You're not leaving us much to work with after the first lynch and NK, you're mostly just telling others what to do and who is doing a good town game. If you know rook is town and he might get mislynched, then you speaking on his behalf will look good for you later
Who would you vote right now if you had to choose between helvete, pmj or rook?
Holding back your opinions might be smart if you're town, but if you're scum it also leaves us with less to figure it out on. You have been "helping" moving pmj suspicions along. You seem to throw bits here and there, which also make it harder for town to pin down cooperation and framing if you're scum
I previewed this post and see you're voting cheese because you "like the votes more spread out". Is that helping town at this point? Or is it just creating more chaos?
The pmj - rook - helvete thing should be sorted out. Might be they are all town and RB is helping scum team by causing confusion.
Rook: was going hard on pmj, but then concludes with pmj might be town. So that reduces the hard pressure he put on pmj in the first place. This means if we lynch pmj and he flips green, rook might be trying to look a bit less suspicious by saying "maybe he's town after all". If rook had been less aggressive, I could more understand that conclusion. But if the point was to put pressure on to see if a dalek pops out of pmj, why reduce it now?
Helvete: hasn't replied yet. I'll also review Latte when helvete has replied.
pmj: doesn't seem too worried about the suspicion? He might just play it cool, though. His defense is not convincing me he's town. Might be dalek, but I'm not convinced where I'll change my vote for it.
And I see Cheese replied. I agree about happy being preemptively defensive. But at the same time, both cheese and happy thought ahead to where they knew their absence later might suspicious, so thinking ahead seems like an expected trait from both of them, and I'll say that makes the preemptively defense less suspicious.
I guess I'll just add I don't have a read on the few posts cheese have so far. Except maybe cheese is putting a bit too much into happy's post, he even uses the phrase "what the fuck".
(Sorry about varying whether I capitalize your names or not, I'm just sporadically lazy).
Helvete seems too unconcerned about potentially lynching a townie, but very concerned about himself not being lynched. In his text after people got suspicious when he so eagerly and excitedly jumped on the Lynch John Train, there was a lot of fear, but little to no indignation. When he now again feels off the hook, there is a lot of excitement, but little feelings of worry or suspiciosness about other people in the way he writes. In sum, it feels to me that he is not concerned about the townies winning, and that he knows more than a townie would and thus seems a bit carefree as far as "who are the daleks?" is concerned.
I could be misreading him, but I am ~80% sure Helvete is a Dalek.
If he does turn out to be a Dalek, him talking about time should be examined and analyzed for motivations.
Interesting analysis but alas incorrect. In my mind the RVS generates discussion. I jumped on the john wagon to play along with rook and rb and see how they or others would act to allow me to try and gauge some judgements on them. My change of tone was not fear but levelling to rb's line of questioning. This to me is a game and I treat it as such. It is a complex game, one I haven't nearly got my head around yet and am still learning. At the start there is no information so I see no harm in letting loose a little as all it can do is offer input to be built upon. I feel you perceive quite deeply into things and will have some good insights but you are misguided here. I'm yet to figure out if this is slanderous as betting I'm scum 80% here is a pretty sure read. How can you be so sure based off a small interaction and before you've even heard from everyone here?
Helvete may just by a shady creature in all their dealings, but so far they have acted the most dodgy in this village.
I won't peg them at 80%, as Latte does, perhaps 65% for now. The main action that tickled me toosh was their unvote, a very peculiar thing, unvoting in a random voting state of affairs.
/Vote Helvete
@Helvete: Even if you understood Rook's starting intentions as a reactionary, why did you unvote John? By doing so, you removed pressure of off a player, and practically achieved nothing. By voting Rook or Redbaron, your conduct would have been more prone to moving things along, extracting responses from your target in turn.
I have to admit that the unvote was a blunder not fully thought out on my part. John still had yours and rb's vote so the pressure was still apparent for john when he arrives and I felt it wasn't necessary for my vote to remain as I was leaving for some time and wanted to hear from other members as they checked in too. Part of the reason was because rb had asked me to change the colour and I wanted to see how he would react to the unvote. I realize now how removing it detracts pressure and doesn't gain anywhere else, I should have voted somebody else or left it.
You're not leaving us much to work with after the first lynch and NK, you're mostly just telling others what to do and who is doing a good town game. If you know rook is town and he might get mislynched, then you speaking on his behalf will look good for you later
Who would you vote right now if you had to choose between helvete, pmj or rook?
Holding back your opinions might be smart if you're town, but if you're scum it also leaves us with less to figure it out on. You have been "helping" moving pmj suspicions along. You seem to throw bits here and there, which also make it harder for town to pin down cooperation and framing if you're scum
I previewed this post and see you're voting cheese because you "like the votes more spread out". Is that helping town at this point? Or is it just creating more chaos?
The pmj - rook - helvete thing should be sorted out. Might be they are all town and RB is helping scum team by causing confusion.
Rook: was going hard on pmj, but then concludes with pmj might be town. So that reduces the hard pressure he put on pmj in the first place. This means if we lynch pmj and he flips green, rook might be trying to look a bit less suspicious by saying "maybe he's town after all". If rook had been less aggressive, I could more understand that conclusion. But if the point was to put pressure on to see if a dalek pops out of pmj, why reduce it now?
Helvete: hasn't replied yet. I'll also review Latte when helvete has replied.
pmj: doesn't seem too worried about the suspicion? He might just play it cool, though. His defense is not convincing me he's town. Might be dalek, but I'm not convinced where I'll change my vote for it.
And I see Cheese replied. I agree about happy being preemptively defensive. But at the same time, both cheese and happy thought ahead to where they knew their absence later might suspicious, so thinking ahead seems like an expected trait from both of them, and I'll say that makes the preemptively defense less suspicious.
I guess I'll just add I don't have a read on the few posts cheese have so far. Except maybe cheese is putting a bit too much into happy's post, he even uses the phrase "what the fuck".
(Sorry about varying whether I capitalize your names or not, I'm just sporadically lazy).
If I was a dayvig I'd literaly shoot Pmj right now, I was 100% serious about him being scum.
Cheese's vote on Happy is actually good. Happy's made a few lengthy posts and said basically nothing of value to the town. He's also chainsaw defending Pmj. I'm saying Pmj is very scum and should be lynched, Happy starts scumreading me and discrediting me.
There's also a big difference between how you're pressuring me and what Happy's doing right now Minu, that's why you're not the person chainsaw defending Pmj right now.
People should be voting Pmj or Happy at this point.
Chainsaw defense is when you defend your scumpartner by throwing suspicion at someone scumreading them. As opposed to buddying your partner with a townread/praise.
All you've done so far is waffle on about 'optimal tactics' and fanny around with random votes. You claim I'm the most scummy, yet you haven't actually voted for me. Instead, you've just directed attention my way without giving any reasoning. Isn't that just an incredibly shit OMGUS? Or perhaps a mafia bussing tactic?
I'd expect more from you, frankly. You're either being incredibly lazy, or you're doing something weird with your meta.
At this point in time, I'm happy to leave my vote on you until I get a reasonable explanation.
If I was a dayvig I'd literaly shoot Pmj right now, I was 100% serious about him being scum.
Cheese's vote on Happy is actually good. Happy's made a few lengthy posts and said basically nothing of value to the town. He's also chainsaw defending Pmj. I'm saying Pmj is very scum and should be lynched, Happy starts scumreading me and discrediting me.
There's also a big difference between how you're pressuring me and what Happy's doing right now Minu, that's why you're not the person chainsaw defending Pmj right now.
People should be voting Pmj or Happy at this point.
In the past you have found me hard to read - what makes you so sure now? Apart from adjusting my meta to be a little more cautious due to always incorrectly tunnelling the wrong person, I can't see anything that would make you assume I'm scum.
If you're waiting for me to say "Oh pwetty pweese, I'm town!" ... that isn't going to happen. It's baseless, and fucking irritating.
Explain yourself. Right now, you're just wasting my damn time.
pmj: doesn't seem too worried about the suspicion? He might just play it cool, though. His defense is not convincing me he's town. Might be dalek, but I'm not convinced where I'll change my vote for it.
Pmj is more the sort to get irritated by baseless assertions. I can't really mount a proper defence when I don't know why I'm being accused. Until RB pulls his thumb from up his ass and stops this clearly BS misdirection tactic, I'll be scrutinising other players.
You also seem to have eluded my statements about you and helvete annulling the pressure phase by outing it, a tactic that looks like Daleks trying to slow things down to me.
Those beast have day chat, and I noticed a pattern between pmj/helvete. Mosts suspicious, don't you agree?
I explained why I retracted my vote which is different to how pmj questioned you about why you rand voted john (which would make strat apparent to daleks). Whilst I see why this is pretty scummy behaviour it also occurs to me that it could easily be poor town play lacking understanding why things are done rather than actually doing them.
These are things that I myself are just coming to understand (as I've not really bothered reading wiki's and just learnt from playing, I know I'm super lazy). Basically whilst now I definitely see why the behaviour is fishy I want to see more before I can be sure that's definitely scum.
I am not aware of any patterns you may have noticed between pmj and I but I have a pretty strange schedule within my own time zone and I have no idea about pmj's but I don't see how seeing patterns or overlap would be suspicious or indicate we're a scum team. By this logic you could pair either one of us with anyone you notice to be online at the same time, which would allow for a great many possibilities. Just so you know I usually work in the evenings and alternate between sleeping at night or at day before work, so I usually either get up for work and stay up after or use my time during the mornings.
Well, so far in this game, there's not been anything I can lock onto and make decisions on, so I'm going to post some thoughts about why you shouldn't be suspicious of me.
At the moment, I'm probably the most unlikely player to secretly be a hunk of metal on wheels. The reasoning here is that I am a substitute player. This indicates that having refused the role given to them, the player that surrendered their place in the game is likely to have gotten a dud role. This is not absolute, obviously, but it's the most likely scenario, and by that probability, I'd suggest eliminating me as a prime suspect for now at least, and focusing attention on others.
This is the only actual evidence we have to work with at the moment, so lets work with it.
Please feel free to share your thoughts on this reasoning.
This post however is absolutely awful reasoning. People leave because they have things more serious to attend to than a game and this isn't alignment indicative. There has already been a game where both scum had to swap out because they had genuine reasons not to play, not because of alignment.
Presenting this as to why it would be more unlikely for you to be scum and then making some fluff posts and telling others to just continue discussion is ridiculous so for now...
@John: Right now the best path is to determine who is Dalek.
Cooperation, questioning and analysis of player actions/behaviors is key in this aspect.
It would be prudent to study the entire game, instead of focusing solely on those who point fingers at oneself, regardless of the manner in which they do so.
Usually I would class someone who focuses solely on their attackers as very suspect, but I assume you are completely new to this, so this kind of behavior can be expected from someone new.
Therefore the current problem with such behavior is that it does not contribute to the collective purging of Daleks.
So: Who thus far seem the most sincere to you in attempting to determine the identity of Daleks?
Who's actions and behavior breeds suspicion in your mind?
Answering these questions, and asking questions of your own, are the stepping stones to fostering useful collaboration and detecting Daleks..
***Re: Happy- I do not find his 'subbed in' defense a definite indication of Dalekism as others have. It's not a faultless statement, but in itself it may be an effort to establish a solid base of certainty within the village.
I would never absolve someone who use the 'subbed in so role boring' argument, but they have not come under fire before posting that, I would at least expect a Dalek to use such a defense once they come under fire, not from the very start when no one has even pegged them as suspicious.
If happy is a Dalek, this has been a very erroneous move on their part. Studying their further play is a better way to see whether it was a Dalek blunder or a flimsy attempt at establishing a modicum of certainty for other villagers.
@Redbaron:
Your reasoning for the Happy vote makes no sense to me.
I do no see instances of Happy chainsaw defending PMJ, in fact Happy seemed to have pegged PMJ/Rook as the likeliest Daleks, following PMJ's FOS.
While Happy's reasoning Re: that does not make sense to me, your analysis of him defending PMJ seems incorrect, so i have to wonder whether your Happy vote is not simply to enter onto the Cheese/Minu wagon.
In lue of this, redbaron seems more suspicious to me, although I would value their input on this.
Pmj literally said he's voting me because I'm wagoning on an innocent. Think about that wording: how does he know john is innocent? It's a scumclaim/scumslip. Town players don't call innocence on non-posters, they're suspicious af. Scum move #1.
Also, Pmj voted me for 'bants m8' and then directed an FoS at two other players - but look where his vote still is. He's never actually expressed suspicion of me as scum, but he keeps the vote there. Town tend to vote who they think is scum. Scum move #2
He's trivializing early game actions. Town sometimes do this but it's usually the scum. LQ did it in the game I modded. I did it and so did Jenny in the game QT modded. Puffy did it and so did Zerkalo. Making scummy moves and blaming it on early game is classic scummy. I've seen it happen in quite a few other games too. Scum do it because it's harder for scum to make content, so they need an excuse. Scum move #3
Pmj appeals to not joining the wagon because he's "not that kinda guy" as well. Wifom/meta defence. Scum move #4
Pmj says that lack of time =/= scummy necessarily. Happy then makes a post about lack of time and Pmj instantly FoS' him (but of course keeps his banter vote on me, instead of voting someone he actually finds suspicious and then they have a little meaningless discourse that says nothing, and looks like scum distancing one another from my POV. Scum move #5.
Ok, finally caught up a bit... Here's where I'm at:
PMJPMJ and Helvete seem the most scummy to me. Their posts don't feel as genuine as others. Rook seems less scummy. Happy, Cheese, Latte no read. RedBaron is my number one townie. Minuend is my number two townie.
Ok, finally caught up a bit... Here's where I'm at:
PMJPMJ and Helvete seem the most scummy to me. Their posts don't feel as genuine as others. Rook seems less scummy. Happy, Cheese, Latte no read. RedBaron is my number one townie. Minuend is my number two townie.
I agree on the reads. Minu is town, Rook can go either way, Happy should realistically be null to anyone not seeing his chainsaw defense. Cheese/Latte are null, at most they would slight lean town.
This readslist isn't the product of scum imo, it's too accurate to the gamestate and makes too much sense. Helvete is playing scummy, but I don't think he's the scum moreso than Happy/Pmj.
Mostly because Pmj is like 100% scum imo, and Helvete/Pmj is an unlikely scumteam at this point in my POV.
In the past you have found me hard to read - what makes you so sure now? Apart from adjusting my meta to be a little more cautious due to always incorrectly tunnelling the wrong person, I can't see anything that would make you assume I'm scum.
If you're waiting for me to say "Oh pwetty pweese, I'm town!" ... that isn't going to happen. It's baseless, and fucking irritating.
Explain yourself. Right now, you're just wasting my damn time.
Pmj is more the sort to get irritated by baseless assertions. I can't really mount a proper defence when I don't know why I'm being accused. Until RB pulls his thumb from up his ass and stops this clearly BS misdirection tactic, I'll be scrutinising other players.
Why do you need to mount a defense? You should strictly be looking for scum, yes? You said you'll be scrutinizing other players... that was about 9 hours ago...
I'll also explain why I was playing optimal town strategy earlier for this game.
It's plurality lynch, and the worst thing in plurality lynch is to have lots of small wagons because scum can then easily push any wagon they want over the edge, or hide away from a main wagon and let town destroy itswlf. What you want is duelling wagons and to force scum to make decisions that you can analyse, not sit back and let lynches fizzle into either a no-lynch or a hasty decision.
We don't need majority to get a lynch, but it's optimal for town to have clear wagons to analyse and to prevent scum forcing town to have a panic-decision because they don't want a no-lynch. That's why it's great to get two competing wagons going ASAP and why I vote to keep the vote spread 'clumpy' rather than spread out.
That's why I said Rook was playing optimal strategy and why he should re-vote John.
I'll also explain why I was playing optimal town strategy earlier for this game.
It's plurality lynch, and the worst thing in plurality lynch is to have lots of small wagons because scum can then easily push any wagon they want over the edge, or hide away from a main wagon and let town destroy itswlf. What you want is duelling wagons and to force scum to make decisions that you can analyse, not sit back and let lynches fizzle into either a no-lynch or a hasty decision.
We don't need majority to get a lynch, but it's optimal for town to have clear wagons to analyse and to prevent scum forcing town to have a panic-decision because they don't want a no-lynch. That's why it's great to get two competing wagons going ASAP and why I vote to keep the vote spread 'clumpy' rather than spread out.
That's why I said Rook was playing optimal strategy and why he should re-vote John.
I think I understand. Last game the first day was ending just as I was coming onboard and everything felt very hasty and we ended with a No Lynch. As it turns out a No Lynch was better than losing our Vigilante, but it still didn't feel like a good result when we should have voted you, lol. This game should be a lot more organized with 48 hour days and everyone onboard with plenty of time remaining.
Yep. That's another thing. If you make the wagons in advance and the lynch possibilities are decided prior to deadline, there's no panic and people can also role-claim. So let's say the Town had the Sinny wagon well and truly going - Sinny then can out herself as vigilante and confirm herself town. This diverts the wagon in advance, and we can figure out which scum were on her wagon.
That's why it's optimal to make wagons for town - you have much less risk of losing your town PR's. This happened in the game I modded, where a last minute panic switch by scum ended up killing the Town Doctor, who had no opportunity to claim as they had no idea they were a potential lynch target.
Sadly no one realised that 2/3 of the vote switchers were obviously scum - but the thing is it shouldn't have even been allowed by the town in the first place.
If people don't switch to this Pmj wagon, we switch to Happy. He has 2 votes and if the people voting Happy or me won't get on Pmj, we get on Happy. Also I'm Vanilla Town and if this comes down to No Lynch or myself, I'll self-vote so the town can get info. That's a really shit situation to be in but as Vanilla Town I'd rather info die than have No Lynch - especially since I'm a likely NK target anyway.
If people don't switch to this Pmj wagon, we switch to Happy. He has 2 votes and if the people voting Happy or me won't get on Pmj, we get on Happy. Also I'm Vanilla Town and if this comes down to No Lynch or myself, I'll self-vote so the town can get info. That's a really shit situation to be in but as Vanilla Town I'd rather info die than have No Lynch - especially since I'm a likely NK target anyway.
I'd like to emphasize that no one should be discussing their role in this game, in any context, outside this thread. Nor shall you have role-related, or game-solving discussions outside this thread without my direct invitation.
If anything about this confuses you, PM me for clarification.
If PMJ gets lynched and turns out not to be Dalek, it should be noted that if RB is Dalek, he might have effectively saved Helvete via an advanced form of chainsaw defense through saying Helvete seems scummy, but PMJ seems even scummier.
It would, however, be a risky approach, since it would keep Helvete under Dalek suspicion and Helvete's Dalek suspicion should per RB's logic be higher if PMJ turns out to not be Dalek, since his objection to viewing Helvete as a primary suspect is that he sees PMJ and Helvete as an unlikely pairing, and PMJ to be way more suspicious.
Since he also earlier talked about chainsaw defence and described it, using it himself in this way and risk the patterns being recognized... would be very bold... but one could always think it would seem too bold to be likely.
All in all I can't come to any conclusions regarding RB's behavior atm, but I think what he is saying during the first day is important to re-analyze after the first lynchings and killings by daleks. He has put himself out there quite heavily. My intuition says it indicates he is a townie, but maybe he just thrives on the main stage. There is more vulnerability there but one also has more potential control over the situation, and a confident player might find that worth it. I haven't read the earlier Mafia threads (and probably won't), so I don't really know how he plays.
@Latte I'm pretty sure is town for not remembering how the setup works and also for being suspicious of how I described chainsaw defence and that I could possibly be doing it right now.
Except one thing: I already scumread Pmj well before Pmj ever FoS'd Helvete and said I want him lynched today, which means that this is impossible for me to be chainsaw defending Helvete.
Your thought process looks town though and it's good.
I've only played one other game with RedBaron (this is my second game ever), but he was definitely "out there" early on as scum. I read him as scum almost immediately that game (which I take full credit for *pats self on back*). I read him town this game, so I'm thinking he just likes being vocal no matter which side he's on. I may be wrong. Only time will tell.
Yeah I meant if PMJ flips non-dalek, then you could be suspected of indirectly defending Helvete. If he does flip dalek, then, yeah, there was no chainsaw defence involved.
Also, if PMJ flips dalek... not many duos would sacrifice one of themselves, especially when there might be investigation powers given to a non-dalek (like maybe the doctor), so PMJ and RB seem likely to be mutually exclusive as daleks, as if not, the game they would be hypothetically playing would be extremely risky.
I've only played one other game with RedBaron (this is my second game ever), but he was definitely "out there" early on as scum. I read him as scum almost immediately that game (which I take full credit for *pats self on back*). I read him town this game, so I'm thinking he just likes being vocal no matter which side he's on. I may be wrong. Only time will tell.
That's good to know. Would you agree that you are usually an initiative-taker in these games, Red Baron?
Also, smithcommajohn, in what ways does his behavior here differ from that other game? What was the tellsigns you saw there so immediately that you don't see here?
Also, smithcommajohn, in what ways does his behavior here differ from that other game? What was the tellsigns you saw there so immediately that you don't see here?
That's honestly a bit hard to quantify. I suppose it's because this game he is taking on a more organizational role, where last game it was more of a chaotic role.
That's good to know. Would you agree that you are usually an initiative-taker in these games, Red Baron?
Also, smithcommajohn, in what ways does his behavior here differ from that other game? What was the tellsigns you saw there so immediately that you don't see here?
I take initiative if I have strong scumreads, otherwise I keep trying to sort the game until I get them.
Also meta from one game is really bad. I'm going to explain something not related to this game, but more game advice generally. I'll put it in different colour text.
This is the bold green text of redbaron's game theory.
First off: Meta reads should never form the basis of a read on someone. They can supplement a read, but that's it. Examples of how it supplements would be like this:
Scenario 1: Player X is playing "slight town" and their meta also suggests they're also "town". Player X in your overall read should be "likely town".
Scneario 2: Player X is playing "slight town" and their meta suggest they're being "scum". Player X in your overall read should be null and you should try and get more info out of them in-game to see which way they swing. You should NOT try to sort their alignment by trying to find more meta info.
Scenario 3: Player X is playing "strong town" and their meta suggests "slightly scummy". Player X in your overall read should be slight town.
Pmj literally said he's voting me because I'm wagoning on an innocent. Think about that wording: how does he know john is innocent? It's a scumclaim/scumslip. Town players don't call innocence on non-posters, they're suspicious af. Scum move #1.
Also, Pmj voted me for 'bants m8' and then directed an FoS at two other players - but look where his vote still is. He's never actually expressed suspicion of me as scum, but he keeps the vote there. Town tend to vote who they think is scum. Scum move #2
He's trivializing early game actions. Town sometimes do this but it's usually the scum. LQ did it in the game I modded. I did it and so did Jenny in the game QT modded. Puffy did it and so did Zerkalo. Making scummy moves and blaming it on early game is classic scummy. I've seen it happen in quite a few other games too. Scum do it because it's harder for scum to make content, so they need an excuse. Scum move #3
Pmj appeals to not joining the wagon because he's "not that kinda guy" as well. Wifom/meta defence. Scum move #4
Pmj says that lack of time =/= scummy necessarily. Happy then makes a post about lack of time and Pmj instantly FoS' him (but of course keeps his banter vote on me, instead of voting someone he actually finds suspicious and then they have a little meaningless discourse that says nothing, and looks like scum distancing one another from my POV. Scum move #5.
+1 This needs to be addressed by pmj asap. I'm not sure how much weight scum move 1 holds, if he suspects you as scum and votes you for wagoning town if you are scum then his wording seems more like an optimistic assumption.
Although your other points do however seem to align with scum motivations, stunting town growth and creating confusion and chaos.
I also noted how pmj responded to rooks questioning with what amounted to; how am I being less town than you after applying pressure like you are?
It is looking like he is just throwing dirt at those around him after being questioned to attempt to make them look bad. I find this suspicious as fuck.
Redbaron:
RB makes a good point about wagon size, but this is also potentially a scum tactic - setting up several competing wagons at the same time. This was actually his plan last game when we were both scum. It does allow town to track votes, but you can only meaningfully analyse along with cases - both their quality and any suspicious lack indicating convenient wagon-jumping.
What I'm unsure about is this: Why are you switching your vote around so much with or without cases? (Eg you switched from Pmj, a high scum-read of yours, to me, only under the reason of 'vote clumpiness'.) It looks a little too much like convenient wagon-forming/jumping in the hopes of securing *any* lynch, making it seem like any lynch will do (which is the case for scum, because any town you kill is good). It makes sense from the perspective of getting reads on others, but it also makes you look a little suspicious and confusing to town, because your vote seems close to meaningless other than pushing wagons. You've made 2 main cases, on Happy and Pmj, yet in your longest post about Pmj you ended it by voting for Happy.
Why is this? Could you please explain your strategy in more detail - are you unconcerned with how you come across, or do you expect to be town-read (by these players, pretty much all of whom are basically noobs in text-games) for this behaviour?
Also, why is Pmj-Helvete unlikely?
I'm also uncomfortable about the flippant tone yet very aggressive/high-content play. The two seem at odds, because he claims to be pushing hard for a town win, and wants us all to push for the same thing, yet his tone often seems smirky. However, I do pretty consistently read RB and Hado as somehow 'off' so my radar might need tweaking. Reading tone alone is also pretty weak.
Rook:
Comes across very town to me. Seems like he's trying to solve the game on his own - gives me a Sete vibe from a couple of games back - and this is what a suspicious/paranoid Townie would do. Also very calm and considered. Is not buddying or bussing as far as I can see - seems to stand alone.
Happy:
I'm reconsidering my "WTF" reaction at Happy following Rook's post. I can attest to the fact that playing/spectating a game like this the first few times (or actually serious gaming in general), you go off your gut and fuzzy thinking. You don't immediately realise that loose reasoning like, "Their motivations for subbing out were probably cos it was boring" apply more to casual speculation in RL situations than they do to more closed systems where the game can actually be broken down and solved. This *could* have been a Townie's attempt to bring a little more certainty into the chaos. But afaik in Mafia, reasoning like this just isn't accepted at all, because there are too many holes in it (you have no way of pinning down why people sub out, we have plenty of counter-examples where they sub out for real reasons despite having a "cool" role, this is a convenient town-claim that uses nothing that can be verified *in-game* hence making it unfalsifiable, etc).
Side-note:
I've found gaming logic to be very counter-intuitive and very unlike RL, so this might take getting used to. It's more 'hard'/deductive logic than intuitive and inductive, the latter being what the majority of people use in everyday life. I'm still getting used to it myself and it occasionally causes me to read logically good play as "weird"/"crazy" and therefore scummy. (Same way smith did last game with the logic behind "no counter-claim = Min is Seer". I struggled with that in the beginning too because it seems all too convenient, but if you break it down and follow every chain of reasoning it makes sense.)
In the meantime, I'm going to wait for more posts by Happy.
Pmj:
I don't count his 'innocent bystander' remark as a scumslip. It's just the way he talks, I think, and it was early in the game so everyone was a little looser/being more like themselves, making jokes etc, rather than completely immersed in the game. I wouldn't vote Pmj on so little, but I'll go over all his posts again soon.
Min:
I'm reading as town. This is based only on tone though; I'll have to see more.
Min said:
And I see Cheese replied. I agree about happy being preemptively defensive. But at the same time, both cheese and happy thought ahead to where they knew their absence later might suspicious, so thinking ahead seems like an expected trait from both of them, and I'll say that makes the preemptively defense less suspicious.
I just want to clear this up now, so we can get over the 'defensive about absence' stuff straightaway and not waste more time on it.
My absence was an issue last game, and I couldn't plan ahead very well because things were in flux. Next wednesday, however, is an actual booked flight. That's fixed and I can 'think ahead' because it's actually already booked. I know I will be out for all of wednesday (unless family dies earlier and I have to fly earlier for a funeral). This is just common courtesy for other players and the game moderator, warning ahead of time.
Also I did the math and realised Wed might be Lylo, and if I'm still alive, looking suspicious because I'm absent and thus throwing the game-info off would be retarded. I wanted to explain ahead of time.
Happy's had the same issue in previous games it seems so he just set it up in a way which would work for him from the outset.
Please note the defensiveness I was talking about in Happy had nothing to do with timing or absence. It was that he basically started this game by saying, "Guys, don't be suspicious of me because of this very-flawed-bit-of-reasoning/BS." THAT is the defensiveness I'm talking about.
smithcommajohn:
Honestly I have no idea. I don't know how to read him as he's so new to this. He's still going off his gut, which in a group of players like this doesn't indicate anything. For now I have nothing on him.
I'm leaving for a couple of hours in a few minutes, so I'll do the rest when I'm back.
I'm in a bit of a rush but I wanted to try to cover a few things before I left. Apologies if it's confusing and messy.
What I'm unsure about is this: Why are you switching your vote around so much with or without cases? (Eg you switched from Pmj, a high scum-read of yours, to me, only under the reason of 'vote clumpiness'.) It looks a little too much like convenient wagon-forming/jumping in the hopes of securing *any* lynch, making it seem like any lynch will do (which is the case for scum, because any town you kill is good). It makes sense from the perspective of getting reads on others, but it also makes you look a little suspicious and confusing to town, because your vote seems close to meaningless other than pushing wagons. You've made 2 main cases, on Happy and Pmj, yet in your longest post about Pmj you ended it by voting for Happy.
My tone? It has nothing to do with anything. I don't care what people think of my alignment I care that we lynch scum. I also didn't expect to get townread for the way I'm playing, no. If I was worried about getting townread in mafia games on INTPf I'd make really long posts that don't say anything important or move the gamestate along because that's what townplay apparently is to this forum.
Also cheese why is it the only thing you focus on within my Pmj case, the little scumslip early on when there's 4-5 other strong points that indicate him being scum?
If I was a dayvig I'd literaly shoot Pmj right now, I was 100% serious about him being scum.
Cheese's vote on Happy is actually good. Happy's made a few lengthy posts and said basically nothing of value to the town. He's also chainsaw defending Pmj. I'm saying Pmj is very scum and should be lynched, Happy starts scumreading me and discrediting me.
There's also a big difference between how you're pressuring me and what Happy's doing right now Minu, that's why you're not the person chainsaw defending Pmj right now.
People should be voting Pmj or Happy at this point.
RB regarding wagon-hopping:
This was the post I was referring to. 100% serious, would actually shoot him now if you could, but you voted Happy? Why?
From a later post detailing Pmj's scum signs:
redbaron said:
Also, Pmj voted me for 'bants m8' and then directed an FoS at two other players - but look where his vote still is. He's never actually expressed suspicion of me as scum, but he keeps the vote there. Town tend to vote who they think is scum. Scum move #2
Why are you voting Happy instead of your 100% scum read? The incongruity of your extreme certainty on Pmj and then your Happy vote, in the same post, struck me.
I'm not saying there aren't legitimate reasons for a townie to do
so. Just asking you to explain so it's clear.
I focused on the Pmj "scumslip" because I only had a certain amount of time and that one stuck out to me as the weakest. I'll get to the rest, including other players, later as I said.
TOWN, PLEASE TAKE WITH A PINCH OF SALT (based on memory not firm facts):
Wagon-hopping in particular I'll have to get to later cos I'm on my phone and can't easily check your vote history. From memory though you voted John off the bat then started pressuring people to do the same for no reason. Then you voted me, Happy, Pmj and possibly more. I think you've voted more than any other player though I'll confirm this later (and quote this paragraph for any corrections). My impression of you has generally been a lot of wagon-starting but surprisingly not voting the person you most suspect (Pmj) till you've started a bunch of other stuff.
This site uses cookies to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. We have no personalisation nor analytics --- especially no Google.
and then they have a little meaningless discourse that says nothing, and looks like scum distancing one another from my POV. Scum move #5.
