Just to clarify, SharkFinnigan used meta to defend Wrath_of_DoG, who has since flipped scum. Your argument is that the type of meta-argument used by SF is inconsistent with your assumption of how SF would play as scum. Therefore, you believe that SF is town. Accurate?
No.
I'm unaware of SF using meta to defend WoD anywhere, unless you are referring to posts where SF is hesitant to attack WoD for purely meta reasons - which was the case for several people. What SF did was follow-up on a point that I made about WoD's past behaviors. By going to WoD's old game and reading up on him (and finding that point valid enough to comment about.) That is the key factor. Like I said, I myself wasn't even making a federal case out of WoD's behaviors at that point, so I find it unlikely that a fellow scum would have taken the time to go and read that old game and all WoD's old posts and then bring them back up here in this game as a point against him.
Especially if you weren't planning to just bus him hard at that point - which SF also didn't do. He never voted WoD. So, that's like the worst case for a fellow scum. You are bringing up stuff unfavorable to your buddy, but NOT trying to gain Townie cred by bussing him and voting him?
Doing outside research is a Townie thing to begin with. I am obviously not saying scum can't do this. It's just less common, requires more work and energy, and being more crafty. And SF doesn't strike me as the type.
Having not read the thread all the way through, I'm assuming that it was some combination of ced being scummy and the "hammerer" role being non-town. My role is actually quite different, though I will likely be on every lynching wagon from here on out.
Still working out Kosakosa Casecase, but this caught my eye.
Roles are all randomized with the exception of the neutral, so speculation about the "hammerer" role being inherently non-town is mostly dead in the water.
I was in Seasons, and I still forgot about that. My bad.
Having not read the thread all the way through, I'm assuming that it was some combination of ced being scummy and the "hammerer" role being non-town.
Given the nature of the setup, the bolded only makes sense if you believe me to be the neutral. Do you really believe that, out of the twenty-one (or more) different unlock triggers in this game, that mine (the first one to have been claimed, I might add) somehow stands out as being "neutral-y"?
Also, why do you say "non-town" instead of "neutral"?
See above. Also, yes, I do thinking killing players (by hammering or other means) is something neutrals are inclined to do. You may have other unlock mechanisms of which we are not aware, but I definitely don't trust you based on what I've read so far.
My role is actually quite different, though I will likely be on every lynching wagon from here on out.
Would you be receptive to the idea of being on your own lynching wagon? Just wondering.
Does someone want to summarize the SF wagon from Day One for me or would it just be better for me to read it myself? The post where he votes ced looks bad but I don't think it alone is worth the handful of votes he's got already.
What in particular makes Nis's FoS on desCoures "absurd"?
Who FoSes five times in a row, let alone all on the same player?
Me. I absolutely abhor sloppy cases and dC was almost tunneling ced on "evidence" that wasn't even applicable to the scenario. Sloppiness + unwavering commitment to a case gets under my skin. I turned out to be wrong on my suspicion of dC, but you can't deny that he pushed hard on ced with a case that was partly built out of straw.
Does someone want to summarize the SF wagon from Day One for me or would it just be better for me to read it myself? The post where he votes ced looks bad but I don't think it alone is worth the handful of votes he's got already.
Those will give you the info about why the wagon on SF formed.
Ecophagy had a series of posts regarding SharkFinnigan's response to WoD's "analysis" post. In fact, Ecophagy was voting Shark for all D1. I did a PBPA of Ecophagy if you don't feel like searching through all his posts for Shark-related ones. Linky.
I'd also recommend reading desCoures' posts. He thought Shark was scum for almost all of D1.
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
Does someone want to summarize the SF wagon from Day One for me or would it just be better for me to read it myself? The post where he votes ced looks bad but I don't think it alone is worth the handful of votes he's got already.
Caex just posted a few PBPAs on this, but my summary is here.
Here's mine, as well, for completeness: Shark Post. It's a bit outdated now, after almost forty pages, but most of it still stands. If there's a demand, I'll update it with what Shark has posted since this post.
At last, I have finished my reread of this monolithic game. I've got lots of notes on some players, and literally none on others. Let's go through it.
It is worth noting that I am currently ignoring the neutral role. It is perfectly possible that some of my reads based on interactions with WoD will be wrong, but that's something I intend to address later in the game.
First up, some town reads:
Xyre - Xyre's incredibly early vote on WoD speaks very positively for him: there's no reason to bus that hard. That it was entirely a meta vote helps more, since WoD wasn't exhibiting any obvious scummy behaviour that would have motivated Xyre to bus early.
Caex Kothar - While it is technically WIFOM, I simply cannot see a mafia player putting as much effort as he has into his PBPAs. They are particularly town-minded since they actually contain a good deal of analysis, and it would be extremely difficult for a Mafioso to fake so much actual analysis. Assuming I am correct, he's setting up a very difficult metagame for him to follow as scum in the future.
Vitek Cythare - Although Vitek didn't post much, I liked a number of them. In #77 he opposes the lock colour claim. Of note is that he opposes it because he "doesn't see any benefit": not because of Mow Down. This implies to me that he is unaware of Mow Down (and therefore unlikely to be mafia), and isn't seeking information for information's sake. In #220, he uses multiple FoS and jokes " (Did I just claim scum?)" for it. I think this indicates a town mindset, since I feel that the newer player would likely be more inclined to avoid using FoS after they were called a scumtell. Added to that, the FoS he uses are well backed up, and he puts down a vote.
SilverSihhe- In general, he's coming across as 100% genuine, albeit very inexperienced. #207 is a lengthy analysis of Axelrod that doesn't come down on either side. Although a lack of solid conclusion is a negative, scum don't tend to put this much effort (and again, actual analysis) into an unsure read: they'd do the same in a much smaller post. Nothing in it reads as waffly, it's a stream-of-conciousness look at Axel's posts. #314 sees him trying to get dC to understand SS's own mindset in a very open manner. #329 has him produce another SOC-style PBPA, and it reads like his one of Axel: no waffle, consistent analysis. He specifically avoided copying Caex's SF post, which also speaks well: he's doing his own research. Another in #607 sees him analyse WoD. Although he is ultimately wrong, it's still analysis, and he intentionally leaves out the meta attack which was the most damning point against WoD, so it's not that surprising. His conclusion is somewhat fencesitty, but he's putting WoD as more town than I'd expect from a scum leaving the door open to bus a buddy. IIRC, he also doesn't actually vote WoD, implying that he wasn't looking that hard for a WoD vote. In sum, SS feels very open and transparent in his play, and his analyses are detailed and without filler.
Axelrod - Axelrod exhibits some similarities with SilverSihhe: his two very long posts #157 and #382 detail a great amount of the inner-workings of Axel's mind, and very openly trying to explain his thought process. Again, it's also stream-of-conciousness style that follows a logical path. I also felt that the string of posts at #727 heavily implies that Axel has no idea what WoD's abilities do, but if they were scum together he almost certainly would know.
I'm not going to make a sig-worthy quote about Axel's towniness though
Asenion - Post #155 struck me as a town player who is very new to the game. It particular "When I ask why you are voting, it's because I want to know what is motivating you to vote." tells me that he's interested in getting motivations, not in getting lynches. Similarly, post #400 displays a desire to interact and help out. Even though he says he "doesn't have a reliable way to find them [scum]", he produces supported reads and does not emphasize their unreliability (as a new scum is wont to do): he's putting an honest opinion out there. I also think that "I'm giving my opinions, but it's hard to provide more back-up for them without manufacturing reasons" really indicates that he's new town trying his best.
*********
Now we move onto the scummy players
Shark Finnegan - Basically, everything I talked about yesterday holds: he called a summary a very good analysis, repeatedly backpedalled and attempted to retcon his position with disclaimers. This behaviour remains undeniably scummy, however I am not as convinced of his scum hood as I was yesterday (I confess a certain degree of tunnel vision). Holding the "secret case" on Nis back to avoid derailing a scum wagon is a strong point in his favour, and the case itself is well grounded (picking up on similar points I noticed in my reread), but SF is putting way too much stock into those tells: the case is not strong, but it's not bunk either. In sun, SF is still scummy, but is not currently the worst offender.
KosaKosa - The dubious winner of the scummiest player award. Kosa has clocked up a huge number of negative points, and has by far the largest number of posts that I tagged as important, and not one looks good. Because the case on him is both long and important, I'll put it in my next post.
Nis - Nis' vote for Shark in #429 is super weird. He's making a huge deal out of some phrasing while totally ignoring all the other point for the wagon. I'm inclined to believe that he was looking for a way onto the wagon without barning anyone, so picked up the first "tell" he could see. Eron spots a neat contradiction in #608: Nis is spinning on a dime. This is bad news for Nis.
#568 is a MAJOR red flag IF KosaKosa turns up scum. Notice the subtle defence of Kosa as Nis explains away his scummy behaviour, without actually calling Kosa town. In fact, Nis leaves the door completely ajar, saying that he will re-evaluate Kosa (which he never did - another big red flag), but "can't stand behind it for a lynch at this time". Basically, he defended Kosa indirectly, while not coming to an opinion and leaving the capacity to vote Kosa is necessary in future, while simultaneously promising a re-evaluation that never manifests. If Kosa is scum, Nis almost certainly is too.
Having said all this, I think #448 looks good for Nis, since he's piling early pressure on known scum. Not enough to outweigh the negatives though.
In addition, Nis has managed to avoid posting content a lot. He has some posts, but not a lot of opinions: I would certainly like to see some reads out of him. We also note that beyond his pressure vote in #448, he doesn't appear to mention WoD again. He never seems to reconsider his vote: if it was to just up the pressure, wouldn't you be looking to examine the responses to the pressure, or even push again for questions to be answered?
Iso - Iso's play remains a riddle wrapped in an enigma, but there are a number of posts that I dislike. As I mentioned at the time, Iso proposing a lock colour claim felt like too much of a coincidence, but his response in #108 of more than just "because soft claim" was better than I expected. In retrospect however, the post reveals to me that Iso's ability(s) somehow rely on the colours of people's locks. As a result, turning on his ability was likely the original root of his claim proposal, but that's alignment neutral: Iso would try to turn his abilities on regardless of which side he's on.
I dislike Iso's vote for Axelrod in #143 since it's a weak reason, when others existed. The way he totally waves Axel away in #158 is absurd. I read Axel's #157 as very town, and Iso totally fails to explain his one-line dismissal. Iso posts a full case in #357, and it is baaaad. The post he says stands out as "reeeeeally scummy" is Axel allegedly giving Shark (alignment unknown) ammunition to defend himself with. To wit, that post is only scummy if Shark is too. Instead, Iso turns it round and labels Shark as scum if Axel is. The rest of the case is pretty poor, containing some summary, and like two other "scummy" posts. I agree with Axel's assessment that it all reads like Iso has decided that Axel is scum and is making the case based on that assumption, and it is not a convincing one. For bonus points, Iso asked myself and ced for an opinion on each other, and never followed up on the question, even as I failed to actually provide one. (oops)
Post #474 is bad. It could easily be a bus vote (and Iso is not afraid to bus), and he's also given Kosa some town cred if (when) WoD flips scum. Again, if Kosa is scum, this looks bad for Iso: Kosa's point against WoD was bad, but Iso's giving him +town for it without even explaining why he liked it.
Post #693 (by WoD) exemplifies the hesitation I have on Iso: WoD has pushed Iso hugely this game, and comes up with a total piece of crap against him here. While there is no love lost between the two players, WoD's relentless attacks on Iso give me pause for thought. Overall though, Iso is erring on the side of scum, particularly if Kosa flips Mafia.
Death's Vampire - In some respects similar to Nis, DV has contributed very little to the game. His two votes in #502 and #590 are both awful and barely supported. His post #462 is a conspiracy theory of the highest degree against Iso. He very rapidly gains a deathy opinion on WoD in #599 despite not really being anywhere near the wagon before that.
DV's actions have been fringe, barely supported and nonsensical. It is entirely possible that DV is actually just mad and town, but his scummy actions have put him in this column for now. I'd like to see some reads from him.
*****
Undecided players:
Ced395 -I liked his #217 as solid analysis. My notes also apparently list dC's #311 in ced's favour, but I can't work out why. I possibly made a typo. <_<
If Kosa flips scum, ced is likely town.
Arnnaria - Been going back and forth on Arnnaria during the read through. I don't like his vote on Axel in #151, it looks like he's trying to come with an excuse (and it's a bad one) for not having voted Axelrod yet.
However, I think #178 is phrased in a townie manner, and the last paragraph of #283 is a townie PoV. #576 is probably a town post, since scum are unlikely to push a policy lynch on a buddy. Arnnaria might be one of the few players principled enough to actually lynch a scum buddy on the grounds of fair play, but I think that's unlikely.
The crux of Arnnaria is his posts in #363/4/6/8. These posts contain a run-down of everyone. What differs with Caex is that these posts contain very little analysis, and are mostly summary. The analysis is arguably implicit due to the points given, but that's not really sufficient justification. On the other hand, he comes to a very clear conclusion on every player, noticeably lacking a lot of fencesitting, which makes me think it might just be bad analysis as opposed to disguised non-analysis.
Eron - Eron's early game was scummy, as he spent most of it picking at Asenion's claimed experience/knowledge level (#140). Post #436 doesn't really go anywhere: there are a lot of words, but no obvious point to it. This therefore looks like active lurking: I can't see any real scumhunting.
Eron's crux is #472, where he attacks KosaKosa. If Kosa IS scum, then this looks good for Eron as it's unlikely to be a bus. However, if Kosa turns out to be town, this is bad for Eron because he dithers over WoD while criticising some of WoD's voters: subtle defence of known scum.
****
No read:
AsianInvasion - I liked Charm Master's #160 because I don't like Iso: unlikely to be buddies for sure. Apart from that, nothing either has done has stood out.
AlphaInsidious - Going into this, I thought I had a town read on this AI, but I actually have no notes taken down for him. Therefore, he's elicited a gut town read, but I sure as hell couldn't tell you why in detail.
Guardman - No notes, can't remember anything he's done apart from vote Tanarin. Please to make more content.
Tanarin - #221 is my only note and it felt a lot like OMGUS to me. Apart from that, I don't have any sort of read on him.
Though I have to say, of everything you just typed, this part:
Quote from Eco »
Ced395
-I liked his #217 as solid analysis. My notes also apparently list dC's #311 in ced's favour, but I can't work out why. I possibly made a typo. <_<
Would be just such an incredible fakeout for scum. Worthy of another sig. quote!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
Caex Kothar - While it is technically WIFOM, I simply cannot see a mafia player putting as much effort as he has into his PBPAs. They are particularly town-minded since they actually contain a good deal of analysis, and it would be extremely difficult for a Mafioso to fake so much actual analysis. Assuming I am correct, he's setting up a very difficult metagame for him to follow as scum in the future.
I'm getting a different read of Caex. In Intrigue he did the PBPAs and lead the town. Caex was instrumental in trying to work the game mechanics for the benefit of the town. He analyzed behavior as the game progressed instead of just in large spurts like in this game.
I'm not sure if it's because this game has almost twice the number of voices, but Caex was definitely more on the forefront in Intrigue. He's in my undecided pile in this game so far.
If Kosa is scum, Nis almost certainly is too.
...
Again, if Kosa is scum, this looks bad for Iso: Kosa's point against WoD was bad, but Iso's giving him +town for it without even explaining why he liked it.
...
Overall though, Iso is erring on the side of scum, particularly if Kosa flips Mafia.
....
However, if Kosa turns out to be town, this is bad for Eron because he dithers over WoD while criticising some of WoD's voters: subtle defence of known scum.
Anybody else notice the attempt to setup a chain lynch here?
We also note that beyond his pressure vote in #448, he doesn't appear to mention WoD again. He never seems to reconsider his vote: if it was to just up the pressure, wouldn't you be looking to examine the responses to the pressure, or even push again for questions to be answered?
With the WoD heating up, how confident do you feel your vote on WoD is? You voted early on before WoD began his defense, so I haven't seen anything there.
After his argument that his meta is now null since he's adjusting his play style against his known meta I feel my vote stands. WoD has shut up hard since Xyre called out his adjustment as a ret-con.
Also Eco, where's my points for asking how you knew Asension was a townie? That probably undercuts your attempt to paint me as scum, though.
Caex Kothar - While it is technically WIFOM, I simply cannot see a mafia player putting as much effort as he has into his PBPAs. They are particularly town-minded since they actually contain a good deal of analysis, and it would be extremely difficult for a Mafioso to fake so much actual analysis. Assuming I am correct, he's setting up a very difficult metagame for him to follow as scum in the future.
I'm getting a different read of Caex. In Intrigue he did the PBPAs and lead the town. Caex was instrumental in trying to work the game mechanics for the benefit of the town. He analyzed behavior as the game progressed instead of just in large spurts like in this game.
I'm not sure if it's because this game has almost twice the number of voices, but Caex was definitely more on the forefront in Intrigue. He's in my undecided pile in this game so far.
So you're saying that you're not sure Caex is town because although he's making PBPAs, he's not leading the town like he did in Intrigue, correct?
If Kosa is scum, Nis almost certainly is too.
...
Again, if Kosa is scum, this looks bad for Iso: Kosa's point against WoD was bad, but Iso's giving him +town for it without even explaining why he liked it.
...
Overall though, Iso is erring on the side of scum, particularly if Kosa flips Mafia.
....
However, if Kosa turns out to be town, this is bad for Eron because he dithers over WoD while criticising some of WoD's voters: subtle defence of known scum.
Anybody else notice the attempt to setup a chain lynch here?
Sometimes player's alignments depends on knowing that of other first. Also, most of my links are based on Kosa being scum. Are you suggesting that I'm bussing my buddy to maybe get two townies in exchange?
We also note that beyond his pressure vote in #448, he doesn't appear to mention WoD again. He never seems to reconsider his vote: if it was to just up the pressure, wouldn't you be looking to examine the responses to the pressure, or even push again for questions to be answered?
With the WoD heating up, how confident do you feel your vote on WoD is? You voted early on before WoD began his defense, so I haven't seen anything there.
After his argument that his meta is now null since he's adjusting his play style against his known meta I feel my vote stands. WoD has shut up hard since Xyre called out his adjustment as a ret-con.
My bad. That's not a convincing point, but I retract my statement. It is interesting that you say WoD has adjusted his meta, but WoD claimed that he forgot how people perceived his meta.
Quote from Nis »
Also Eco, where's my points for asking how you knew Asension was a townie? That probably undercuts your attempt to paint me as scum, though.
You don't get points for that because it's not a tell? Nice zinger though.
So you're saying that you're not sure Caex is town because although he's making PBPAs, he's not leading the town like he did in Intrigue, correct?
Correct. I'm not automatically putting him in my town camp just because he's doing PBPAs. I hate to use meta but in this case my recent experience with Caex tells me he's not doing the same thing he did last time he was town. He's doing part of what he did then, but he's definitely not leading the charge like last time.
Also, most of my links are based on Kosa being scum. Are you suggesting that I'm bussing my buddy to maybe get two townies in exchange?
You did setup two sets of potential mislynches: If Kosa is scum then Iso and I are scum; if Iso and I are both town, though, you've mislynched twice. If Kosa is town then Eron is scum; if Eron is town then you've mislynched twice.
My bad. That's not a convincing point, but I retract my statement. It is interesting that you say WoD has adjusted his meta, but WoD claimed that he forgot how people perceived his meta.
Because we know that scum always tell the truth.[/sarcasm]
So you're saying that you're not sure Caex is town because although he's making PBPAs, he's not leading the town like he did in Intrigue, correct?
Correct. I'm not automatically putting him in my town camp just because he's doing PBPAs. I hate to use meta but in this case my recent experience with Caex tells me he's not doing the same thing he did last time he was town. He's doing part of what he did then, but he's definitely not leading the charge like last time.
This doesn't mean I view him as scum now, though.
Ok. I'm calling you out here: there's so much difference between a player leading a mini with a handful of veterans, and leading a large, complex game filled with renowned players. What is it about leading the town that's so necessary? Why aren't his detailed and wide-spread analyses enough for a read?
Also, most of my links are based on Kosa being scum. Are you suggesting that I'm bussing my buddy to maybe get two townies in exchange?
You did setup two sets of potential mislynches: If Kosa is scum then Iso and I are scum; if Iso and I are both town, though, you've mislynched twice. If Kosa is town then Eron is scum; if Eron is town then you've mislynched twice.
For the former, I had to trade my scumbuddy, which is a pretty lame trade. For the latter, yeah I guess I get two mislynches. Instead of looking at how many potential mislynches I've chained in a worst case scenario, why don't you evaluate each player's behaviour and the links between them and decide whether you agree with me. If you don't think Eron is likely scum if Kosa is town, explain it. Don't just say "oh no he'll get mislynched".
My bad. That's not a convincing point, but I retract my statement. It is interesting that you say WoD has adjusted his meta, but WoD claimed that he forgot how people perceived his meta.
Because we know that scum always tell the truth.[/sarcasm]
Pretty sure WoD would have avoided playing to his scum metagame if he'd have thought about it. Not realising didn't exactly work out well for him.
You don't get points for that because it's not a tell? Nice zinger though.
It was a slip though.
[/quote]
a) No it isn't, because I don't actually know Asenion is town, b) so? you'd only get points for catching a slip if I turn out to be scum, which is not the case.
The first thing that I noticed was post #53/56. He calls Shark's "slip" "the tell of the century", but apparently this isn't enough for a vote. As KosaKosa says in #56, you "GOTTA EARN IT [a vote]", but if the best tell of this century isn't enough, I don't see how Kosa can ever vote anyone. Note also that his plan is to hang back with ced and Caex: this is not the mindset of someone actively hunting for scum, he's hanging back and waiting for more public support before voting. He even says that he doesn't want to hear more like ced and Caex, he's just not voting for no good reason.
Eventually though, Kosa does vote Shark in #106, is one hell of an OMGUS. The vote is apparently only based on Shark "Slightly trying to make me look suspicious", which is a far cry from "GOTTA EARN IT BRO". Kosa was unprepard to vote Shark for making the tell of the century, but is happy to pull the trigger on "Slightly trying to make me look suspicious".
In #287 and #300, Kosa unleashes a tide of OMGUS against Caex who dares to agree with ced's points against Kosa, as well as slinging mud at ced himself. This attack on ced originates in #223, where he raises a truly ridiculous and desperate theory. The "fish more" doesn't really make sense in context, but I suspect that he's telling ced that he won't succeed in creating some kind of meta game for Kosa to aid reading him in the later game. Why wouldn't Kosa want that to happen? Because he doesn't want to be read correctly.
Throughout the game, Kosa makes digs at people without explictly raising supicions. Examples are #159, #423, and #205. In particular, the latter attempts to discredit the very pro-town actions of Caex by dismissing them as WIFOM. In a similar vein, post #163 contains a fencesit on AlphaI/Tanarin and leaves the door very open to barn something and vote eiher one.
Kosa voted Axelrod in #173, and it's a doozy. As I'm sure everyone can read, Axelrod's statements are nowhere near contradictions. This non-issue is apparently the biggest point KosaKosa has against Axel, and his other points are tame (apparently asking a pointless question is a scumtell?) Somehow, this all adds up to Axel being "blatant scum". This vote is truly awful. Kosa's looking for an easy way onto the wagon.
Moving onto Kosa's interactions with WoD, we first have a fencesit in #445. He's very happy to have no strong opinion and wait to see what happens, allowing him to bus if needed. Which he does in #471.
#471 deserves some scrutiny. Kosa's main issue with WoD in #445 was a lack of solid conclusions, but by #471 this has apparently been forgotten and Kosa votes WoD for some barely comprehensible metagame reason. Like, I'm not even sure it makes sense. It looks like Kosa is voting WoD because WoD says that he would have played differently if he was aware of his meta. Huh? That's not a scumtell, that's common sense. Moving on, we get to #699 where the reason for Kosa's vote is now apparently a lack of conclusions again. This isn't what he said when he actually voted, and Kosa can't keep his story straight.
Lastly, we see his post today of #857. I would wager that this is more or less exactly what Kosa said he would do in the night talk: kill dC, attack Shark for being a dC suspect. Even though it is (as he himself says) WIFOM (dC being a very strong player with a well documented history of dying Night 1), Kosa goes all in on Shark - one of dC's less strong suspects. He doesn't seem to even provide a reason for voting Shark, it's just tacked on there. Axel nailed it in #861.
In summary, this case isn't a super slam dunk of one obvious tell, but instead it's a sum of parts: I see Kosa being very reluctant to vote without support, very happy to discredit and poke at players without actually voicing suspicion, while also very happy to fencesit on a number of players, leaving option open to vote them at the drop of a hat. Kosa is also very sensitive to being pressured, firing off an OMGUS vote at Shark, and attacking Caex and ced viciously for making points against him. The votes that he has made have been poor in general (Shark, Axel, WoD), and I just don't see him striking out and hunting scum. Finally, his reveal would be incredibly helpful in puzzling out the game.
Ok. I'm calling you out here: there's so much difference between a player leading a mini with a handful of veterans, and leading a large, complex game filled with renowned players.
What is it about leading the town that's so necessary? Why aren't his detailed and wide-spread analyses enough for a read?
Last time to played with Player X he turned out to be town and had some specific behaviors. In the next game with Player X he exhibits some of those behaviors but not others. Is it safe to assume that Player X is town again?
Pretty sure WoD would have avoided playing to his scum metagame if he'd have thought about it. Not realising didn't exactly work out well for him.
Wait. Do you think I'm saying I thought WoD was adjusting his meta? I was restating what WoD was saying about his playstyle. I think we're misunderstanding each other here. Maybe reset on this point?
I realize this is a joke, but again, it seems forced.
I'm about to take a game I'm running from Night into Day, so once I post that scene, I'm going to tackle Axel's post that I said I would since I have about 2 hours before I have to leave for my flight.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
@Eco: You have organized your post nicely and put good subject sentences at the start of the paragraphs. Organized writing like that is much easier to read.
I agree with your opinion on Xyre and you make good points about Kosa. I'm keeping Caex somewhat neutral though. I went and read most of Intrigue and I think that because he developed this "meta" there, he would be likely to try and do these kind of analysis posts as either town or scum. His opinions here also feel more neutral and less strong than they were there. I also disagree about Iso, who I currently feel is likely town, and Axelrod who I currently feel is very likely scum.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
An accurate description of myself:
Quote from Megiddo »
You're the dude who just lies a lot and makes people hate you and then magically becomes town later, right?
So you're saying that you're not sure Caex is town because although he's making PBPAs, he's not leading the town like he did in Intrigue, correct?
Correct. I'm not automatically putting him in my town camp just because he's doing PBPAs. I hate to use meta but in this case my recent experience with Caex tells me he's not doing the same thing he did last time he was town. He's doing part of what he did then, but he's definitely not leading the charge like last time.
This doesn't mean I view him as scum now, though.
Ok. I'm calling you out here: there's so much difference between a player leading a mini with a handful of veterans, and leading a large, complex game filled with renowned players. What is it about leading the town that's so necessary? Why aren't his detailed and wide-spread analyses enough for a read?
This hits the nail on the head. In Intrigue, there were only 12 players. By the time I really took the lead, there were just 10, and there were relatively few veterans who were being proactive about posting. Nobody else was spearheading the game after Iso got lynched and it happened to be that I was the one doing a good chunk of the posting.
In this game, there are almost twice as many people and a lot of them are mafia heavyweights. I don't feel like it's necessary to try to take the reigns when there are much more experienced players who can do it better.
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
I don't feel like it's necessary to try to take the reigns when there are much more experienced players who can do it better.
I'm starting to lean in this direction myself. As long as I am an informed voter and not mindlessly /barning, I think I will let those inclined to do serious analysis do so until I feel that I can contribute without simply adding to the level of noise in the thread.
I will try to churn out a big catch-up post some time in the following week, though.
Quick post: No one can help me unlock my ability to vote. It depends on my actions. I can't comment on whether it's worth it or not without revealing more information.
My ability that unlocks myself is something I have to do by myself. Others can use their abilities to lock/unlock my locks though.
I realize I was somewhat unclear earlier, but didn't feel the need to clarify unless someone misunderstood.
I've also been thinking, it seems likely that most of us will have at least one way to unlock their own locks. Might there be value at some point in a soft-claim on unlock method so that the town has more control over who gets abilities and who doesn't? We already have a few claims from people like ced and AsianInvasion.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
An accurate description of myself:
Quote from Megiddo »
You're the dude who just lies a lot and makes people hate you and then magically becomes town later, right?
My ability that unlocks myself is something I have to do by myself. Others can use their abilities to lock/unlock my locks though.
I realize I was somewhat unclear earlier, but didn't feel the need to clarify unless someone misunderstood.
I've also been thinking, it seems likely that most of us will have at least one way to unlock their own locks. Might there be value at some point in a soft-claim on unlock method so that the town has more control over who gets abilities and who doesn't? We already have a few claims from people like ced and AsianInvasion.
Maybe later on, but at this point, I don't really see that much value unless that method requires coordination from other parties, such as ced's. It's just unnecessary information being revealed.
My ability that unlocks myself is something I have to do by myself. Others can use their abilities to lock/unlock my locks though.
I realize I was somewhat unclear earlier, but didn't feel the need to clarify unless someone misunderstood.
I've also been thinking, it seems likely that most of us will have at least one way to unlock their own locks. Might there be value at some point in a soft-claim on unlock method so that the town has more control over who gets abilities and who doesn't? We already have a few claims from people like ced and AsianInvasion.
I feel for the most part that we should not be claiming our unlocks for now. I don't see any great advantage unless there is a clear cut easy way for the town to influence the unlocking.
I feel for the most part that we should not be claiming our unlocks for now. I don't see any great advantage unless there is a clear cut easy way for the town to influence the unlocking.
Given dC's unlock ability we also know that there are passive unlock abilities and some of those abilities might not be influenced by any sort of coordinated effort.
The situation when Iso cast his vote was this: There were three other votes on me - Vitek, Tanarin, and SilverSihhe. Vitek's vote was a leftover RVS vote. The other two, however, were serious. In addition, several other players had expressed suspicions about some of my posts, notably Arnneria in several posts, but also kosakosa and charmmaster. Even ced had agreed I was "stretching" in my questioning of Eco.
The timing, you might say, was ripe.
I would never attack someone strictly for being in a specific “slot” in the voting order, of course, so what you do next is look at the actual reasoning being given for said vote. Is the person bringing anything of his own to the discussion, or are they strictly barning/copying what others have already said?
So your point is that, because scum are likely to place their votes in such a manner that would push the wagon into momentum, that you think my vote was the catalyst for that? While I agree with the technique, I disagree with the conclusion - as for why, let's look at the votes following my own. You'll find that your wagon did not gain momentum as a result of my vote. The votes that occurred after my own before your own wagon lost momentum were:
(dC confirmed his vote on Shark, but since that's not an actual changing of the vote, I'll only make a note of it here.)
Vitek realized his RVS vote was still present and Unvoted it. (Also worth noting that zindabad forgot my vote in the votecount that made Vitek realize this.)
So, two votes on you followed my vote of you, when two votes went elsewhere - to myself and to one of the people whose vote on your wagon followed my own. But then your wagon stagnated. If my vote were such an event that would cause you to get run up, then I could understand that, but as it is, your speculation is totally off-base in that people started looking elsewhere once Vitek removed his vote. So, this is a misrepresentation of what actually happened.
Quote from Axelrod »
Basically, I’m “stretching.” I will note 5 things here:
(1) This is more or less a reiteration of what other people (SilverSihhe and Ced and even SF) have already come down on me for with respect to my posting at Eco;
(2) He’s asking these questions like he wants an answer, but he doesn’t really want an answer, as he immediately votes and states he wants me to hang;
(3) I’ve actually answered this now (though, admittedly, I had not at the time) and admitted it was probably a stretch, though I did not consider it all that big of a deal so early on in the day;
(4) When the explanation comes, however, shortly afterwards, Iso completely ignores it; and
(5) If you really want to know whether or not I consider a scum-Eco to be a threat or not, just check out that Sig. of his that he so proudly trots about wearing. One of my worst reads ever.
1. ...and? When you vote for a person, it's generally commonplace to provide your reasoning for believing that person is scum - whether it's a rehash of someone else's points against you or not should make little difference if the push is genuine.
2. If I ask it in Mafia, it's probably not rhetorical. Just because I want you to get lynched doesn't mean I don't want you to still answer my questions.
3. So you say it's a point against me...and then say that yes, what I said is, in fact, true? Garbage. This shouldn't even have been included in your post if you were genuinely trying to convince people that I was scum. I think this is a clear indicator that your push against me is fabricated and holds no basis in reality whatsoever.
4. Show me where. Did I not verbally acknowledge it? If not, then I probably thought it was a bull**** reason if I'm still presenting that as a point against you. Fabricating an explanation =/= Explaining yourself sufficiently.
5. Okay, so why, then, given your atrocious behavior, should I be inclined to believe that this isn't just a farce to buddy up to Eco?
Quote from Axelrod »
The dreaded “too self-conscious” accusation. I will note three things here:
(1) The “self-conscious” accusation is also not original to Iso. This is basically what everyone has been getting on me for since the early game.
(2) The “however”. It’s interesting, because it’s almost like he’s saying the quote immediately above was NOT a sufficient reason to vote for me, but – however – the “self-conscious” thing has now tipped it over the edge. And the point here is that it just doesn’t come across like all that strong of a vote. Hardly, the kind of thing you act virtually certain about later on.
(3) The way the vote is kind of buried in the post. It’s odd that most of this post isn’t even talking about me. It’s talking about SF and answering a couple of questions from other people. The vote reads as almost incidental. This too, in my experience, does not show a Townie mindset. When a Townie is getting prepared to cast a serious vote – maybe his first or most serious vote of the game, they don’t generally toss it off in the middle of a post talking about a lot of other things. If it’s a really serious, strong vote, they tend to emphasize the vote. Iso did none of that. It’s really, at its heart, a pure bandwagon vote, and nothing more.
1. Again...and? Are you discrediting their accusations by merit of me using logic that someone else has used? If not, then your "by proxy" argument is stupid. If so, then I'd like you to explain, again, how that makes it anything of a point against me "just because someone else said it, too". I often don't thoroughly read the posts of people that I think are town, and as such, it's well within the realm of possibility for me to post the exact same case someone else has just because I didn't look into their post too closely because I thought they were town. I play Mafia by gut a lot, as I tend to be more accurate when I favor it over pure analysis. So if a player makes a post, or even several, that make me think they're town, I start to look less for possible indications that they are scum.
2. "Interesting" is a scum word, Axel. That aside, the "however" was to indicate that what I said was not of the same train of thought as my previous quote of you in that post that I was explaining my disdain for. You're reaching. Again.
3. It's not a bandwagon vote at all. You're saying that my vote is "buried in my post". Clearly you're unfamiliar with the way that I write my posts. I read the last post I didn't read, will open a quote in a new tab if it's something I want to specifically respond to, or type an "@Playername" if I just want to make a general comment about it or can't be arsed to open a new tab for it. This continues on until I reach the end of the thread. I will then type anything else I think is worth bringing up, and make my post. If there's enough that needs to be said, then I will occasionally compile quotes in an organized manner, e.g. in a fashion similar to dC's posting style. That's how I make my posts. This can not possibly be a genuine line of attack from you. Post formatting is what makes me scummy? Really? You are NOT that bad a player, Axelrod.
Quote from Axelrod »
So, what happens next? Just bandwaggoning doesn’t mean a player is scum. It is, in fact, perfectly possible for one person to make a post, a case, against another player, and for you to go “oh yeah, that makes total sense, I totally agree with that” and vote accordingly. This happens too. Usually, of course, if that’s what you are doing, you SAY that’s what you are doing. You say “man, I agree with XXX” right there in the post. This is especially true when the voter has not previously expressed any kind of suspicion about the player in question.
Iso, of course, did not do that either. He didn’t say “I agree with X” or anything like that. Nor had he previously posted in a way as to suggest he was actually suspicious of me leading up to that vote. So he’s waggoning, without admitting he’s waggoning. This is also more closely aligned with the scum mindset – because they “know” that pure bandwaggoning can get you looked at.
A cute theory, except you're completely disregarding the way I play the game and using that as a point against me. This goes into self-meta a bit, which I'm reluctant to bring up as I strongly feel my meta is not an indication of my alignment (rather, that I am Iso), but this is strictly a playstyle argument and I refuse to allow this to be used against me just because Axel doesn't like the way I play. Apples and oranges. Get over it. Not the first time I've pointed out why this is a stupid argument in my play history, either.
Quote from Axelrod »
Certainly no one has any basis to be that sure about any vote early on D1.
Playstyle argument.
Quote from Axelrod »
(2) How they justify/explain their vote when asked to do so? When people finally started to question Iso more about his vote – and his apparent dismissal of my explanation - Iso retreated. He not only didn’t explain it. He said he couldn’t explain it. He said he felt like my posts were just too self conscious, and not “natural” sounding to him, and that was all there is too it. When specifically asked to “deconstruct” my post and explain what sounded unnatural to him, he said he couldn’t do it. It was just too personal to him and his way of thinking.
Except I later did go back and address this and nobody (looking at you, Eco) seems to remember that I did this. So, this is just a blatant lie.
Quote from Axelrod »
Also this, which is a smaller thing, but I found his audacity amusing. In my post directed at SilverSihhe, I talked a little about my attitude, and in particular one thing that can absolutely get me to blow my top in this game, which is when I am Town and someone else (I always read this as smugly) states that they are absolutely positive I am scum. They’re certain. I am obviously scum. I admitted that I am liable to rip that person a new one when that happens – because of how completely and totally wrong they and their garbage reasons are, you see?
Not long after, Iso says:
Quote from Iso »
Well Axelrod's pretty obviously scum at this point.
In a blatant attempt to get me to lose my cool, and (hopefully?) draw the attention back to myself for my “over-reaction” and “over-defensiveness.” I do not believe this was unintentional. Not for a minute. And it’s not Town.
I actually must have glazed over that exchange of yours with SS because I don't remember you saying that at all, but after reading this post that I'm responding to right now, I will admit that I've laced a bit of trolling in some of my posts directed towards you to get you to slip up some more. And also because it makes me chuckle. I think it's laughable that you think my attempting to get someone I believe is scum to lose their cool and post something incriminating is anti-town in any way, given that scum can get angry just as easily as town.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
The first thing that I noticed was post #53/56. He calls Shark's "slip" "the tell of the century", but apparently this isn't enough for a vote. As KosaKosa says in #56, you "GOTTA EARN IT [a vote]", but if the best tell of this century isn't enough, I don't see how Kosa can ever vote anyone. Note also that his plan is to hang back with ced and Caex: this is not the mindset of someone actively hunting for scum, he's hanging back and waiting for more public support before voting. He even says that he doesn't want to hear more like ced and Caex, he's just not voting for no good reason.
Sorry for trying to have fun during RVS on my first game. No, really, I've made all those posts with caps, laughts and emoticons to be taken seriously during the less serious part of the game.
Eventually though, Kosa does vote Shark in #106, is one hell of an OMGUS. The vote is apparently only based on Shark "Slightly trying to make me look suspicious", which is a far cry from "GOTTA EARN IT BRO". Kosa was unprepard to vote Shark for making the tell of the century, but is happy to pull the trigger on "Slightly trying to make me look suspicious".
Shark was being held as the scummiest player of the game up to that point. Then he not only skimmed while defending himself, but also tried to frame me. He deserved that vote. It's was a bit OMGUS, yes, but not that much.
Also, as you also consider Shark to be scummy, what would I gain, as scum, from voting Shark then unvoting Shark for Axel? As I said a couple posts back, it would make no sense to do so.
In #287 and #300, Kosa unleashes a tide of OMGUS against Caex who dares to agree with ced's points against Kosa, as well as slinging mud at ced himself. This attack on ced originates in #223, where he raises a truly ridiculous and desperate theory. The "fish more" doesn't really make sense in context, but I suspect that he's telling ced that he won't succeed in creating some kind of meta game for Kosa to aid reading him in the later game. Why wouldn't Kosa want that to happen? Because he doesn't want to be read correctly.
That wasn't OMGUS at all. I was pointing out the unnecessary amounts of praising that Caex was putting onto his ced's analysis (mostly points against me), which he didn't when PBPA'ing other players before. I didn't like it, because ced's points against me were implicity a defense of Caex's PBPAs so that sounded as biased. As I said before, I wasn't questioning the PBPAs, only saying that the sheer act of doing it doesn't define allegiance.
About ced's attack on me, I think it's pretty clear how he gets to "conclusions" over things I was "obviously implying", when in fact it was a simple comment. And my meta-comment stands: people care way too much about meta. I'm sure some players get really unconfortable when playing against new players/proxies for being unable to check their past games.
Throughout the game, Kosa makes digs at people without explictly raising supicions. Examples are #159, #423, and #205. In particular, the latter attempts to discredit the very pro-town actions of Caex by dismissing them as WIFOM. In a similar vein, post #163 contains a fencesit on AlphaI/Tanarin and leaves the door very open to barn something and vote eiher one.
#159: which part?
#423: the phrase itself explains the point. What is hard to understand there?
#205: seriously, this is the last time I will say the same thing: the act of doing PBPAs is null, what matters is their content. This is a fact whether people agree with it or not. That said, if you read that post, you will see I wasn't trying to discredit Caex, I was pointing out something totally possible to happen. Is there any lies, untruths, incorrect points over that post's affirmation? No.
#163: that was an address to Guardman's complaint about people ignoring his Tan vote post. I've posted my opinion over it, of while not having a solid read over neither, that Tan post sounded like and escape route. I can't do much if you think that's fence-sitting.
Kosa voted Axelrod in #173, and it's a doozy. As I'm sure everyone can read, Axelrod's statements are nowhere near contradictions. This non-issue is apparently the biggest point KosaKosa has against Axel, and his other points are tame (apparently asking a pointless question is a scumtell?) Somehow, this all adds up to Axel being "blatant scum". This vote is truly awful. Kosa's looking for an easy way onto the wagon.
Already addressed. I've tunnel-visioned a bit. Acknowleged, apologised and moved on. Also, as I said before, Shark would be an easier wagon for scum to stay on and bus for town credit.
Moving onto Kosa's interactions with WoD, we first have a fencesit in #445. He's very happy to have no strong opinion and wait to see what happens, allowing him to bus if needed. Which he does in #471.
Of course that was a fence-sit. Most of WoD's posts were null and he wasn't even close to being scum for most players. Then Xyre dropped a bomb with fair reasoning, although partially meta-based. I didn't know what to think, so I wanted to hear WoD's defense over that. His defense made no sense as I've pointed out on my vote post on him, also stating my argument, reasoning and his contradiction.
#471 deserves some scrutiny. Kosa's main issue with WoD in #445 was a lack of solid conclusions, but by #471 this has apparently been forgotten and Kosa votes WoD for some barely comprehensible metagame reason. Like, I'm not even sure it makes sense. It looks like Kosa is voting WoD because WoD says that he would have played differently if he was aware of his meta. Huh? That's not a scumtell, that's common sense. Moving on, we get to #699 where the reason for Kosa's vote is now apparently a lack of conclusions again. This isn't what he said when he actually voted, and Kosa can't keep his story straight.
My vote wasn't meta-based. If you didn't figured that out, I recommend you to get back there and reread it because you just accused me of bussing WoD. You can't say that if you were unable to understand the post that made you do so, that is reaching.
Lastly, we see his post today of #857. I would wager that this is more or less exactly what Kosa said he would do in the night talk: kill dC, attack Shark for being a dC suspect. Even though it is (as he himself says) WIFOM (dC being a very strong player with a well documented history of dying Night 1), Kosa goes all in on Shark - one of dC's less strong suspects. He doesn't seem to even provide a reason for voting Shark, it's just tacked on there. Axel nailed it in #861.
Lol wait, do you really think scum would let me, a new player at online Mafia, to command the NK? Plus, how the hell am I supposed to know how of a "very strong player etc" dC is? This is my first game here! I've read bits of other games and most of Seasons, not lurked relentlessly to know everything about my friends and enemies. I don't even care about meta that much tbh.
I've made that point because for me, it's more obvious to nightkill a more-likely confirmed town as Xyre (who got a scum out of nowhere). I was trying to understand the reasoning behind it, because even if that goes into a WIFOM, it's better than nothing.
Also, saying that Shark was one of dC's less strong suspects is wrong. To begin with, when the day ended dC's vote was on Shark. Plus, if you don't think my following posts after Axel's question (you haven't mentioned them) were good reasoning as on why to vote Shark... then I don't know what else I can do.
In summary, this case isn't a super slam dunk of one obvious tell, but instead it's a sum of parts: I see Kosa being very reluctant to vote without support, very happy to discredit and poke at players without actually voicing suspicion, while also very happy to fencesit on a number of players, leaving option open to vote them at the drop of a hat. Kosa is also very sensitive to being pressured, firing off an OMGUS vote at Shark, and attacking Caex and ced viciously for making points against him. The votes that he has made have been poor in general (Shark, Axel, WoD), and I just don't see him striking out and hunting scum. Finally, his reveal would be incredibly helpful in puzzling out the game.
I tried to make a word file early into the game laying out the posts I thought to be relevant, but I gave up on that around #200 or so because of lazyness, college's end of semester and because I read the game a lot on my phone. I'm just not the type of scum-hunter that goes 500 posts back to check if things add up every time someone posts something. I do it mostly by memory and language. To say that I am not hunting scum is unfair, especially after my WoD vote and my recent Shark vote.
Not only that, but to say that I'm discrediting people is twisting my words. I am pointing out stuff that I consider to be worth for doing so, either because people are assuming too much or because it's plain wrong. I'm asking, argumenting and being transparent on every point I make, instead of laying stuff simply for the sake of doing so, especially on my votes.
Background: Conventional wisdom is that scum do not like to interact with their teammates, especially in the early game, for risk of spilling out too much information if they chose to get lynched. We know Wrath of Dog flipped scum. Now, we should analyze his interactions with other players to determine if his level of interactivity with other players could provide an insight into who is scum and who is town.
I chose four methods of interaction: Questions, Comments, Votes, and Quotes. I did not weigh these differently in value because each provides an interaction with another player that shouldn’t be overlooked. Here is my definition of the four categorical interactions:
Questions: A direct question asked to another player.
Comments: A direct comment about another player without a quote.
Votes: A vote placed upon another player.
Quotes: A direct quote pulled from another player with or without commentary attached. Quotes supersede comments.
Wrath of Dog confessed himself as mafia in post # 735. I scored all the categories before then, and here are the levels of interaction:
Comment: # 410 (in summary, not case)
Comment: # 419
Comment: # 457
Comment: # 645
Caex: 3 Interactions
Comment: # 410 (in summary, not case)
Comment: # 419
Comment: # 671
desCoures: 2 Interactions
Comment: # 410 (in summary, not case)
Comment: # 419
Eron: 1 Interaction
Comment: #149
Ced: 1 Interaction
Comment: # 693
Ecophagy: 1 Interaction
Quote: # 419
Tanarin: 1 Interaction
Quote: # 725
Guardman: 1 Interaction
Quote: # 566
AlphaInsidious: 1 Interaction
Quote: # 674
Zero Interaction:
Asenion
Asian Invasion / Charm
Nis
Deaths Vampire
SilverSihhe
Comments: Charm didn’t post much and Asian Invasion took over after he had confessed. Cyathre replaced Vitek.
And I didn’t realize until I did this that Wrath had RVS voted Iso and continued to tunnel him throughout his tenure here like a snowball rolling down a hill and getting bigger and bigger.
That does nothing to rebut Xyre's argument. Let's up the pressure. Unvote Vote Wrath_of_DoG
Remember how I've said twice I don't like sloppiness? Time to check up your counts.
I guess it wasn't stated, but I only pulled from Wrath of Dog's posts, not everyone elses. I was trying to see how Wrath of Dog interacted with other players, not the other way around.
It's more like... If you hold it against me every time I make an analysis post... I'm just not going to even try and analyse anymore, as town or scum.
That being said, I did completely forget that I have been known to do that when I am mafia, so perhaps I chose the wrong game to start trying to "play" the game.
Defeatist attitude and a bad excuse for a change inbehavior. This is scum trying to explain away a minor mistake, but making himself more obvious in the process.
I guess it wasn't stated, but I only pulled from Wrath of Dog's posts, not everyone elses. I was trying to see how Wrath of Dog interacted with other players, not the other way around.
That makes sense then. I thought I was going crazy since I was really sure I had voted for WoD and I was pretty sure Asenion had pseudo-voted. Time to look at it from the opposite perspective.
I guess it wasn't stated, but I only pulled from Wrath of Dog's posts, not everyone elses. I was trying to see how Wrath of Dog interacted with other players, not the other way around.
Most of my top scumspects are near the top of your list. Also, I had forgotten DV was even in this game. Has he done anything besides yell at Iso? At what point does low contribution become a scum tell? Day 2? Day 3?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
An accurate description of myself:
Quote from Megiddo »
You're the dude who just lies a lot and makes people hate you and then magically becomes town later, right?
Most of my top scumspects are near the top of your list. Also, I had forgotten DV was even in this game. Has he done anything besides yell at Iso? At what point does low contribution become a scum tell? Day 2? Day 3?
I dunno, part of the reason Wrath was lynched was because he was failing to contribute what he promised to contribute. So, there's that.
My case on Shark also still stands. Also, post 840. The awkwardness just stands out. The fact that he's doing it as a "me too" after AsianInvasion does it also makes me feel like AI is likely town.
@AI: I am sorry that I swiped that from you, but your request seemed off to me. I understand that you have your reason for wanting to be on the wagon before the end of the day, but the Day was already basically over, and I was uncomfortable about you asking to be on the wagon without providing any analysis from your reread.
How do you derive that AsianI is town from Shark's "Me too"? Also, this apology feels forced. Why would you not include this when you vote-blocked AsianI to close out the day?
Edit: I see that AsianI asked a similar question.
How was I supposed to post any analysis when I specifically said that I wouldn't be able to reread for a while?
And why are you apologizing now when you knew full well what you were doing at the time? It's not like you accidentally hammered and now feel guilty about it.
I have my eyes on Axelrod, ced395, and Ecophagy after reading the first few pages of the thread as well as recent developments. Nis's quintuple-FoS on desCoures is also absurd and deserves scrutiny.
I'm apologizing to you as a person, because I recognize that it was something that you really didn't like, but I am not apologizing to you as a player, because I stand by my gut at the time, since your request seemed weird to me.
I am aware that you said it would take you some time to reread, but the jumping on the wagon regardless didn't sit right with me. I realize you have your reasons for doing so, and like I said before, you can't control when you replaced in, but L-2 seemed like the wrong time to ask everyone to slow down so you could vote him.
This doesn't address the question. Why do you feel bad enough about it now to apologize, but didn't at the time of the hammer?
I'm trying to find out the reasoning behind the choosing of dC as the NK target, instead of a more likely-confirmed town as Xyre. As WIFOM as it might be, I think it's worth looking at what dC said he would do for toDay (before being killed, that is), and check his points on both ced and Nis.
I felt the case against Nis pretty weak as it is, especially considering it was Shark who came out with it in the first place, but nonetheless it's worth a better look after dC's death.
And speaking of Shark, Vote: SharkFinnigan
I really don't like this post. You don't really remember what dC was going to do today, but you remember that he had points against ced and Nis. You conveniently leave out that he had points against you and Shark as well.
You want to look into what dC had to say regarding Nis (this implies that you at least think there is something to a NisScum Possiblity) but then in your second paragraph you use Shark's "weak case" against Nis as reason to vote him.
Can you clarify how dC's points against Nis are worth looking back on and Shark's case is just "weak"?
Speaking of this ced issue, I've been thinking about him asking for the hammer at the beginning of the game, and I think it is less likely to be a scum mindset. It wouldn't be unreasonably difficult to try to get the hammer vote as scum without outing himself at the start. And I would think from a scum mindset that he would be wary of the town actively not letting him hammer if they knew he wanted to.
Thus, I think it actually makes more sense from a town perspective -- misguided though it was -- to ask for the hammer in hopes of town coordination to help his abilities along (presumably).
I actually agree that this is probably not from a strictly scum mindset. It would have been just as easy for ScumCed to wait for a player to get to L-1 and then cast the final vote. Moreso in this case as he would have gotten town credit for hammering WoD. I am concerned though that this mindset could come from a neutral perspective because it can be played off as town.
And after a point, Shark wasn't being berated by speculating about the scumteam (and btw his first comment about it when he voted on me wasn't speculation, was an affirmative), but because the answers he was providing when confronted with his affirmative and the way he has put them sounded scummy. My first vote on him was cast based on constant bad reasoning plus an attempt to frame me, not because he was speculating on the setup.
Not that they were scummy, but that they sounded scummy.
Lol opportunistic? Opportunistic would be voting without presenting reasoning. All the people who disliked my point said they "had bad feelings" about it, but no one tackled their perceived problem on it. You know why is that? Because there is none, my argument makes full sense and WoD didn't addressed it at all.
I think your definition of opportunistic isn't aligned with the general understanding of the word. Your definition is more of a naked vote or poor reasoned vote. An opportunistic vote, at least in my opinion is one where you have something to gain. I feel that your votes have been opportunistic from a scum perspective. They were on major wagons each time and the reasons for the votes were pretty lame. See Eco's posts for reference.
I said I would heard from WoD. I did. His argument had a big problem on it. I've pointed out and voted him. He flipped scum. And now you are voting me because you think that was bussing. That makes no sense.
Yes, I hate when someone gives an accused person an way out because even with wrong reasoning when attacking someone, the way they defend themselves speaks per se. See Shark's case early on, for example.
No, it reads as the new player catching his first online scum ever after presenting good reasoning that was tackled by everyone (save Iso), though without arguments and without the accused addressing it. I was happy about being right. Had to rub it on dC's face.
1. You didn't catch WoD, Xyre did.
2. "Had to rub it on dC's face" Vote: KosaKosa This cannot come from a town mentality. What purpose would rubbing anything in anyone's face serve if we are supposed to be a team? We have to work together not create division. Did you believe dC to be scum?
And seriously, you afk for 10 days during most of WoD's stalling and right after getting back you proceed to imply something against me without arguments? You begged for that answer.
And again with the smug negativity. Confirm Vote: KosaKosa. You should be lynched just for this, nevermind the atrocious wagon hopping and ignoring dC's questions.
Eron - Eron's early game was scummy, as he spent most of it picking at Asenion's claimed experience/knowledge level (#140). Post #436 doesn't really go anywhere: there are a lot of words, but no obvious point to it. This therefore looks like active lurking: I can't see any real scumhunting.
Eron's crux is #472, where he attacks KosaKosa. If Kosa IS scum, then this looks good for Eron as it's unlikely to be a bus. However, if Kosa turns out to be town, this is bad for Eron because he dithers over WoD while criticising some of WoD's voters: subtle defence of known scum.
My early game may have been shaky, but to boil it down to simply attacking Asenion is quite the exaggeration. I've also explained that post #472 helped me form an opinion on Arrn, so to say it didn't go anywhere isn't really fair. You may not have gained anything from the exchange, but I did.
I need to dedicate more time to reading through this post. I also need to review Eco's #908. I don't have time to read through all the links, but the case seems to make sense and has similar sentiments to what I had posted Day 1 concerning Kosa's weird voting.
I've also been thinking, it seems likely that most of us will have at least one way to unlock their own locks. Might there be value at some point in a soft-claim on unlock method so that the town has more control over who gets abilities and who doesn't? We already have a few claims from people like ced and AsianInvasion.
I don't think that's a good idea. ced and Asian kind of needed to explain their unlock triggers to avoid gaining suspicion due to their unlocks being vote triggered. So far, no one else has voiced that kind of issue and we should probably keep that excess information out of the thread.
I'm going to give more time to the 2 posts I mentioned as well as Iso's deconstruction of Axel's post. At this point between the behavior yesterday and so far today, I like my vote on Kosa.
My case on Shark also still stands. Also, post 840. The awkwardness just stands out. The fact that he's doing it as a "me too" after AsianInvasion does it also makes me feel like AI is likely town.
@AI: I am sorry that I swiped that from you, but your request seemed off to me. I understand that you have your reason for wanting to be on the wagon before the end of the day, but the Day was already basically over, and I was uncomfortable about you asking to be on the wagon without providing any analysis from your reread.
How do you derive that AsianI is town from Shark's "Me too"? Also, this apology feels forced. Why would you not include this when you vote-blocked AsianI to close out the day?
Edit: I see that AsianI asked a similar question.
How was I supposed to post any analysis when I specifically said that I wouldn't be able to reread for a while?
And why are you apologizing now when you knew full well what you were doing at the time? It's not like you accidentally hammered and now feel guilty about it.
I have my eyes on Axelrod, ced395, and Ecophagy after reading the first few pages of the thread as well as recent developments. Nis's quintuple-FoS on desCoures is also absurd and deserves scrutiny.
I'm apologizing to you as a person, because I recognize that it was something that you really didn't like, but I am not apologizing to you as a player, because I stand by my gut at the time, since your request seemed weird to me.
I am aware that you said it would take you some time to reread, but the jumping on the wagon regardless didn't sit right with me. I realize you have your reasons for doing so, and like I said before, you can't control when you replaced in, but L-2 seemed like the wrong time to ask everyone to slow down so you could vote him.
This doesn't address the question. Why do you feel bad enough about it now to apologize, but didn't at the time of the hammer?
Both of these notes seem to be asking the same question (or at least related questions). I doubt that two scum would just hop on the bandwagon as "me too". Also, AI's posts here and here read to me like frustrated town. I hadn't gotten enough of a read from him and Charm before, but my gut told me those were townie responses to being cut off from joining the wagon.
I didn't include the apology then because I didn't feel it was warranted. The apology is because of the "screw you guys" post which seemed actually offended or pissed off at me. I'm not sorry for the gameplay.
I really don't like this post. You don't really remember what dC was going to do today, but you remember that he had points against ced and Nis. You conveniently leave out that he had points against you and Shark as well.
You want to look into what dC had to say regarding Nis (this implies that you at least think there is something to a NisScum Possiblity) but then in your second paragraph you use Shark's "weak case" against Nis as reason to vote him.
Can you clarify how dC's points against Nis are worth looking back on and Shark's case is just "weak"?
1: Where is that part of me not remembering what would dC do for today?
2: He explicitly said he wouldn't be able to convince anyone of his perceived scumminess of ced on D1. He was also building points over Nis before dying. Do you remember his last point on me? A "pass". Also, I've mentioned his points on Shark my following post. Did you just left that out "conveniently"?
3: Of course it implies that possibility. I don't have a read on Nis, I don't know his alignment. He could be anything.
4: I said Nis case was weak right off the bat simply for coming from Shark which is clearly scum. But as dC, now known town, also had his points over it, it was worth looking again. Also, in no moment that comes as the reason of voting Shark: it comes on the following post which, again, was "conveniently" left out.
O, and for the record, my comment on catching 2 scum was KosaKosa and Acension (if I didn't say this earlier).
KosaKosa voted Caex for hassling Acension and calling Caex a scumbag.
Thus it could be seen as a chainsaw. Given that it's in RVS, it is HIGHLY unlikely it is. Though, I won't discount it, but I'll put it on the backburner atm.
I think your definition of opportunistic isn't aligned with the general understanding of the word. Your definition is more of a naked vote or poor reasoned vote. An opportunistic vote, at least in my opinion is one where you have something to gain. I feel that your votes have been opportunistic from a scum perspective. They were on major wagons each time and the reasons for the votes were pretty lame.
I've already said how it would make no sense to uncast the vote from Shark if the point was to gain something. Plus, it isn't the first time you claim to find my vote reasoning lame. Last time I've asked why, in your opinion, you didn't like my WoD's vote reasoning and I don't remember you explaining it. You dismissed it on #472 as being based on meta and playstyle, where is actually about language. Care to explain now?
Also, how are you asking for the post where Shark tries to frame me, when it's quoted on the same post I've cast my vote for him, with an explanation? You just said my "vote reasons were lame", and that implies that you have read them, but you just asked where was Shark's framing attempt. How is this possible?
It doesn't. As with all people discrediting my vote, Alpha hadn't addressed actual facts on why he believes the reasoning on my vote to be wrong, therefore bussing.
It would be if you tried to explain why, for you, my vote had a bad reasoning in your eyes rather than let WoD do it. At least you didn't. But since WoD also didn't and you called my vote lame, I'm waiting for it.
1. You didn't catch WoD, Xyre did.
2. "Had to rub it on dC's face" Vote: KosaKosa This cannot come from a town mentality. What purpose would rubbing anything in anyone's face serve if we are supposed to be a team? We have to work together not create division. Did you believe dC to be scum?
I was part of it and was right at the end, that's what matters. Made me happy to be right and for my detractors to be wrong.
And you are right, it didn't came from a town, scum nor neutral mentality: it came from a player's mentality. I'm putting fairly good amounts of time and thinking effort at this, and to correctly lynch (for the first time) a scum made very satisfied. After dC claimed to have arguments against my reasoning and it turned out to be correct, it was only natural to tease dC's on how right I was (in a total friendly way as you can see by the emoticon).
And again with the smug negativity. Confirm Vote: KosaKosa. You should be lynched just for this, nevermind the atrocious wagon hopping and ignoring dC's questions.
Yes, let's now lynch a player just because he is correctly moralizing another one. My point stands: he begged for it.
Also, you are lying. I have addressed all questions from dC and even non-questions, as you can see at #698
FoS: EtR in case people missed it on the middle of the post.
OK, so he first points to Nis' null content early on. Now this is not so much a case against Nis as much as a case against his PLAYSTYLE. We all know people play Mafia differently. Some of us are bullheaded, while others take the time and question players before fully committing to a vote. We have a perfect example of this actually in dC. He never really committed to a vote until he had a solid read from questioning.
Shark: Why do you feel this is notable of him being scum when others have been doing the same thing.
It’s fair to call it a case against playstyle. I don’t particularly like that playstyle. It’s not giving any sort of tells and I think it is scummy. It’s not a main point of lynching, I admit. It’s more support for the latter two points.
The next part of the case on Nis is about Nis' vote. Shark goes on about how it is a minor point (Again, didn't we have this conversation before?) The main point I take out of this is that he is more concerned about the POSITIONING of the vote as opposed to the reason why. This seems odd as in the very next post he quotes he brings up Nis' response to his defense. I also find this a weak tell at best. Nis raised a valid point and has in my mind reasonably defended his position on his case.
Preliminary wagon analysis. I’ll concede it’s not a strong point atm as obviously there isn’t a full wagon to analyze, but I still think it’s opportunistic positioning. It’s like “Hey look, I’ve being town by rereading and I want to be like everyone else”
The final post Shark posts is Nis' vote on WoD. This is the strongest of the cases, but still weak IMO. It is something town is as likely to do as scum, and seems more of an issue of positioning in my mind as opposed to reasoning.
Looking at Ecophagy and desCoures, I don’t think it’s as easy as Nis made it seem to jump off a wagon. Nis seemed to just jump on and see where that wagon went. If he really felt like I was scum, he’d stay on.
Also, what is your reason for voting me, as I really don’t see much in this post.
@ced395:
As I recall, desCoures was voting for you by the end of day one. Why do you characterize him as having "stopped" going after you?
See below:
Quote from desCoures »
I need to do some re-reading with the knowledge of WoD as scum. That considered, however, I can say that Xyre is almost certainly town, that Iso is probably town, and Kosa and Asenion now look a bit less dodgy - although I'll note that Kosa, in the end, never did explain just what about WoD's posts was so 'lacking' to him, only that they were.
For now I'm willing to give Kosa a pass, though, because ced still looks horrendously suspicious, especially given the quote I have in his section above. As such, I'm very much against ced being allowed to hammer.
....and actually, with WoD as scum, I'm suddenly a bit less certain about Shark. Especially since his supposed 'secret case' is on Nis, who's also caught my attention of late. I need to look at that case a bit more.
I wasn't aware that I was under pressure from anyone yesterday aside from desCoures. What exactly are you referring to here?
People’s overreaction to giving you the hammer plus dC’s constant questioning.
As others have said, not sure what you are hoping to read from this given that desCoures was attacking you as well. Especially given his history of dying on night one.
I am unfamiliar with desCoures’ history. Did not know he was a regular N1 kill.
That's funny. I don't recall:
1. People supporting Asian's wish to place a vote.
2. People opposed (including yourself) when I gave warning for my L-1 vote.
Hence, I have no idea where your problem lies here.
I don’t think these topics were adequately discussed. Additionally, I was unaware you gave warning to placing your vote. Where did you say this?
@AsianInvasion:
Of cases presented, I think this is the most accurate one for a reference. I don't agree with some of those points, but I think it's the most accurate considering the entirety of my play
Shark Finnegan - Basically, everything I talked about yesterday holds: he called a summary a very good analysis, repeatedly backpedalled and attempted to retcon his position with disclaimers. This behaviour remains undeniably scummy, however I am not as convinced of his scum hood as I was yesterday (I confess a certain degree of tunnel vision). Holding the "secret case" on Nis back to avoid derailing a scum wagon is a strong point in his favour, and the case itself is well grounded (picking up on similar points I noticed in my reread), but SF is putting way too much stock into those tells: the case is not strong, but it's not bunk either. In sun, SF is still scummy, but is not currently the worst offender.
@KosaKosa:
Again, I was not trying to frame you at all. I was admitting it was not pursuing and overall not worth considering at the time where there is little info to go on. Though it could be useful later on so I am not dismissing it entirely, hence my use of putting it on the backburner. I really don't remember the context of that at this point, so I think it should have been a non-issue.
That being said, overall play on you is not great, but this is your first game, so I have to consider experience into reading you. I've got a couple of players to start reading now/build better cases on.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Ask the right questions in the right way and truth is inevitable."
—Lazav
I had no reasons to interact with WoD. He wasn't addressing me, nor doing anything worth questioning until Xyre got him.
And after a point, Shark wasn't being berated by speculating about the scumteam (and btw his first comment about it when he voted on me wasn't speculation, was an affirmative), but because the answers he was providing when confronted with his affirmative and the way he has put them sounded scummy. My first vote on him was cast based on constant bad reasoning plus an attempt to frame me, not because he was speculating on the setup.
Never said you had reasons to interact with him, just stating it for the purpose of tracking the interactions.
And I'm only referring to WoD berating Shark for the speculation. You don't enter into what I was saying yet.
Kosa speculates on the neutral setup first, but does give a throwaway comment that a 5 player mafia seems fair. Nothing damning here, but I do have to wonder why he stopped to discuss the setup while simultaneously saying it was not important at this time. (I would argue that it's never useful in this style of game, and leaving the door open is a distraction method)
So yes, in the same quote I say it's not important, because it wasn't. People were trying to modgame instead of sticking to argument analysis. It was a simple comment and you're reaching the hell out to have a scum read on it.
Uh huh, I get that. So why discuss it if you think it's not important?
This next interaction with WoD, a vote, comes much later in the game, after Xyre's case. Kosa is the 4th one on the wagon, clearly a much easier position to bus from. Some called Kosa out as opportunistic with this vote, including desCoures.
Lol opportunistic? Opportunistic would be voting without presenting reasoning. All the people who disliked my point said they "had bad feelings" about it, but no one tackled their perceived problem on it. You know why is that? Because there is none, my argument makes full sense and WoD didn't addressed it at all.
I didn't call it opportunistic, so you can spare me your incredulity. Clearly it wasn't so much opportunistic since WoD was mafia. I believe it was straight bus-ing -- which is what I call it in that quote.
Quote from Kosakosa »
And how is that a good position to bus when 1-) it would be stupid from scum perspective to make a vote with good reasoning that early against a fellow member, 2-) Shark was a better wagon for opportunists the whole game long.
It would be easy for WoD to defend himself against a meta accusation. It makes no sense trying to bus on such a considered-weak argument. But my turning point on him wasn't over meta, was about the flawed way he defended himself (pretty much like Shark did).
You have a very low opinion of bus-ing if you think it's only ever done with weak reasoning so as to give the buddy an out. There have been many cases of scum seeing the writing on the wall, or even trying to buck convention by going all out on a mate. I've done it myself, with an all-out assault on Jobie while he had minimal pressure in...Asphodel Meadows, I think.
Minor aside -- so you wanted good reasoning...meaning you wanted ced to reveal role info?
I said in a post "inb4 fishing". Giving a good reason as why to hammer would be good, as he lacks the trust of a fairly amount of people.
I don't get it, what does saying "inb4 fishing" do to change what you wanted? What good reason could he possibly give that wasn't role information?
Quote from Kosakosa »
No, it reads as the new player catching his first online scum ever after presenting good reasoning that was tackled by everyone (save Iso), though without arguments and without the accused addressing it. I was happy about being right. Had to rub it on dC's face.
And seriously, you afk for 10 days during most of WoD's stalling and right after getting back you proceed to imply something against me without arguments? You begged for that answer.
AGAIN, for the 3rd time, I don't mind when people call me out on lurking; I've been a player with spotty activity records for 6 years on this site. But you continue to classify it as 10 days, when in fact it was barely 8, and more importantly, what does that matter? Do you think I'm scum because I wasn't here for a while?
If that's what you think, that's well and good. But come out and say it. I "begged" for a holier-than-thou answer because I felt your tone matched scum attitudes that I've seen countless times? The two aren't even related.
Quote from Kosakosa »
Funny though, you use dC's reputation and suspicions over me to validate your point, but fail to acknowledge that dC had ced as one of his primary suspects during the game, even voting for him. As for you, ced is town.
If you are using dC's opinion on me to justify a possible nightkill on him, why aren't you also pointing out his points over ced? That is having double-standards. dC's read on me at the end was good, but he died promising to work on the Nis case and to convince town of ced's scumminess. But conveniently, you aren't addressing those.
Ha! It's not even close to being a double standard! Should I point out dC's opinions of every player in a post where I'm analyzing your play? That's just laughable.
This is a capper, a P.S., if you will, to the case I have against you. It's not the basis for thinking you are scum.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from TheFooFish »
Lies! -I'm Buffy Summers, town tracker. I used my ability on you and saw that you didn't use any abilities before the game started. My flavor is I was sucked through a mysterious space-time portal and I'm here to kill all the vampires, and my tracking ability is a combination of my Slayer and Native American skills.
I actually agree that this is probably not from a strictly scum mindset. It would have been just as easy for ScumCed to wait for a player to get to L-1 and then cast the final vote. Moreso in this case as he would have gotten town credit for hammering WoD. I am concerned though that this mindset could come from a neutral perspective because it can be played off as town.
Yes, it could also make sense from a neutral, I suppose, but I count that as less likely given that most neutrals tend to play it cool early in the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from TheFooFish »
Lies! -I'm Buffy Summers, town tracker. I used my ability on you and saw that you didn't use any abilities before the game started. My flavor is I was sucked through a mysterious space-time portal and I'm here to kill all the vampires, and my tracking ability is a combination of my Slayer and Native American skills.
Thus, I think it actually makes more sense from a town perspective -- misguided though it was -- to ask for the hammer in hopes of town coordination to help his abilities along (presumably).
It's not misguided - I can't think of another way to go about getting the hammer vote which isn't really dodgy. Can you?
As I said, I think it would have been smarter, AND less dodgy to just try to get the hammer vote organically. You still have a decent shot, and you don't have people going out of their way to stop you from getting it. It takes a whole mess of WIFOM out of the thread as well.
Quote from Ced395 »
Quote from Alpha »
Incidentally, this post
Quote from WoD »
I've been voting Iso the entire game.
I didn't FIND Iso with my post at all.
Are you even reading the game?
makes Iso look better.
Why?
Because:
A.) He had been pressuring Iso hardcore.
and
B.) If this were a distancing attempt, it would seem illogical to hit everyone over the head with it like he did.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from TheFooFish »
Lies! -I'm Buffy Summers, town tracker. I used my ability on you and saw that you didn't use any abilities before the game started. My flavor is I was sucked through a mysterious space-time portal and I'm here to kill all the vampires, and my tracking ability is a combination of my Slayer and Native American skills.
@Guardman: He stopped for the moment. I guess looking back I did not make that clear and he did find me less scummy than the others so he dropped his efforts for others. This is true. I did not say he thought I was town, but rather he stopped tunneling me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Ask the right questions in the right way and truth is inevitable."
—Lazav
@Guardman: He stopped for the moment. I guess looking back I did not make that clear and he did find me less scummy than the others so he dropped his efforts for others. This is true. I did not say he thought I was town, but rather he stopped tunneling me.
But then your case against ced is really hypocritical as a major fact in it is dC thought he was scum.
Hi guys I am totally drunker than I ever have been in my life. So here, have a post! I'll try to make it as comprehensive as possible but my finer motor functions are being impeded by the vodka. So my typing may be a bit wonky.
And I didn’t realize until I did this that Wrath had RVS voted Iso and continued to tunnel him throughout his tenure here like a snowball rolling down a hill and getting bigger and bigger.
I don't think that we're gonna find all of the scum through WoD's interactions, but it's likely a good start. Based on Day 1 behavior combined with the other wagons going on at the time, who do you think is likely to be WoD's scumbuddies?
So I don't remember if I said this here yet but I think the scum team is/was Axel/WoD/ced/Guardman/SharkFinnigan. I think the whole game makes perfect sense if those are our scummies and that we should lynch them all immediately. Except WoD because he's already dead.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
And I didn’t realize until I did this that Wrath had RVS voted Iso and continued to tunnel him throughout his tenure here like a snowball rolling down a hill and getting bigger and bigger.
I don't think that we're gonna find all of the scum through WoD's interactions, but it's likely a good start. Based on Day 1 behavior combined with the other wagons going on at the time, who do you think is likely to be WoD's scumbuddies?
So I don't remember if I said this here yet but I think the scum team is/was Axel/WoD/ced/Guardman/SharkFinnigan. I think the whole game makes perfect sense if those are our scummies and that we should lynch them all immediately. Except WoD because he's already dead.
I think Shark is a good candidate. But, personally, I want to take a closer look at Nis. His reaction to my post before I clarified what I meant seemed a little offputting. First, he called my work sloppy. Then he dug up a post of his to prove his interactions with Wrath of Dog. Then, he dug up a post by another player (Asenion) to prove that I was wrong yet again. I mean, it could be frustrated town and it could be miscommunication and lines getting crossed. But I'm really hardpressed to find a Town reason why that response was so much flailing than it should have been.
I think Shark is a good candidate. But, personally, I want to take a closer look at Nis. His reaction to my post before I clarified what I meant seemed a little offputting. First, he called my work sloppy. Then he dug up a post of his to prove his interactions with Wrath of Dog. Then, he dug up a post by another player (Asenion) to prove that I was wrong yet again. I mean, it could be frustrated town and it could be miscommunication and lines getting crossed. But I'm really hardpressed to find a Town reason why that response was so much flailing than it should have been.
That being said, I was thinking of calculating the percentage of times people have posted in this thread and cross-referencing them with the percentage of times Wrath of Dog interacted with another person in this thread. My reasoning is that a higher post count would obviously lead someone to be referenced more often by any player. If we could establish some sort of baseline for percentage of posts vs. percentage of interactions, I think it could give us a better "big picture" look.
However, I didn't do this right away because we're pretty much into Day Two stuff and I don't know how relevant it would be if X, Y, and Z stepped their game up coming into Day Two. (And I'm not adept enough in the software to figure out how many posts there were prior to him admitting defeat.)
If someone thinks there is value in this, I can figure it all out. But, I'm not sure how much added information it would give us.
Could have been just me. I assumed there were others, but I didn't read all of the posts since WoD claimed scum.
So, you assumed that there were others who wanted more discussion, and accused Cythare based on that assumption alone?
I assumed others wanted me to make a substantial post before Night. Apparently "catching up during Night" was my lot instead, but more importantly, I also missed an unlock because of deliberate interference.
Also, yes, I do thinking killing players (by hammering or other means) is something neutrals are inclined to do.
Yeh, this is faulty. By the same logic, townies are inclined to kill specific people through the medium of lynching, hence I'm a townie role!
Zinda advised against gaming the mod: you're not even doing it well.
This comment will be even more hilarious after zindabad posts my role PM.
You may have other unlock mechanisms of which we are not aware,
I have other unlock mechanisms? No, I only have the hammer one.
I'm not a fan of how you split this quoted sentence from the above in order to discredit me. Of course I'm not "doing it well" when you only address a portion of my response at a time.
That being said, I was thinking of calculating the percentage of times people have posted in this thread and cross-referencing them with the percentage of times Wrath of Dog interacted with another person in this thread. My reasoning is that a higher post count would obviously lead someone to be referenced more often by any player. If we could establish some sort of baseline for percentage of posts vs. percentage of interactions, I think it could give us a better "big picture" look.
This is something Seppel likes to do, but I don't think it's particularly effective without also taking the time to compare the quantity of posting to the quality of the interaction, and that would be so time-intensive as to yield minimal expected value. That said, if you don't think your analysis is worthwhile, I suppose posting raw data is better than lurking into oblivion.
Gotcha. That makes sense.
I was in Seasons, and I still forgot about that. My bad.
Yes.
Uncharacteristic posts.
Who FoSes five times in a row, let alone all on the same player?
Could have been just me. I assumed there were others, but I didn't read all of the posts since WoD claimed scum.
See above. Also, yes, I do thinking killing players (by hammering or other means) is something neutrals are inclined to do. You may have other unlock mechanisms of which we are not aware, but I definitely don't trust you based on what I've read so far.
Does someone want to summarize the SF wagon from Day One for me or would it just be better for me to read it myself? The post where he votes ced looks bad but I don't think it alone is worth the handful of votes he's got already.
I think his posting yesterday was suspicious. Yesterday, I was more forgiving of that posting than today for as-yet-secret reasons.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Me. I absolutely abhor sloppy cases and dC was almost tunneling ced on "evidence" that wasn't even applicable to the scenario. Sloppiness + unwavering commitment to a case gets under my skin. I turned out to be wrong on my suspicion of dC, but you can't deny that he pushed hard on ced with a case that was partly built out of straw.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
This is my early PBPA of Shark.
This is Axelrod's.
Those will give you the info about why the wagon on SF formed.
Ecophagy had a series of posts regarding SharkFinnigan's response to WoD's "analysis" post. In fact, Ecophagy was voting Shark for all D1. I did a PBPA of Ecophagy if you don't feel like searching through all his posts for Shark-related ones. Linky.
I'd also recommend reading desCoures' posts. He thought Shark was scum for almost all of D1.
{Magic: The RPG}
Caex just posted a few PBPAs on this, but my summary is here.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
My cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9981
It is worth noting that I am currently ignoring the neutral role. It is perfectly possible that some of my reads based on interactions with WoD will be wrong, but that's something I intend to address later in the game.
First up, some town reads:
Xyre - Xyre's incredibly early vote on WoD speaks very positively for him: there's no reason to bus that hard. That it was entirely a meta vote helps more, since WoD wasn't exhibiting any obvious scummy behaviour that would have motivated Xyre to bus early.
Caex Kothar - While it is technically WIFOM, I simply cannot see a mafia player putting as much effort as he has into his PBPAs. They are particularly town-minded since they actually contain a good deal of analysis, and it would be extremely difficult for a Mafioso to fake so much actual analysis. Assuming I am correct, he's setting up a very difficult metagame for him to follow as scum in the future.
VitekCythare - Although Vitek didn't post much, I liked a number of them. In #77 he opposes the lock colour claim. Of note is that he opposes it because he "doesn't see any benefit": not because of Mow Down. This implies to me that he is unaware of Mow Down (and therefore unlikely to be mafia), and isn't seeking information for information's sake. In #220, he uses multiple FoS and jokes " (Did I just claim scum?)" for it. I think this indicates a town mindset, since I feel that the newer player would likely be more inclined to avoid using FoS after they were called a scumtell. Added to that, the FoS he uses are well backed up, and he puts down a vote.SilverSihhe- In general, he's coming across as 100% genuine, albeit very inexperienced. #207 is a lengthy analysis of Axelrod that doesn't come down on either side. Although a lack of solid conclusion is a negative, scum don't tend to put this much effort (and again, actual analysis) into an unsure read: they'd do the same in a much smaller post. Nothing in it reads as waffly, it's a stream-of-conciousness look at Axel's posts. #314 sees him trying to get dC to understand SS's own mindset in a very open manner. #329 has him produce another SOC-style PBPA, and it reads like his one of Axel: no waffle, consistent analysis. He specifically avoided copying Caex's SF post, which also speaks well: he's doing his own research. Another in #607 sees him analyse WoD. Although he is ultimately wrong, it's still analysis, and he intentionally leaves out the meta attack which was the most damning point against WoD, so it's not that surprising. His conclusion is somewhat fencesitty, but he's putting WoD as more town than I'd expect from a scum leaving the door open to bus a buddy. IIRC, he also doesn't actually vote WoD, implying that he wasn't looking that hard for a WoD vote. In sum, SS feels very open and transparent in his play, and his analyses are detailed and without filler.
Axelrod - Axelrod exhibits some similarities with SilverSihhe: his two very long posts #157 and #382 detail a great amount of the inner-workings of Axel's mind, and very openly trying to explain his thought process. Again, it's also stream-of-conciousness style that follows a logical path. I also felt that the string of posts at #727 heavily implies that Axel has no idea what WoD's abilities do, but if they were scum together he almost certainly would know.
I'm not going to make a sig-worthy quote about Axel's towniness though
Asenion - Post #155 struck me as a town player who is very new to the game. It particular "When I ask why you are voting, it's because I want to know what is motivating you to vote." tells me that he's interested in getting motivations, not in getting lynches. Similarly, post #400 displays a desire to interact and help out. Even though he says he "doesn't have a reliable way to find them [scum]", he produces supported reads and does not emphasize their unreliability (as a new scum is wont to do): he's putting an honest opinion out there. I also think that "I'm giving my opinions, but it's hard to provide more back-up for them without manufacturing reasons" really indicates that he's new town trying his best.
*********
Now we move onto the scummy players
Shark Finnegan - Basically, everything I talked about yesterday holds: he called a summary a very good analysis, repeatedly backpedalled and attempted to retcon his position with disclaimers. This behaviour remains undeniably scummy, however I am not as convinced of his scum hood as I was yesterday (I confess a certain degree of tunnel vision). Holding the "secret case" on Nis back to avoid derailing a scum wagon is a strong point in his favour, and the case itself is well grounded (picking up on similar points I noticed in my reread), but SF is putting way too much stock into those tells: the case is not strong, but it's not bunk either. In sun, SF is still scummy, but is not currently the worst offender.
KosaKosa - The dubious winner of the scummiest player award. Kosa has clocked up a huge number of negative points, and has by far the largest number of posts that I tagged as important, and not one looks good. Because the case on him is both long and important, I'll put it in my next post.
Nis - Nis' vote for Shark in #429 is super weird. He's making a huge deal out of some phrasing while totally ignoring all the other point for the wagon. I'm inclined to believe that he was looking for a way onto the wagon without barning anyone, so picked up the first "tell" he could see. Eron spots a neat contradiction in #608: Nis is spinning on a dime. This is bad news for Nis.
#568 is a MAJOR red flag IF KosaKosa turns up scum. Notice the subtle defence of Kosa as Nis explains away his scummy behaviour, without actually calling Kosa town. In fact, Nis leaves the door completely ajar, saying that he will re-evaluate Kosa (which he never did - another big red flag), but "can't stand behind it for a lynch at this time". Basically, he defended Kosa indirectly, while not coming to an opinion and leaving the capacity to vote Kosa is necessary in future, while simultaneously promising a re-evaluation that never manifests. If Kosa is scum, Nis almost certainly is too.
Having said all this, I think #448 looks good for Nis, since he's piling early pressure on known scum. Not enough to outweigh the negatives though.
In addition, Nis has managed to avoid posting content a lot. He has some posts, but not a lot of opinions: I would certainly like to see some reads out of him. We also note that beyond his pressure vote in #448, he doesn't appear to mention WoD again. He never seems to reconsider his vote: if it was to just up the pressure, wouldn't you be looking to examine the responses to the pressure, or even push again for questions to be answered?
Iso - Iso's play remains a riddle wrapped in an enigma, but there are a number of posts that I dislike. As I mentioned at the time, Iso proposing a lock colour claim felt like too much of a coincidence, but his response in #108 of more than just "because soft claim" was better than I expected. In retrospect however, the post reveals to me that Iso's ability(s) somehow rely on the colours of people's locks. As a result, turning on his ability was likely the original root of his claim proposal, but that's alignment neutral: Iso would try to turn his abilities on regardless of which side he's on.
I dislike Iso's vote for Axelrod in #143 since it's a weak reason, when others existed. The way he totally waves Axel away in #158 is absurd. I read Axel's #157 as very town, and Iso totally fails to explain his one-line dismissal. Iso posts a full case in #357, and it is baaaad. The post he says stands out as "reeeeeally scummy" is Axel allegedly giving Shark (alignment unknown) ammunition to defend himself with. To wit, that post is only scummy if Shark is too. Instead, Iso turns it round and labels Shark as scum if Axel is. The rest of the case is pretty poor, containing some summary, and like two other "scummy" posts. I agree with Axel's assessment that it all reads like Iso has decided that Axel is scum and is making the case based on that assumption, and it is not a convincing one. For bonus points, Iso asked myself and ced for an opinion on each other, and never followed up on the question, even as I failed to actually provide one. (oops)
Post #474 is bad. It could easily be a bus vote (and Iso is not afraid to bus), and he's also given Kosa some town cred if (when) WoD flips scum. Again, if Kosa is scum, this looks bad for Iso: Kosa's point against WoD was bad, but Iso's giving him +town for it without even explaining why he liked it.
Post #693 (by WoD) exemplifies the hesitation I have on Iso: WoD has pushed Iso hugely this game, and comes up with a total piece of crap against him here. While there is no love lost between the two players, WoD's relentless attacks on Iso give me pause for thought. Overall though, Iso is erring on the side of scum, particularly if Kosa flips Mafia.
Death's Vampire - In some respects similar to Nis, DV has contributed very little to the game. His two votes in #502 and #590 are both awful and barely supported. His post #462 is a conspiracy theory of the highest degree against Iso. He very rapidly gains a deathy opinion on WoD in #599 despite not really being anywhere near the wagon before that.
DV's actions have been fringe, barely supported and nonsensical. It is entirely possible that DV is actually just mad and town, but his scummy actions have put him in this column for now. I'd like to see some reads from him.
*****
Undecided players:
Ced395 -I liked his #217 as solid analysis. My notes also apparently list dC's #311 in ced's favour, but I can't work out why. I possibly made a typo. <_<
If Kosa flips scum, ced is likely town.
Arnnaria - Been going back and forth on Arnnaria during the read through. I don't like his vote on Axel in #151, it looks like he's trying to come with an excuse (and it's a bad one) for not having voted Axelrod yet.
However, I think #178 is phrased in a townie manner, and the last paragraph of #283 is a townie PoV. #576 is probably a town post, since scum are unlikely to push a policy lynch on a buddy. Arnnaria might be one of the few players principled enough to actually lynch a scum buddy on the grounds of fair play, but I think that's unlikely.
The crux of Arnnaria is his posts in #363/4/6/8. These posts contain a run-down of everyone. What differs with Caex is that these posts contain very little analysis, and are mostly summary. The analysis is arguably implicit due to the points given, but that's not really sufficient justification. On the other hand, he comes to a very clear conclusion on every player, noticeably lacking a lot of fencesitting, which makes me think it might just be bad analysis as opposed to disguised non-analysis.
Eron - Eron's early game was scummy, as he spent most of it picking at Asenion's claimed experience/knowledge level (#140). Post #436 doesn't really go anywhere: there are a lot of words, but no obvious point to it. This therefore looks like active lurking: I can't see any real scumhunting.
Eron's crux is #472, where he attacks KosaKosa. If Kosa IS scum, then this looks good for Eron as it's unlikely to be a bus. However, if Kosa turns out to be town, this is bad for Eron because he dithers over WoD while criticising some of WoD's voters: subtle defence of known scum.
****
No read:
AsianInvasion - I liked Charm Master's #160 because I don't like Iso: unlikely to be buddies for sure. Apart from that, nothing either has done has stood out.
AlphaInsidious - Going into this, I thought I had a town read on this AI, but I actually have no notes taken down for him. Therefore, he's elicited a gut town read, but I sure as hell couldn't tell you why in detail.
Guardman - No notes, can't remember anything he's done apart from vote Tanarin. Please to make more content.
Tanarin - #221 is my only note and it felt a lot like OMGUS to me. Apart from that, I don't have any sort of read on him.
Though I have to say, of everything you just typed, this part:
-I liked his #217 as solid analysis. My notes also apparently list dC's #311 in ced's favour, but I can't work out why. I possibly made a typo. <_<
Would be just such an incredible fakeout for scum. Worthy of another sig. quote!
I'm getting a different read of Caex. In Intrigue he did the PBPAs and lead the town. Caex was instrumental in trying to work the game mechanics for the benefit of the town. He analyzed behavior as the game progressed instead of just in large spurts like in this game.
I'm not sure if it's because this game has almost twice the number of voices, but Caex was definitely more on the forefront in Intrigue. He's in my undecided pile in this game so far.
Anybody else notice the attempt to setup a chain lynch here?
Ahem...
Also Eco, where's my points for asking how you knew Asension was a townie? That probably undercuts your attempt to paint me as scum, though.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
So you're saying that you're not sure Caex is town because although he's making PBPAs, he's not leading the town like he did in Intrigue, correct?
Sometimes player's alignments depends on knowing that of other first. Also, most of my links are based on Kosa being scum. Are you suggesting that I'm bussing my buddy to maybe get two townies in exchange?
My bad. That's not a convincing point, but I retract my statement. It is interesting that you say WoD has adjusted his meta, but WoD claimed that he forgot how people perceived his meta.
You don't get points for that because it's not a tell? Nice zinger though.
Correct. I'm not automatically putting him in my town camp just because he's doing PBPAs. I hate to use meta but in this case my recent experience with Caex tells me he's not doing the same thing he did last time he was town. He's doing part of what he did then, but he's definitely not leading the charge like last time.
This doesn't mean I view him as scum now, though.
You did setup two sets of potential mislynches: If Kosa is scum then Iso and I are scum; if Iso and I are both town, though, you've mislynched twice. If Kosa is town then Eron is scum; if Eron is town then you've mislynched twice.
Because we know that scum always tell the truth.[/sarcasm]
It was a slip though.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
Ok. I'm calling you out here: there's so much difference between a player leading a mini with a handful of veterans, and leading a large, complex game filled with renowned players. What is it about leading the town that's so necessary? Why aren't his detailed and wide-spread analyses enough for a read?
For the former, I had to trade my scumbuddy, which is a pretty lame trade. For the latter, yeah I guess I get two mislynches. Instead of looking at how many potential mislynches I've chained in a worst case scenario, why don't you evaluate each player's behaviour and the links between them and decide whether you agree with me. If you don't think Eron is likely scum if Kosa is town, explain it. Don't just say "oh no he'll get mislynched".
Pretty sure WoD would have avoided playing to his scum metagame if he'd have thought about it. Not realising didn't exactly work out well for him.
[/quote]
a) No it isn't, because I don't actually know Asenion is town, b) so? you'd only get points for catching a slip if I turn out to be scum, which is not the case.
The first thing that I noticed was post #53/56. He calls Shark's "slip" "the tell of the century", but apparently this isn't enough for a vote. As KosaKosa says in #56, you "GOTTA EARN IT [a vote]", but if the best tell of this century isn't enough, I don't see how Kosa can ever vote anyone. Note also that his plan is to hang back with ced and Caex: this is not the mindset of someone actively hunting for scum, he's hanging back and waiting for more public support before voting. He even says that he doesn't want to hear more like ced and Caex, he's just not voting for no good reason.
Eventually though, Kosa does vote Shark in #106, is one hell of an OMGUS. The vote is apparently only based on Shark "Slightly trying to make me look suspicious", which is a far cry from "GOTTA EARN IT BRO". Kosa was unprepard to vote Shark for making the tell of the century, but is happy to pull the trigger on "Slightly trying to make me look suspicious".
In #287 and #300, Kosa unleashes a tide of OMGUS against Caex who dares to agree with ced's points against Kosa, as well as slinging mud at ced himself. This attack on ced originates in #223, where he raises a truly ridiculous and desperate theory. The "fish more" doesn't really make sense in context, but I suspect that he's telling ced that he won't succeed in creating some kind of meta game for Kosa to aid reading him in the later game. Why wouldn't Kosa want that to happen? Because he doesn't want to be read correctly.
Throughout the game, Kosa makes digs at people without explictly raising supicions. Examples are #159, #423, and #205. In particular, the latter attempts to discredit the very pro-town actions of Caex by dismissing them as WIFOM. In a similar vein, post #163 contains a fencesit on AlphaI/Tanarin and leaves the door very open to barn something and vote eiher one.
Kosa voted Axelrod in #173, and it's a doozy. As I'm sure everyone can read, Axelrod's statements are nowhere near contradictions. This non-issue is apparently the biggest point KosaKosa has against Axel, and his other points are tame (apparently asking a pointless question is a scumtell?) Somehow, this all adds up to Axel being "blatant scum". This vote is truly awful. Kosa's looking for an easy way onto the wagon.
Moving onto Kosa's interactions with WoD, we first have a fencesit in #445. He's very happy to have no strong opinion and wait to see what happens, allowing him to bus if needed. Which he does in #471.
#471 deserves some scrutiny. Kosa's main issue with WoD in #445 was a lack of solid conclusions, but by #471 this has apparently been forgotten and Kosa votes WoD for some barely comprehensible metagame reason. Like, I'm not even sure it makes sense. It looks like Kosa is voting WoD because WoD says that he would have played differently if he was aware of his meta. Huh? That's not a scumtell, that's common sense. Moving on, we get to #699 where the reason for Kosa's vote is now apparently a lack of conclusions again. This isn't what he said when he actually voted, and Kosa can't keep his story straight.
Lastly, we see his post today of #857. I would wager that this is more or less exactly what Kosa said he would do in the night talk: kill dC, attack Shark for being a dC suspect. Even though it is (as he himself says) WIFOM (dC being a very strong player with a well documented history of dying Night 1), Kosa goes all in on Shark - one of dC's less strong suspects. He doesn't seem to even provide a reason for voting Shark, it's just tacked on there. Axel nailed it in #861.
In summary, this case isn't a super slam dunk of one obvious tell, but instead it's a sum of parts: I see Kosa being very reluctant to vote without support, very happy to discredit and poke at players without actually voicing suspicion, while also very happy to fencesit on a number of players, leaving option open to vote them at the drop of a hat. Kosa is also very sensitive to being pressured, firing off an OMGUS vote at Shark, and attacking Caex and ced viciously for making points against him. The votes that he has made have been poor in general (Shark, Axel, WoD), and I just don't see him striking out and hunting scum. Finally, his reveal would be incredibly helpful in puzzling out the game.
Vote KosaKosa
I did point this out in my first response.
Last time to played with Player X he turned out to be town and had some specific behaviors. In the next game with Player X he exhibits some of those behaviors but not others. Is it safe to assume that Player X is town again?
Wait. Do you think I'm saying I thought WoD was adjusting his meta? I was restating what WoD was saying about his playstyle. I think we're misunderstanding each other here. Maybe reset on this point?
So why'd you call him a townie?
I tend to give points to people who catch potential slips and contradictions. It shows they're paying attention.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
I realize this is a joke, but again, it seems forced.
I'm about to take a game I'm running from Night into Day, so once I post that scene, I'm going to tackle Axel's post that I said I would since I have about 2 hours before I have to leave for my flight.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I agree with your opinion on Xyre and you make good points about Kosa. I'm keeping Caex somewhat neutral though. I went and read most of Intrigue and I think that because he developed this "meta" there, he would be likely to try and do these kind of analysis posts as either town or scum. His opinions here also feel more neutral and less strong than they were there. I also disagree about Iso, who I currently feel is likely town, and Axelrod who I currently feel is very likely scum.
My cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9981
This hits the nail on the head. In Intrigue, there were only 12 players. By the time I really took the lead, there were just 10, and there were relatively few veterans who were being proactive about posting. Nobody else was spearheading the game after Iso got lynched and it happened to be that I was the one doing a good chunk of the posting.
In this game, there are almost twice as many people and a lot of them are mafia heavyweights. I don't feel like it's necessary to try to take the reigns when there are much more experienced players who can do it better.
{Magic: The RPG}
Axelrod has a history of making forced jokes in this game, it seems.
I'm starting to lean in this direction myself. As long as I am an informed voter and not mindlessly /barning, I think I will let those inclined to do serious analysis do so until I feel that I can contribute without simply adding to the level of noise in the thread.
I will try to churn out a big catch-up post some time in the following week, though.
Before going into another 2 hours addressing it, I want to ask Asenion one thing though:
Care to elaborate?
I realize I was somewhat unclear earlier, but didn't feel the need to clarify unless someone misunderstood.
I've also been thinking, it seems likely that most of us will have at least one way to unlock their own locks. Might there be value at some point in a soft-claim on unlock method so that the town has more control over who gets abilities and who doesn't? We already have a few claims from people like ced and AsianInvasion.
My cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9981
Maybe later on, but at this point, I don't really see that much value unless that method requires coordination from other parties, such as ced's. It's just unnecessary information being revealed.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
I feel for the most part that we should not be claiming our unlocks for now. I don't see any great advantage unless there is a clear cut easy way for the town to influence the unlocking.
Given dC's unlock ability we also know that there are passive unlock abilities and some of those abilities might not be influenced by any sort of coordinated effort.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
So your point is that, because scum are likely to place their votes in such a manner that would push the wagon into momentum, that you think my vote was the catalyst for that? While I agree with the technique, I disagree with the conclusion - as for why, let's look at the votes following my own. You'll find that your wagon did not gain momentum as a result of my vote. The votes that occurred after my own before your own wagon lost momentum were:
(dC confirmed his vote on Shark, but since that's not an actual changing of the vote, I'll only make a note of it here.)
Vitek realized his RVS vote was still present and Unvoted it. (Also worth noting that zindabad forgot my vote in the votecount that made Vitek realize this.)
So, two votes on you followed my vote of you, when two votes went elsewhere - to myself and to one of the people whose vote on your wagon followed my own. But then your wagon stagnated. If my vote were such an event that would cause you to get run up, then I could understand that, but as it is, your speculation is totally off-base in that people started looking elsewhere once Vitek removed his vote. So, this is a misrepresentation of what actually happened.
1. ...and? When you vote for a person, it's generally commonplace to provide your reasoning for believing that person is scum - whether it's a rehash of someone else's points against you or not should make little difference if the push is genuine.
2. If I ask it in Mafia, it's probably not rhetorical. Just because I want you to get lynched doesn't mean I don't want you to still answer my questions.
3. So you say it's a point against me...and then say that yes, what I said is, in fact, true? Garbage. This shouldn't even have been included in your post if you were genuinely trying to convince people that I was scum. I think this is a clear indicator that your push against me is fabricated and holds no basis in reality whatsoever.
4. Show me where. Did I not verbally acknowledge it? If not, then I probably thought it was a bull**** reason if I'm still presenting that as a point against you. Fabricating an explanation =/= Explaining yourself sufficiently.
5. Okay, so why, then, given your atrocious behavior, should I be inclined to believe that this isn't just a farce to buddy up to Eco?
1. Again...and? Are you discrediting their accusations by merit of me using logic that someone else has used? If not, then your "by proxy" argument is stupid. If so, then I'd like you to explain, again, how that makes it anything of a point against me "just because someone else said it, too". I often don't thoroughly read the posts of people that I think are town, and as such, it's well within the realm of possibility for me to post the exact same case someone else has just because I didn't look into their post too closely because I thought they were town. I play Mafia by gut a lot, as I tend to be more accurate when I favor it over pure analysis. So if a player makes a post, or even several, that make me think they're town, I start to look less for possible indications that they are scum.
2. "Interesting" is a scum word, Axel. That aside, the "however" was to indicate that what I said was not of the same train of thought as my previous quote of you in that post that I was explaining my disdain for. You're reaching. Again.
3. It's not a bandwagon vote at all. You're saying that my vote is "buried in my post". Clearly you're unfamiliar with the way that I write my posts. I read the last post I didn't read, will open a quote in a new tab if it's something I want to specifically respond to, or type an "@Playername" if I just want to make a general comment about it or can't be arsed to open a new tab for it. This continues on until I reach the end of the thread. I will then type anything else I think is worth bringing up, and make my post. If there's enough that needs to be said, then I will occasionally compile quotes in an organized manner, e.g. in a fashion similar to dC's posting style. That's how I make my posts. This can not possibly be a genuine line of attack from you. Post formatting is what makes me scummy? Really? You are NOT that bad a player, Axelrod.
A cute theory, except you're completely disregarding the way I play the game and using that as a point against me. This goes into self-meta a bit, which I'm reluctant to bring up as I strongly feel my meta is not an indication of my alignment (rather, that I am Iso), but this is strictly a playstyle argument and I refuse to allow this to be used against me just because Axel doesn't like the way I play. Apples and oranges. Get over it. Not the first time I've pointed out why this is a stupid argument in my play history, either.
Playstyle argument.
Except I later did go back and address this and nobody (looking at you, Eco) seems to remember that I did this. So, this is just a blatant lie.
I actually must have glazed over that exchange of yours with SS because I don't remember you saying that at all, but after reading this post that I'm responding to right now, I will admit that I've laced a bit of trolling in some of my posts directed towards you to get you to slip up some more. And also because it makes me chuckle. I think it's laughable that you think my attempting to get someone I believe is scum to lose their cool and post something incriminating is anti-town in any way, given that scum can get angry just as easily as town.
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
Sorry for trying to have fun during RVS on my first game. No, really, I've made all those posts with caps, laughts and emoticons to be taken seriously during the less serious part of the game.
Shark was being held as the scummiest player of the game up to that point. Then he not only skimmed while defending himself, but also tried to frame me. He deserved that vote. It's was a bit OMGUS, yes, but not that much.
Also, as you also consider Shark to be scummy, what would I gain, as scum, from voting Shark then unvoting Shark for Axel? As I said a couple posts back, it would make no sense to do so.
That wasn't OMGUS at all. I was pointing out the unnecessary amounts of praising that Caex was putting onto his ced's analysis (mostly points against me), which he didn't when PBPA'ing other players before. I didn't like it, because ced's points against me were implicity a defense of Caex's PBPAs so that sounded as biased. As I said before, I wasn't questioning the PBPAs, only saying that the sheer act of doing it doesn't define allegiance.
About ced's attack on me, I think it's pretty clear how he gets to "conclusions" over things I was "obviously implying", when in fact it was a simple comment. And my meta-comment stands: people care way too much about meta. I'm sure some players get really unconfortable when playing against new players/proxies for being unable to check their past games.
#159: which part?
#423: the phrase itself explains the point. What is hard to understand there?
#205: seriously, this is the last time I will say the same thing: the act of doing PBPAs is null, what matters is their content. This is a fact whether people agree with it or not. That said, if you read that post, you will see I wasn't trying to discredit Caex, I was pointing out something totally possible to happen. Is there any lies, untruths, incorrect points over that post's affirmation? No.
#163: that was an address to Guardman's complaint about people ignoring his Tan vote post. I've posted my opinion over it, of while not having a solid read over neither, that Tan post sounded like and escape route. I can't do much if you think that's fence-sitting.
Already addressed. I've tunnel-visioned a bit. Acknowleged, apologised and moved on. Also, as I said before, Shark would be an easier wagon for scum to stay on and bus for town credit.
Of course that was a fence-sit. Most of WoD's posts were null and he wasn't even close to being scum for most players. Then Xyre dropped a bomb with fair reasoning, although partially meta-based. I didn't know what to think, so I wanted to hear WoD's defense over that. His defense made no sense as I've pointed out on my vote post on him, also stating my argument, reasoning and his contradiction.
My vote wasn't meta-based. If you didn't figured that out, I recommend you to get back there and reread it because you just accused me of bussing WoD. You can't say that if you were unable to understand the post that made you do so, that is reaching.
Lol wait, do you really think scum would let me, a new player at online Mafia, to command the NK? Plus, how the hell am I supposed to know how of a "very strong player etc" dC is? This is my first game here! I've read bits of other games and most of Seasons, not lurked relentlessly to know everything about my friends and enemies. I don't even care about meta that much tbh.
I've made that point because for me, it's more obvious to nightkill a more-likely confirmed town as Xyre (who got a scum out of nowhere). I was trying to understand the reasoning behind it, because even if that goes into a WIFOM, it's better than nothing.
Also, saying that Shark was one of dC's less strong suspects is wrong. To begin with, when the day ended dC's vote was on Shark. Plus, if you don't think my following posts after Axel's question (you haven't mentioned them) were good reasoning as on why to vote Shark... then I don't know what else I can do.
I tried to make a word file early into the game laying out the posts I thought to be relevant, but I gave up on that around #200 or so because of lazyness, college's end of semester and because I read the game a lot on my phone. I'm just not the type of scum-hunter that goes 500 posts back to check if things add up every time someone posts something. I do it mostly by memory and language. To say that I am not hunting scum is unfair, especially after my WoD vote and my recent Shark vote.
Not only that, but to say that I'm discrediting people is twisting my words. I am pointing out stuff that I consider to be worth for doing so, either because people are assuming too much or because it's plain wrong. I'm asking, argumenting and being transparent on every point I make, instead of laying stuff simply for the sake of doing so, especially on my votes.
I chose four methods of interaction: Questions, Comments, Votes, and Quotes. I did not weigh these differently in value because each provides an interaction with another player that shouldn’t be overlooked. Here is my definition of the four categorical interactions:
Questions: A direct question asked to another player.
Comments: A direct comment about another player without a quote.
Votes: A vote placed upon another player.
Quotes: A direct quote pulled from another player with or without commentary attached. Quotes supersede comments.
Wrath of Dog confessed himself as mafia in post # 735. I scored all the categories before then, and here are the levels of interaction:
Xyre: 13 interactions
Quote: # 449
Quote: # 457
Comment: # 460
Quote: # 461
Quote: # 469
Comment: # 566
Comment: # 637
Comment: # 645
Comment: # 671
Quote: # 674
Comment: # 683
Comment: # 734
Shark Finnegan: 11 interactions
Comment: # 353
Comment: # 410 (in summary, not case)
Comment: # 417
Quote: # 419
Comment: # 457
Quote: # 470
Comment: # 566
Comment: # 645
Comment: # 671
Quote: # 683
Iso: 10 Interactions
Quote: # 149
Quote: # 228
Quote: #230
Comment: # 410 (in summary, not case)
Comment: # 417
Comment: # 419
Comment: # 449
Comment: # 683
Comment: # 693
Axelrod: 9 Interactions
Comment: # 353
Comment: # 457
Comment: # 566
Quote: # 645
Quote: # 671
Comment: # 672
Quote: # 674
Comment: # 734
KosaKosa: 8 Interactions
Quote: # 216
Comment: # 410 (in summary, not case)
Comment: # 417
Comment: # 419
Comment: # 457
Comment: # 645
Comment: # 671
Arnnaria: 6 Interactions
Comment: # 410 (in summary, not case)
Comment: # 419
Quote: # 460
Quote: # 566
Comment: # 671
Comment: # 419
Comment: # 457
Comment: # 645
Caex: 3 Interactions
Comment: # 419
Comment: # 671
desCoures: 2 Interactions
Comment: # 419
Eron: 1 Interaction
Ced: 1 Interaction
Ecophagy: 1 Interaction
Tanarin: 1 Interaction
Guardman: 1 Interaction
AlphaInsidious: 1 Interaction
Zero Interaction:
Asenion
Asian Invasion / Charm
Nis
Deaths Vampire
SilverSihhe
Comments: Charm didn’t post much and Asian Invasion took over after he had confessed. Cyathre replaced Vitek.
And I didn’t realize until I did this that Wrath had RVS voted Iso and continued to tunnel him throughout his tenure here like a snowball rolling down a hill and getting bigger and bigger.
WTF?
Remember how I've said twice I don't like sloppiness? Time to check up your counts.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
I guess it wasn't stated, but I only pulled from Wrath of Dog's posts, not everyone elses. I was trying to see how Wrath of Dog interacted with other players, not the other way around.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
That makes sense then. I thought I was going crazy since I was really sure I had voted for WoD and I was pretty sure Asenion had pseudo-voted. Time to look at it from the opposite perspective.
[card=Jace Beleren]Jace[/card] = Jace
Magic CompRules
Scry Rollover Popups for Google Chrome
The first rule of Cursecatcher is, You do not talk about Cursecatcher.
There you go Nis...
My cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9981
I dunno, part of the reason Wrath was lynched was because he was failing to contribute what he promised to contribute. So, there's that.
How do you derive that AsianI is town from Shark's "Me too"? Also, this apology feels forced. Why would you not include this when you vote-blocked AsianI to close out the day?
Edit: I see that AsianI asked a similar question.
This doesn't address the question. Why do you feel bad enough about it now to apologize, but didn't at the time of the hammer?
I really don't like this post. You don't really remember what dC was going to do today, but you remember that he had points against ced and Nis. You conveniently leave out that he had points against you and Shark as well.
You want to look into what dC had to say regarding Nis (this implies that you at least think there is something to a NisScum Possiblity) but then in your second paragraph you use Shark's "weak case" against Nis as reason to vote him.
Can you clarify how dC's points against Nis are worth looking back on and Shark's case is just "weak"?
I actually agree that this is probably not from a strictly scum mindset. It would have been just as easy for ScumCed to wait for a player to get to L-1 and then cast the final vote. Moreso in this case as he would have gotten town credit for hammering WoD. I am concerned though that this mindset could come from a neutral perspective because it can be played off as town.
Not that they were scummy, but that they sounded scummy.
How did Shark try and frame you?
I think your definition of opportunistic isn't aligned with the general understanding of the word. Your definition is more of a naked vote or poor reasoned vote. An opportunistic vote, at least in my opinion is one where you have something to gain. I feel that your votes have been opportunistic from a scum perspective. They were on major wagons each time and the reasons for the votes were pretty lame. See Eco's posts for reference.
How does that not make sense?
How is was that giving WoD an out?
1. You didn't catch WoD, Xyre did.
2. "Had to rub it on dC's face" Vote: KosaKosa This cannot come from a town mentality. What purpose would rubbing anything in anyone's face serve if we are supposed to be a team? We have to work together not create division. Did you believe dC to be scum?
And again with the smug negativity. Confirm Vote: KosaKosa. You should be lynched just for this, nevermind the atrocious wagon hopping and ignoring dC's questions.
My early game may have been shaky, but to boil it down to simply attacking Asenion is quite the exaggeration. I've also explained that post #472 helped me form an opinion on Arrn, so to say it didn't go anywhere isn't really fair. You may not have gained anything from the exchange, but I did.
I need to dedicate more time to reading through this post. I also need to review Eco's #908. I don't have time to read through all the links, but the case seems to make sense and has similar sentiments to what I had posted Day 1 concerning Kosa's weird voting.
So does this.
I don't think that's a good idea. ced and Asian kind of needed to explain their unlock triggers to avoid gaining suspicion due to their unlocks being vote triggered. So far, no one else has voiced that kind of issue and we should probably keep that excess information out of the thread.
I'm going to give more time to the 2 posts I mentioned as well as Iso's deconstruction of Axel's post. At this point between the behavior yesterday and so far today, I like my vote on Kosa.
Both of these notes seem to be asking the same question (or at least related questions). I doubt that two scum would just hop on the bandwagon as "me too". Also, AI's posts here and here read to me like frustrated town. I hadn't gotten enough of a read from him and Charm before, but my gut told me those were townie responses to being cut off from joining the wagon.
I didn't include the apology then because I didn't feel it was warranted. The apology is because of the "screw you guys" post which seemed actually offended or pissed off at me. I'm not sorry for the gameplay.
Draft my cube! (630 cards)
1: Where is that part of me not remembering what would dC do for today?
2: He explicitly said he wouldn't be able to convince anyone of his perceived scumminess of ced on D1. He was also building points over Nis before dying. Do you remember his last point on me? A "pass". Also, I've mentioned his points on Shark my following post. Did you just left that out "conveniently"?
3: Of course it implies that possibility. I don't have a read on Nis, I don't know his alignment. He could be anything.
4: I said Nis case was weak right off the bat simply for coming from Shark which is clearly scum. But as dC, now known town, also had his points over it, it was worth looking again. Also, in no moment that comes as the reason of voting Shark: it comes on the following post which, again, was "conveniently" left out.
Please pay attention to the game, I'm tired of quoting this:
This post, but specifically the bolded part.
I've already said how it would make no sense to uncast the vote from Shark if the point was to gain something. Plus, it isn't the first time you claim to find my vote reasoning lame. Last time I've asked why, in your opinion, you didn't like my WoD's vote reasoning and I don't remember you explaining it. You dismissed it on #472 as being based on meta and playstyle, where is actually about language. Care to explain now?
Also, how are you asking for the post where Shark tries to frame me, when it's quoted on the same post I've cast my vote for him, with an explanation? You just said my "vote reasons were lame", and that implies that you have read them, but you just asked where was Shark's framing attempt. How is this possible?
FoS EtR
It doesn't. As with all people discrediting my vote, Alpha hadn't addressed actual facts on why he believes the reasoning on my vote to be wrong, therefore bussing.
It would be if you tried to explain why, for you, my vote had a bad reasoning in your eyes rather than let WoD do it. At least you didn't. But since WoD also didn't and you called my vote lame, I'm waiting for it.
I was part of it and was right at the end, that's what matters. Made me happy to be right and for my detractors to be wrong.
And you are right, it didn't came from a town, scum nor neutral mentality: it came from a player's mentality. I'm putting fairly good amounts of time and thinking effort at this, and to correctly lynch (for the first time) a scum made very satisfied. After dC claimed to have arguments against my reasoning and it turned out to be correct, it was only natural to tease dC's on how right I was (in a total friendly way as you can see by the emoticon).
Yes, let's now lynch a player just because he is correctly moralizing another one. My point stands: he begged for it.
Also, you are lying. I have addressed all questions from dC and even non-questions, as you can see at #698
FoS: EtR in case people missed it on the middle of the post.
It’s fair to call it a case against playstyle. I don’t particularly like that playstyle. It’s not giving any sort of tells and I think it is scummy. It’s not a main point of lynching, I admit. It’s more support for the latter two points.
Preliminary wagon analysis. I’ll concede it’s not a strong point atm as obviously there isn’t a full wagon to analyze, but I still think it’s opportunistic positioning. It’s like “Hey look, I’ve being town by rereading and I want to be like everyone else”
Looking at Ecophagy and desCoures, I don’t think it’s as easy as Nis made it seem to jump off a wagon. Nis seemed to just jump on and see where that wagon went. If he really felt like I was scum, he’d stay on.
Also, what is your reason for voting me, as I really don’t see much in this post.
@ced395:
See below:
People’s overreaction to giving you the hammer plus dC’s constant questioning.
I am unfamiliar with desCoures’ history. Did not know he was a regular N1 kill.
I don’t think these topics were adequately discussed. Additionally, I was unaware you gave warning to placing your vote. Where did you say this?
@AsianInvasion:
Of cases presented, I think this is the most accurate one for a reference. I don't agree with some of those points, but I think it's the most accurate considering the entirety of my play
@KosaKosa:
Again, I was not trying to frame you at all. I was admitting it was not pursuing and overall not worth considering at the time where there is little info to go on. Though it could be useful later on so I am not dismissing it entirely, hence my use of putting it on the backburner. I really don't remember the context of that at this point, so I think it should have been a non-issue.
That being said, overall play on you is not great, but this is your first game, so I have to consider experience into reading you. I've got a couple of players to start reading now/build better cases on.
—Lazav
_______________________________________________
Mafia Stats
Summary:
Total Win %: 40%
Total Scum Win %: 60%
Total Town Win %: 20%
Total Neutral Win %: 0%
Never said you had reasons to interact with him, just stating it for the purpose of tracking the interactions.
And I'm only referring to WoD berating Shark for the speculation. You don't enter into what I was saying yet.
Uh huh, I get that. So why discuss it if you think it's not important?
I didn't call it opportunistic, so you can spare me your incredulity. Clearly it wasn't so much opportunistic since WoD was mafia. I believe it was straight bus-ing -- which is what I call it in that quote.
You have a very low opinion of bus-ing if you think it's only ever done with weak reasoning so as to give the buddy an out. There have been many cases of scum seeing the writing on the wall, or even trying to buck convention by going all out on a mate. I've done it myself, with an all-out assault on Jobie while he had minimal pressure in...Asphodel Meadows, I think.
I don't get it, what does saying "inb4 fishing" do to change what you wanted? What good reason could he possibly give that wasn't role information?
AGAIN, for the 3rd time, I don't mind when people call me out on lurking; I've been a player with spotty activity records for 6 years on this site. But you continue to classify it as 10 days, when in fact it was barely 8, and more importantly, what does that matter? Do you think I'm scum because I wasn't here for a while?
If that's what you think, that's well and good. But come out and say it. I "begged" for a holier-than-thou answer because I felt your tone matched scum attitudes that I've seen countless times? The two aren't even related.
Ha! It's not even close to being a double standard! Should I point out dC's opinions of every player in a post where I'm analyzing your play? That's just laughable.
This is a capper, a P.S., if you will, to the case I have against you. It's not the basis for thinking you are scum.
Yes, it could also make sense from a neutral, I suppose, but I count that as less likely given that most neutrals tend to play it cool early in the game.
---------------
As I said, I think it would have been smarter, AND less dodgy to just try to get the hammer vote organically. You still have a decent shot, and you don't have people going out of their way to stop you from getting it. It takes a whole mess of WIFOM out of the thread as well.
Because:
A.) He had been pressuring Iso hardcore.
and
B.) If this were a distancing attempt, it would seem illogical to hit everyone over the head with it like he did.
@Shark: That isn't exactly dC dropping the case and more like he was unsure and wanted to reread you.
—Lazav
_______________________________________________
Mafia Stats
Summary:
Total Win %: 40%
Total Scum Win %: 60%
Total Town Win %: 20%
Total Neutral Win %: 0%
But then your case against ced is really hypocritical as a major fact in it is dC thought he was scum.
Is it possible for "haters gonna hate" to ever come from a scum mentality? I don't think so.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
I don't think that we're gonna find all of the scum through WoD's interactions, but it's likely a good start. Based on Day 1 behavior combined with the other wagons going on at the time, who do you think is likely to be WoD's scumbuddies?
So I don't remember if I said this here yet but I think the scum team is/was Axel/WoD/ced/Guardman/SharkFinnigan. I think the whole game makes perfect sense if those are our scummies and that we should lynch them all immediately. Except WoD because he's already dead.
OH? How so? DECONSTRUCT MY ENGLISH TELL ME WHY YOU HATE IT SO I CAN PROVE YOU WRONG
why
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I think Shark is a good candidate. But, personally, I want to take a closer look at Nis. His reaction to my post before I clarified what I meant seemed a little offputting. First, he called my work sloppy. Then he dug up a post of his to prove his interactions with Wrath of Dog. Then, he dug up a post by another player (Asenion) to prove that I was wrong yet again. I mean, it could be frustrated town and it could be miscommunication and lines getting crossed. But I'm really hardpressed to find a Town reason why that response was so much flailing than it should have been.
That being said, I was thinking of calculating the percentage of times people have posted in this thread and cross-referencing them with the percentage of times Wrath of Dog interacted with another person in this thread. My reasoning is that a higher post count would obviously lead someone to be referenced more often by any player. If we could establish some sort of baseline for percentage of posts vs. percentage of interactions, I think it could give us a better "big picture" look.
However, I didn't do this right away because we're pretty much into Day Two stuff and I don't know how relevant it would be if X, Y, and Z stepped their game up coming into Day Two. (And I'm not adept enough in the software to figure out how many posts there were prior to him admitting defeat.)
If someone thinks there is value in this, I can figure it all out. But, I'm not sure how much added information it would give us.
And you think that's normal?
I assumed others wanted me to make a substantial post before Night. Apparently "catching up during Night" was my lot instead, but more importantly, I also missed an unlock because of deliberate interference.
As I told Alpha, I forgot that this, being a zindabad game, has mostly randomized roles.
This comment will be even more hilarious after zindabad posts my role PM.
I'm not a fan of how you split this quoted sentence from the above in order to discredit me. Of course I'm not "doing it well" when you only address a portion of my response at a time.
See above. Again.
This is something Seppel likes to do, but I don't think it's particularly effective without also taking the time to compare the quantity of posting to the quality of the interaction, and that would be so time-intensive as to yield minimal expected value. That said, if you don't think your analysis is worthwhile, I suppose posting raw data is better than lurking into oblivion.