " I did this whole thing on purpose" is an outrageous claim. He claimed miller knowing there was another miller? That's too farfetched. Go back and read his miller claim. It hardly looked like it was planned.