Of course the werewolves should have shot me! But they didn't. The only viable explanation for why not is they figured shooting me wouldn't be productive, either because I'd be protected or because I was already going to get shot by the mafia. (And that explanation follows even were I to be mafia, before you ask.) Neither of those is a good reason for what they did, but they did it. So let's stop debating facts here.
And sorry, that was another brain-fart typo. Let's clarify: You've cleared Dota of being a werewolf. Dota blocked Nacho. Nacho had my item. Blocking my item's ability does nothing for the mafia. If Dota's mafia, he should have just blocked Zionite as they killed him (setting aside that if he were mafia, he'd also never have backtracked on his jailkeeper claim, because it would be almost impossible to prove he was lying).
The fact that he blocked Nacho anyway suggests either (a) he blocked Nacho for a tactical reason, or (b) he blocked Nacho because he actually believed he was a JK. Because he wouldn't have a tactical reason as mafia, if (a) is true, he's a werewolf, and you lied about your result.
So lynching Dota gives us no information about you, since even if he flips mafia somehow, we still have no idea whether you have a seer-shot or are a werewolf faking one. But lynching you gives us quite a bit of information about Dota - if you flip town, he's confirmed town. If you flip scum, we get to go back and check your interactions to determine if he's a werewolf whom you were covering for.
And again, to everyone else: the only reason we're even having this discussion is because tom and Dota have through shoddy play created enough murk for IMAB to hide in. We should have lynched imab Day 3, after tom went to his grave ferociously denying imab's result and imab conveniently failed to claim his result until after the tom wagon was in full swing Day 2. For losing focus and lynching Wildfire instead, I'm partly responsible and quite regretful. I'm not making this mistake again.
Unvote, Vote imabusinessman
This ends now. Nacho, if you want to governor him, I'm willing to argue with you until the ends of the earth on this, and I'd much rather risk you disagreeing with me and saving IMAB than risk letting a townie get lynched because of your role. Because then, I can say I did everything I could to win the game.
I'm not changing my vote today. You all can ride with me, or ride without me.
(Yes, I know one page ago I said I was OK with letting imab get shot tonight, but I realize now that's no different than the Wildfire lynch - getting distracted, losing focus, accepting a compromise that only makes a greater mess. I'm done. Disagree with me all you will, but I'm all-in on this.)
Of course the werewolves should have shot me! But they didn't. The only viable explanation for why not is they figured shooting me wouldn't be productive, either because I'd be protected or because I was already going to get shot by the mafia. (And that explanation follows even were I to be mafia, before you ask.) Neither of those is a good reason for what they did, but they did it. So let's stop debating facts here.
And sorry, that was another brain-fart typo. Let's clarify: You've cleared Dota of being a werewolf. Dota blocked Nacho. Nacho had my item. Blocking my item's ability does nothing for the mafia. If Dota's mafia, he should have just blocked Zionite as they killed him (setting aside that if he were mafia, he'd also never have backtracked on his jailkeeper claim, because it would be almost impossible to prove he was lying).
The fact that he blocked Nacho anyway suggests either (a) he blocked Nacho for a tactical reason, or (b) he blocked Nacho because he actually believed he was a JK. Because he wouldn't have a tactical reason as mafia, if (a) is true, he's a werewolf, and you lied about your result.
So lynching Dota gives us no information about you, since even if he flips mafia somehow, we still have no idea whether you have a seer-shot or are a werewolf faking one. But lynching you gives us quite a bit of information about Dota - if you flip town, he's confirmed town. If you flip scum, we get to go back and check your interactions to determine if he's a werewolf whom you were covering for.
And again, to everyone else: the only reason we're even having this discussion is because tom and Dota have through shoddy play created enough murk for IMAB to hide in. We should have lynched imab Day 3, after tom went to his grave ferociously denying imab's result and imab conveniently failed to claim his result until after the tom wagon was in full swing Day 2. For losing focus and lynching Wildfire instead, I'm partly responsible and quite regretful. I'm not making this mistake again.
Unvote, Vote imabusinessman
This ends now. Nacho, if you want to governor him, I'm willing to argue with you until the ends of the earth on this, and I'd much rather risk you disagreeing with me and saving IMAB than risk letting a townie get lynched because of your role. Because then, I can say I did everything I could to win the game.
I'm not changing my vote today. You all can ride with me, or ride without me.
How is he confirmed town? That makes 0 sense. That makes even less sense than your previous post which made almost no sense. When was DoTA cleared of being mafia? Because his night action was foolish? That lines up with mafia perfectly.
tom and Dota created murk for me to hide in? Tom's behavior created clarification and Dota's behavior was downright detrimental to town. If you have a problem with "murk being created" then you should absolutely want to lynch DoTA, especially since...
I roleblocked him because I'm concerned by how easily he has been accepted as town for a claim that could be false, and we're reaching a stage where it could be detrimental to test his role out. I've been thinking that maybe he hasn't been NK'd yet because he's on one scum team, and is continually directing town away from lynching someone on the opposing team (I'm looking at you TS).
Xyre, I'll respond to you tonight, but I will again reiterate that your vote is a vote towards a no lynch, which is far worse than any other outcome today. Unless you believe the scumteam is you/TS/DoT/IMAB, I suggest you vote elsewhere.
And I'm not just shutting down these lines of thought because they are reads that I held previously; I've been reading on my phone even while I haven't been able to post, and so will be responding UK arguments in full.
I like etr for today and use the ww ability on IABM tonight.
Tomorrow we might have to lynch Xyre. I was told his alignment made him like confirmed town but I'm doubting that more and more now. At some point behavior has to factor in. The fact that he put up a wall and said he wouldn't respond to people he considered scum is also a huge red flag.
Can someone please explain to me why we are letting one person run this show?
EtR still scum.
imabusinessman still slinging mud
Calling you scum is a read not slinging mud. It's a Euphemism for "anti-town faction". Is this your first game of mafia?
If you want to see slinging mud take a look at your own posts or Xyre's accusations that people are trying to be disruptive to gain tactical advantages. That's slinging mud.
@Axelrod
1. You're town.
2. Now that it's finally been mentioned I wanted to bring this to your attention...
Because I realized only townies fake post restriction because they're crumbing power and want to draw NK. I'm sad because most people who fake post restrictions at least have the courtesy to do so in a way that they can still post good content. For example, only posting in haiku, Gifs or images. Posting in song titles prevents that. It means he's just going to be dead weight for town until he gets bored with it.
imab switches to townreading tordeck for no apparent reason.
Of all the people who have claimed to have re-read the game you're the only person to have noticed that I did indeed explain why I switched my read on Tordeck. This should finally put to rest the notion that tomsloger was telling the truth about not having a gun. Why do you think EtR, tomsloger and Xyre "missed" this? tomsloger is a confirmed liar when it came to not having a gun, not having looked up role information, and to have made a number of false accusations towards other players (btw EtR, tomsloger is another player you should look at if you have problems with mudslinging)and yet Xyre is still relying on tom's death throws to send shade my way.
I'm finishing my parsing of Anty's TS case. Then I guess I'll see where I am.
Point 7: Sir Chris has replaced in for Necarg. TS seems to be saying that the arguments against Necarg were mainly meta arguments that looked scummy, but now that Sir Chris has replaced in we'll have to see if he still looks scummy. TS seems to be saying that if the slot is scummy, it's scummy, and the fact Sir Chris is replacing in doesn't just magically change his prior impression of the "slot." That all sounds fine to me. Anty criticizes because he says that TS is reducing the case against Necarg to one about meta when TS hasn't actually been making any meta arguments against Necarg. He says TS seems to just "forget" all his other arguments. This is another one that requires follow-up to see what TS was actually saying about Necarg previous to this. It could be relevant one way or the other.
Point 8: TS made a post where he was guessing who the scum were, and he guessed 6 scum slots. DOTA asked him how he knew there were 6 scum. Anty thinks this is a good catch of a possible slip. I'm less impressed, as my default assumption at the start was that there were probably 6 scum with 3/3 teams also. It is slightly relevant that Anty is corect here that TS doesn't actually answer the question DOTA asked: "How do you know there are 6 scum?" He just criticises DOTA for referring to an old post with outdated reads. When this is followed up on, TS just says he's not sure how many scum there are and he's not familiar with set-ups. It's kind of a weak response from TS. So I'm crediting this one as a real point.
Point 9: TS attacks Tom for his poor performance (not just in this game, but in a prior game). TS essentially says Tom had bad reads in the other game and he's got bad reads now, and that Tom himself should have no confidence in his own reads because of how wrong he was before. This is kind of BS from Tapping. To say, "you were wrong in that other game and therefore you have no idea how to read people" is both bad logic and kind of petty.
Point 10: Again accusing TS of buddying up to Nacho, to the point of changing his own read of Tom to "leantown" based just on Nacho's opinion. I'm not a huge fan of this logic from TS either. The part where he essentially defers to nacho on the reads "against his better judgment" - not the buddy part, which I think is less of a point.
Point 11: Anty thinks he sees a post which could possibly be indicative of scum TS trying to get help from his scumbuddy Sir Chris. This one is not a point. Anty himself says this one "may be off the mark."
Point 12: Tapping says that since Sir Chris has replaced in he hasn't done anything to make TS suspicious. Anty doesn't like that TS seems to "forgive and forget" how scummy he thought Necarg was before. I'm not sure I can agree with this point either, as (1) it wasn't like TS was all up and down screaming for Necarg's head before, and (2) He seems appropriately cautious about Sir Chris. He's not saying he thinks he's Town, just that he's watching him and hasn't seem anything scummy yet.
Point 13: Accuses TS of "chainsaw" voting for Tom, after Tom has voted for Sir Chris. I'm not a big fan of this point, as it seems to rely on linking TS and Sir Chris as scum together, and the "chainsaw" voting logic doesn't follow for me.
Point 14: Again he points out what appears to be an attempt at buddying, or at least Tapping linking himself with Nacho, saying how he was "on" Tom before, with Nacho, about his different style of play in this game. Eh, it's a minor point.
Point 15: Tapping wants a claim from Tom even though Nacho has said he will pardon Tom. Anty says there is no reason for this. I disagree. If I though someone was scum, I wouldn't back off from pressing them just because the "Governor" role said he would pardon. I would probably be trying to convince the Governor he was wrong, and one way to possibly do that is by forcing out a claim.
I will say I don't like the way TS asks the question "would anyone else like to see a claim?" As opposed to just pressing for it himself. It's a little passive and deferential?
Point 16: TS asks EtR (in a very snarky way) to explain what specific language (or post) I (Axelrod) made that made him (EtR) feel better about me. He also cautions EtR not to use language that TS has used himself so he (EtR) won't contradict himself again. I'm not sure what this all refers to. I don't like this post because TS is snarky and condescending, but maybe not for the same reasons Anty doesn't like it.
Point 17: Still thinks that TS voting for Tom after Nacho has said he will pardon is scummy. I still think this is wrong.
Point 18: After snarking at EtR, now TS almost seems to defend EtR against IAMB. IAMB calls a post of EtR's "contentless garbage" and TS responds "but we have all these other juicy targets to lynch first..." It's a minor point.
Point 20: Accuses TS of a flip-flop on Jobie, when TS is asked who his top suspects are after the trio of Tom, Xyre, Zionite, and TS mentions EtR and Jobie. Apparently, according to Anty, just a few pages earlier, TS had Jobie leaning Town. If true, this is another minor point. TS isn't saying Jobie is scum here, just that he's "taking another look" at him, presumably because of posts that have happened.
Point 21: Anty notes a post where TS defends Sir Chris (true).
Point 22: TS gets super-frustrated with Nacho saying he will Govern Tom. Kind of explodes with "this is bull****" Anty seems tickled that TS is now mad at Nacho after all the buddy-buddy he did. I'm more interested in the part where TS calls lynching Sir Chris "disgusting (even if he might be scum)." That's just kind of an extreme response when you are not even sure the player in question is Town. TS is making a meta call (following Wildfire here, I believe) that Sir Chris will get killed by a scum team either way, so lynching him is dumb. Also threatens to hammer himself to get out of the game.
Point 23: TS says Xyre's case against Sir Chris has "no merit." I wonder if he still feels that way and thinks Xyre just got lucky, or if he is capable of admitting to being wrong. I'm also interested in the part here where TS seems to now be casting aspersions on Nacho, criticizing people for just accepting his claim and not casing him, and saying the ability seems anti-town. I think it's possibly relevant that Nacho (in addition to threatening to Govern Tom) is going after Sir Chris at this juncture. That seems to be what has changed TS opinion on him almost as much as the Governor thing.
Point 24: TS calms down and "Thanks" Nacho, and moves his vote over to Huntzilla. Anty says this is exactly what a scum who was buddy with Chris would do. Anty isn't quoting all of TS posts, so I don't know what, if anything TS was saying about Hunt. If TS wasn't saying much of anything about Hunt, this looks worse for TS. So, another point that might require some research.
Point 25: TS is challenged on his read of Sir Chris and claims that he was "open" to evidence that Sir Chris was scum, but that there wasn't much. I agree with Anty that TS didn't not appear very open at all to any evidence that Sir Chris might be scum.
Point 26: Anty says that TS was willing to "clear" Zionite for handing out gifts, but not clear Xyre for doing the same. He is still very suspicious of Xyre. This one is much less of a point as TS got a gift from Zionite and knows what it does, whereas he doesn't know what Xyre's gift does and he was previously suspicious of Xyre.
Point 27: Notes that TS has not made a case against anyone this game, though he's posted a ton, yet TS is always asking other people to make cases. Eh. It's minor.
Man, these things always get out of control lengthwise. Of these points, I like 9, 10, 16, 21, 22, 23 and 25. 7 and 24 require some more research. A few others are minor points I can agree with but that don't really say much about TS's alignment.
I think there is enough here for me to say that Anty's case appears genuine, however, and not just something he was fabricating to try and push a mis-lynch. That's enough for me to call them as not being on the same team, at least. And it's also generally in Anty's favor for him to do the work.
I'm not reading TS's response to all this right now.
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.
Xyre, I'll respond to you tonight, but I will again reiterate that your vote is a vote towards a no lynch, which is far worse than any other outcome today. Unless you believe the scumteam is you/TS/DoT/IMAB, I suggest you vote elsewhere.
I don't care. I've had it with you continually threatening to take the ball and go home. You've made it almost impossible to form a coherent strategy this game, since we all have to please you, and that stubbornness has contributed to us winding up here. So I'm done.
Either you and I can have an honest conversation about the reasons to lynch IMAB, or you can try to form a lynch without my vote. Because even if we lose, at least then my conscience will be clear. At least then I can say I did everything I could to point out the scum and deliver a coherent strategy for the day and lost due to other people's arrogance.
The fact that you haven't chimed in on any of my PBPAs or analyses about GJ, Antny, TS, imab, or ETR, even as you continue to list many of them on your kill-or-save lists, totally baffles me. You're supposed to be our last line of defense, which means you're supposed to care about what we have to say! But instead you just keep the blinders on and continue to deliver opinions from on high, "kill you, save you", like Jesus Christ on a bender.
So I'm done. If we lose and IMAB is scum, you lost it for us. That's it. Hands washed.
(1) I think Anty was being genuire in his attack on TS. That only means that they would not be on the same scum team.
(2) It makes me feel a bit better about Anty.
Of course, if that's all he's done this game, then it isn't all that much either.
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.
Of course the werewolves should have shot me! But they didn't. The only viable explanation for why not is they figured shooting me wouldn't be productive, either because I'd be protected or because I was already going to get shot by the mafia. (And that explanation follows even were I to be mafia, before you ask.) Neither of those is a good reason for what they did, but they did it. So let's stop debating facts here.
And sorry, that was another brain-fart typo. Let's clarify: You've cleared Dota of being a werewolf. Dota blocked Nacho. Nacho had my item. Blocking my item's ability does nothing for the mafia. If Dota's mafia, he should have just blocked Zionite as they killed him (setting aside that if he were mafia, he'd also never have backtracked on his jailkeeper claim, because it would be almost impossible to prove he was lying).
The fact that he blocked Nacho anyway suggests either (a) he blocked Nacho for a tactical reason, or (b) he blocked Nacho because he actually believed he was a JK. Because he wouldn't have a tactical reason as mafia, if (a) is true, he's a werewolf, and you lied about your result.
So lynching Dota gives us no information about you, since even if he flips mafia somehow, we still have no idea whether you have a seer-shot or are a werewolf faking one. But lynching you gives us quite a bit of information about Dota - if you flip town, he's confirmed town. If you flip scum, we get to go back and check your interactions to determine if he's a werewolf whom you were covering for.
And again, to everyone else: the only reason we're even having this discussion is because tom and Dota have through shoddy play created enough murk for IMAB to hide in. We should have lynched imab Day 3, after tom went to his grave ferociously denying imab's result and imab conveniently failed to claim his result until after the tom wagon was in full swing Day 2. For losing focus and lynching Wildfire instead, I'm partly responsible and quite regretful. I'm not making this mistake again.
Unvote, Vote imabusinessman
This ends now. Nacho, if you want to governor him, I'm willing to argue with you until the ends of the earth on this, and I'd much rather risk you disagreeing with me and saving IMAB than risk letting a townie get lynched because of your role. Because then, I can say I did everything I could to win the game.
I'm not changing my vote today. You all can ride with me, or ride without me.
How is he confirmed town? That makes 0 sense. That makes even less sense than your previous post which made almost no sense. When was DoTA cleared of being mafia? Because his night action was foolish? That lines up with mafia perfectly.
tom and Dota created murk for me to hide in? Tom's behavior created clarification and Dota's behavior was downright detrimental to town. If you have a problem with "murk being created" then you should absolutely want to lynch DoTA, especially since...
Thanks for responding to the two least important parts of that analysis.
The bolded part is just total nonsense. Even if the mafia are dim, they don't do anything for no reason. What you're suggesting - the only way Dota can be mafia - is that we accept that he did something for no reason. And you give us no reason to believe he acted with no reason. Which is nonsensical.
And by "murk" I mean they did just enough to make your investigations not suspicious. tom was adamant about not having a gun, but because he was a neutral and because he was super fidgety, enough people believed he could have maybe made a mistake to give you a pass. And Dota's naivety has given just enough rope to hang himself despite the fact that the only way he could be scum based on your investigation would be if either he had a stroke last night or you're lying. In both cases, your investigation looks worse for you, and it's only because you had the good luck to investigate two people who've done their damndest to hang themselves that you continue to draw breath.
Of all the people who have claimed to have re-read the game you're the only person to have noticed that I did indeed explain why I switched my read on Tordeck. This should finally put to rest the notion that tomsloger was telling the truth about not having a gun. Why do you think EtR, tomsloger and Xyre "missed" this? tomsloger is a confirmed liar when it came to not having a gun, not having looked up role information, and to have made a number of false accusations towards other players (btw EtR, tomsloger is another player you should look at if you have problems with mudslinging)and yet Xyre is still relying on tom's death throws to send shade my way.
Well, the thing is, Tom is still not a "confirmed liar" for saying he didn't have a gun. The only person confirming this is you. That's not confirmed. I'll agree Tom was wrong when he says that you switched to a Town view of Tordeck for no apparent reason. But I can't quite ascribe the malicious motivations that you seem to want me to ascribe here. It seemed a pretty off the cuff remark.
Did EtR and Xyre miss this? Is you "flip-flopping" on Tordeck a big part of their case against you? If so, I'll agree that isn't a super strong point (although, you should note that while I acknowledge that you gave a reason for switching your opinion, I also said I didn't think your reason was that great.)
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.
Yeah, I don't think I ever said anything about tordeck. Especially because my theory that IMAB is a werewolf means that their relationship doesn't matter much at all in that regard.
Yo, Nacho, of the people you just said you would govern, can you say (again? I missed if you said before) why DOTA and TS are on that list? I can understand Xyre and IAMB just because of ability claims, but why the others?
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.
@Nachos: Remember Newbie 1653? I was town and I was involved in every single mislynch in that game. Town can be wrong. Remember how it ended? You voted Austerior instead of Plotinus (who did admittedly play a damn strong game) and town lost. You're also wrong on occasion. Imab has been at L-1 twice in this game if I remember correctly. Xyre's post to you above is pretty close to why I was suspecting that you lied about your role, you've been deflecting wagons away from players that the majority believe are scum and I can't figure out why.
There is basically no way in hell that DoT is scum. It doesn't actually make sense for scum to claim the Jailkeeper --> Roleblock thing on me; he wasn't caught out by his Jailkeeper claim, and the random paranoia of me because people aren't questioning me enough is well within the range of his town game but not so much within the range of his scum game.
Okay, I see this post on DOTA. Was that it?
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.
This is why I don't play much anymore. This is too much damn time spent for too little result.
Now I'm looking at GJ.
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.
So, wow, GJ has been a super non-entity this game, at least up until, like, a week ago? When he finally made a case against DOTA? Why isn't anyone talking about him? I might put him above both EtR and Anty right now.
Crap, I might even have to make a case now.
I think this might be the real deal guys.
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.
#2196
This is GJ finally giving his big "reads" post of the game. The below quote is his response to DOTA's jailkeeper claim:
This is the only pause I am having with Dota, and am not sure how much I believe this. No one else has claimed a protective role, short of maybe the gifts, but we will see if the massclaim happens.
Does the guy who's role is Bodyguard say that? In that way?
I do not read this, at all, as someone who is skeptical of a claim because he himself has a protective role. I read this as a guy who is considering believing the claim because no one else has claimed a protective role. Which you just would not do if you yourself had a protective role.
This is just wrong.
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.
Other game is in hyper over drive mode, but there isn't a snowball's chance in hell TS is on either team with a post like that about Chris.
This is apparently in response to this post from TS:
Quote from TappingStones »
As I explained early on, there was never a reason to worry about S.C. he was a kill target regardless of alignment. But I had him as lean town when he died. I was very open to some evidence that he was scum. There wasn't a ton.
Should I show you the posts where you missed on my alignment? You were also not unhappy about the Huntzilla lynch as I remember.
But no matter, are you going to play or keep whining?
I'm not available to lynch, so who would you like? Etr seems like a nice one, right?
How, exactly, would this preclude TS from being a Mafia, even assuming it excluded him from being a Werewolf (which, how does it do that?). This one reeks of inside knowledge.
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.
Yeah, I don't think I ever said anything about tordeck. Especially because my theory that IMAB is a werewolf means that their relationship doesn't matter much at all in that regard.
But you are choosing to listen to someone who has demonstrated that they were a habitual liar to cast shade my way.
@Axelrod
I will never see tom as anything other than a habitual liar. He's got a body of work on this.
I have a reason to believe the town has a ton of power, due to their being two scum groups. I am also aware of what could happen if it would succeed and who would or wouldn't be targeted. On top of all that, there is a chance that a cross kill or two may happen.
You are a Bodyguard? What "reason to believe" did you have? What does the second part of this even mean?
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.
@Axelrod
I will never see tom as anything other than a habitual liar. He's got a body of work on this.
...Except for that part where he cleared you of being a Werewolf. We've talked about this already.
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.
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.
Look, #2196 is all anyone really should need. No way a Townie bodyguard says that.
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.
So, wow, GJ has been a super non-entity this game, at least up until, like, a week ago? When he finally made a case against DOTA? Why isn't anyone talking about him? I might put him above both EtR and Anty right now.
Crap, I might even have to make a case now.
I think this might be the real deal guys.
For the most part of days 1 and 2, I was in the invitational, and ground pounding the crap out of it.
This is the only pause I am having with Dota, and am not sure how much I believe this. No one else has claimed a protective role, short of maybe the gifts, but we will see if the massclaim happens.
I am trying to figure out if you missed where I said I believed a jailer and my role could co-exist in the same game, or purposefully ignoring that part. We have had several claimed power investigative roles, 2 protective roles didn't seem to be too much of a stretch.
How, exactly, would this preclude TS from being a Mafia, even assuming it excluded him from being a Werewolf (which, how does it do that?). This one reeks of inside knowledge.
there was a reason I wasn't reading him as mafia before (I'll go back and read that), but come on. You really think TS being buddies with Chris mentions his death in that way at all?
You are a Bodyguard? What "reason to believe" did you have? What does the second part of this even mean?
A bodyguard instead of a doctor typically means that the investigative roles are usually stronger. You never see watcher + doctor in a game, due to how absurd the interactions could be. Elite bodyguard gave me the implication that with two scum groups, there was likely no other killing abilities, considering how elite bodyguard works.
As far as the 2nd part goes. Don't worry about it.
Look, #2196 is all anyone really should need. No way a Townie bodyguard says that.
XKCD had a jailkeeper, bullet proof, and a doctor that was bulletproof while using his ability. I think it's fairly safe to assume my ability could exist by itself with a jailkeeper.
You are missing (or ducking) the point. I'm not arguing whether it makes sense or it's possible for those roles to coexist in the same game. I'm pointing out that your statement, in #2196, and the mindset it shows, does not follow.
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.
If I'm a Doctor role (eg.), and someone comes along and claims Bodyguard, I don't say "Well, I'm not sure if I believe this claim or not, but no one else has claimed a protective role yet, so we'll just wait and see what happens in a mass claim...."
You just wouldn't.
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.
Also, there are zero vigilantes in this game. "Elite" bodyguard is, therefore, a guaranteed 1-1 trade with a scum if you don't get lynched. And with multiple scum groups, the chances would appear to be doubled. That's seems a little too good to be true, now that I'm actually thinking about it.
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.
Edit: strike that, I suppose, it could be possible that you bodyguard a Werewolf on a night someone with Xyre's gift tries to kill them and then you die?
Xyre, can your gift kill a non-werewolf? Does that make any sense at all with the role GJ is claiming?
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.
My PM just says if the target (of the item's ability, not my giving them the item) is a werewolf, they will be killed. I'll ask Iso what that might entail for bodyguarding.
Also, there are zero vigilantes in this game. "Elite" bodyguard is, therefore, a guaranteed 1-1 trade with a scum if you don't get lynched. And with multiple scum groups, the chances would appear to be doubled. That's seems a little too good to be true, now that I'm actually thinking about it.
Also, there are zero vigilantes in this game. "Elite" bodyguard is, therefore, a guaranteed 1-1 trade with a scum if you don't get lynched. And with multiple scum groups, the chances would appear to be doubled. That's seems a little too good to be true, now that I'm actually thinking about it.
That's not quite how it works.
And you are choosing not to clarify this...why?
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.
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.
@ Nacho: What about the fact that EtR was OceanBlack? The latter I read as very townie, and nothing I've seen from EtR has really displaced that feeling.
Has anything EtR posted looked town?
OB looked town, sure, but he was in the game for 6 pages. People can look town for 6 pages, especially when they can scum hunt genuinely. How long does the slot slide on OB's play?
In my book, based on the sheer craziness of the original's play, only until the replacement does something undeniably scummy. But fine, let's do a stripped-down EtR PBPA without the barnacle.
And this right here is the biggest gripe I have with your read on EtR: we are playing a game with two scum teams. That means that any member of any scumteam can genuinely scumhunt just like a townie can. This becomes more difficult later game, when your team mates come under pressure or it becomes incredibly advantageous to lynch a townie over an opposing scum but OB didn't have to deal with any of that. And you're giving his slot a 100% pass because of something he did in 6 pages in a game where he could genuinely scumhunt as scum.
And this is the biggest problem with me accepting your EtR read at face value; I know that an overwhelming majority of your read is based on something that really really really shouldn't matter at this point.
EtR actually came in on post 207. After some earlier housekeeping posts, he comes out the gate in 259 with some good analysis of the game so far. But scum can reread too, so only a small town point for substantial effort. (Compare him with Antny's play this game, though, and it stands out immediately.) What follow are a barrage of questions-only posts, which also could go either way.
"Some good analysis of the game so far?" What point are you making here? What am I supposed to glean from your post here?
EtR's 259 isn't doing anything. He said he thought I was town (boring), he said he "didn't like how DoT was twisting Rodemy's words" (boooring), and he called your stance on IMAB's claim problematic (booooooring). I find none of those stances a risky for a hypothetical scum-EtR, I find none of those stances to possess any particular sort of insight; hell, the only stance he provides that is even original is his interpretation of DoT approaching Rodemy which is a very very shallow observation that doesn't impress me much at all.
His first big critical analyses come in 336, and I find myself agreeing with a lot of them. His comment about Dota's phrasing is another example where I'd say, as with GJ's case generally, "yeah, that's weird, but I can believe he said it innocenetly", but again I think it's a valid point taken alone. The vote on Antny for "hopping around to where ever you think something will catch fire with weak reasoning" is a pretty concise summary of the main reason I think Antny is scum, so points there. And I agree with his breakdown of TS's semi-PBPAs, especially as explicated in 399. Overall, I'm really liking EtR at this moment.
I disagree very strongly with his nitpicking of DoT's phrasing: it's a very shallow observation and normally pretty rare from people unless they believe in Freudian slips, and people who do always pursue them with more vigor than the half-hearted potshot EtR offered. I don't think someone saying "the point of the game is to ask questions and cast suspicion" is a scum tell and would vomit in my mouth and on the floor if you felt differently. The rest of his observations I really want to break down here because they are not interesting by any stretch of the word whatsoever:
1) Accusing Anty of votehopping - I'm sorry, is this a deep observation to make? I personally agree that anyone with eyes and fifth grade reading comprehension could accuse of Anty doing something like that, do you disagree?
2) Wow, TS is super aggressive. It feels fake. - Again, I am confused why this is an observation that makes you believe that EtR could possibly be town; it's easy as hell to point out because yep, TS is aggressive. I've played with him before. He was aggressive there too.
(His subsequent unvote of Antny is bothersome - why does every vote have to serve a purpose? It seems like scum more than town are worried about leaving votes floating around in the ether - but that could just be personal style. And he votes for TS shortly thereafter, claiming "I wanted to hear more from Dota", which explains the Antny unvote a bit more but is itself a bit of a thin justification.)
It's evidence for how unwilling to pursue his suspicions he really is; the biggest problem with EtR is that he hasn't felt or honestly pursued anything, and that's incredibly unnatural. In a game like this, that doesn't happen to town. It happens to scum.
Again an insightful comment about Dota in 414. Shows he's thinking fully about motivations and how what people say reflects it. I like that a lot. I also like his even-tempered response to TS's just plain bad answer to the vote (424 and 418, respectively). EtR doesn't look at all to be "playing for his own survival" - quite the opposite in fact. Whereas TS looks eager to slander someone voting for him, which is how I define OMGUS.
EtR's #414 said that he thought DoT was town because it looked like he was genuinely scumhunting and not slinging mud.
That is NOT an "insightful comment". That is a generic townread. I can make that post about anyone in the entire game and it applies because it is so generic.
The opposite of playing for survival is playing to piss people off, which is what TS was doing. The the reason I enjoy playing with TS as much as I do is because he's unafraid to push his opinions and doesn't really care how he words them; he steps on people's toes, he's harsh, he's blunt, but he says what's on his mind. That playstyle is "the opposite of playing for survival", being offended when someone insults you is not. It is natural and a human being response, not an alignment indicative one.
Keeps pressing TS for answers to his questions about the PBPA, which I like. He's not tunnelling, i.e. he's not using his pressure on TS as an all-purpose excuse to not contribute other content, but he keeps the pressure on nonetheless in the belief that it will produce useful results. And I like his willingness to consider TS's points on face value re: tomsloger and Zionite.
Tunneling is not a scumtell.
You've been tunneling like crazy on IMAB. IMAB has been tunneling on DoT and you. I tunneled on Wildfire.
It's completely natural to have a strong suspect and try to ram it through; EtR avoiding a town tendency isn't a town tell, sorry.
1141 is another good point - Sir Chris was getting mighty conciliatory with me at the end (calling me town against my many critics) in the hopes of shaking me off, and EtR catches it.
Do you know what EtR didn't do?
Push a scumread on Sir Chris. Making tiny observations and taking potshots at scum means nothing if you don't put anything behind it. EtR didn't.
His comment in 1847 about imab following up on supposed slips by Necarg is astute. I'm not sure I totally buy it, but it does have a certain allure - that imab turned a blind eye to his scumbuddy's mistake. His analysis in this post in general also largely makes much sense to me. And I like that he's retracing his steps to the early game, rather than just getting mired in the present. Suggests he's making earnest steps to rectify his absences.
Re: the slip.
No. No no no no no.
The original slip that IMAB brought up was accusing EtR of focusing on the Seer aspect of his role and not the gunsmith. He then claimed that Necarg, who did the exact same thing that supposedly town!EtR did, scumslipped. No. Town don't see scum doing something that they did (and was wrongly accused about) and say "oh hey, maybe it actually was a slip!".
"His analysis in general makes sense to me" is a lazy observation, let's break down that lovely observation yet again.
1) "Xyre called Necarg scum! Xyre is town!" - lame
2) "Xyre voted Necarg! Xyre is town!" - lame
3) EtR has an attack on IMAB for pointing out that Tordeck could have had a post restriction and still produced content, which is a horrible, terrible, no good observation. Tordeck COULD have produced more content, he was being lazy. This is a fact. Trying to use Tordeck's townflip against IMAB is slimy and terrible and would be very surprised if it was an observation you actually agreed with.
4) "Third and fifth positions on a wagon are scummy!" - lame
5) "I agree with a Tom post!" - don't care
6) "IMAB attacks me for scumslipping like he attacked Necarg for scumslipping!" - I don't understand why this was posted here. I don't understand how he could think that Necarg scumslipped by doing the same exact thing that he did.
7) "Xyre continued to vote Necarg! Xyre is town!" - wow Xyre it's no surprise you liked this post!
8) "Seppel's reads were bad! I think town!" - lame
And I guess there are a few more but this is an overwhelming majority of DoT's analysis post you agree with; I think it's your turn to show me exactly what.
His play regarding who targeted me was very solid. I highly doubt he wouldn't just share the information if he were scum. That's all I'm gonna say about that.
I also know who targeted you. There's literally no reason for EtR to share that information with the town as scum. Why would he?
I do realize a majority of this post has a bit of an aggressive edge to it; I apologize for that, I'm trying to type fast and the way I do that is by listening to music with hard, angry beats and this usually translates in my writing.
EtR hasn't done jack *****.
When I read his posts, I see nothing more than garbage, garbage accusations; you seemed to have liked a couple of his posts because they were long-ish but what good observations specifically did he bring up in them? The only thing you could really substantiate that was good was a poke at Anty for being a survivalist, but, again, this isn't a reason to call him town because scum can scumhunt genuinely and that point is both incredibly obvious and incredibly not original. Bring me a reason to call him town.
Xyre, here is a short and dirty reads list while I move to find and answer your IMAB wall.
But before I do that, here's a thinking experiment for you:
I have the power to control the lynch and bring it wherever the hell I want. I have been playing like a dick. It also means that, if I have bad reads, I can singlehandedly lose the game for town. How do you think scum approach me in a situation like that? Personally, I think they play nice - I think they move where I tell them to lynch, and I don't think they get in my face and yell at me and suspect me and tell me I'm going to be the reason the town loses the game.
Now, think of my govern targets: IMAB, TappingStones, you, DoT.
Do you remember the only person with the gall to say that I was scum? IMAB. No one else had the balls to say "**** you Nacho, your role is bull*****, you are scum". IMAB did. He continuously held this position until I rammed through the lynch on Huntzilla and Sir Chris was shot by the Mafia team. Even today, he has appealed to me personally more consistently and angrily than anyone else with maybe the exception of you.
Now think of TappingStones, who was one of the first people to attack me. You thought that he hated me because of the way he went after me early game. I somehow don't think that scum, no matter how crazy, would do that to someone who could carry their team to victory. You point out his aggressiveness as a reason for him being scum; you're wrong, read his other games and see how wrong you are. You point out how he sheeps me and follows me and defers to me, read through his play in Predator Mafia to see why you're wrong; his play evolved during that game as he tried to ram through lynches on whoever he cared about and **** everyone else and then other players picked up on things he wasn't seeing and he started trusting "experienced players" more closely. Even now, he's reminding me to use my ability conservatively so I don't **** everyone over.
Think of DoT, who got paranoid of me because I was wielding too much power and blocked me over it. Who is currently pointing out that I was wrong a bunch in the first game I played together and please don't do that to us again, who has shown signs of paranoia over me the entire game.
Now, think of you, who is telling me that it's my fault if we lose and you're going to lynch IMAB whether I make us no lynch or not because **** you, you're governing my scumreads.
This is how townies act. You should be pissed that I'm leaning back on my throne and telling you what you can and cannot do because it's complete and utter bull*****. This is how you four are acting.
Now, take Gentlemen Johnny. I have been threatening to govern his scumreads for pretty much the entire game. Shouldn't he be frustrated? Shouldn't he be pissed? You can tell me he's a chill guy and doesn't get mad or whatever, but I saw him expose frustration at no one posting but I *didn't* see him show frustration at me saying that I was going to bring his scumreads to endgame with me; hell, the closest he got to expressing that sort of frustration is his little twitter line egg along at your wall post which he is saying while he is completely happy to vote within my suspects.
Take Anty, who is doing the same exact thing. He's snipped at me. He's said "Nacho you're governing all of my suspects!". But he hasn't dug his heels in and tried to change anything because he is still holding out for that hope where I say "I'm governing Anty and there's nothing anyone can do about it!".
Now think of EtR. What has EtR's interaction been with me?
What has Seppel's?
Axelrod is an odd duck. I'm recently slotting him into town because I liked the late doublevoter reveal (only reason to hide it would be if he was scum going for endgame, don't think he'd just suddenly reveal it because massclaim) and because I like some of his latest drive and because this is a read of yours that I'm trusting a bit.
I'll get to the EtR thing in a moment, but I wanted to point out that your logic in the post right above mine doesn't follow, because it assumes there's only one valid response one can have to capricious cruelty. People deal with unfairness in different ways, especially if they think they benefit from or suffer from those caprices.
What you're identifying as characteristics of TS and IMAB - sullen aggression - unique to you and your role, I'd say are characteristics of who they are in every respect. When things don't go their way, when people disagree with them, they pout, they name-call, they go on the offensive. Same for your existence. That doesn't make them townies, that makes them themselves. Much in the same way that a kid pouting because his mother won't buy him candy still has a hidden agenda.
Likewise, someone who ignores your existence and tries to find a way to beat an unfair game could be town or scum. I, for example, had no reason to complain about your methods until they negatively affected by ability to lynch people I needed lynched, in part because I used you to confirm myself. As a winner of the game, I didn't need to bother. That didn't make me scum, though, as you know. So the extrapolation crumbles further.
You can't just assume that the winners of the game, the people who don't complain, are sinister, and the people who do complain are good. That's cartoonishly simplistic.
So instead, why don't we talk about how TS meets all criticism by implying that the criticism is only being brought because the person criticizing him is scum, in perhaps the most subconscious OMGUSing behavior I've ever seen. Let's talk about how IMAB spreads blame around to cover up the serious holes in his cover story. Let's talk about how GJ and Antny have done absolutely nothing except protect their own skins. But let's stop talking about the caprices of your universe. Because you ain't God.
"When things don't go their way, they pout, go on the offensive" - the times when IMAB and TS went on the offensive with me was when I prevented their primary scum suspect from getting lynched. This is more likely to come from town than scum: this isn't some crazy ego trip that I'm on, this is that IMAB and TS showed very definitive and genuine signs of frustration when I told them they couldn't lynch Tom, which is frustration that is less likely to come out when their primary goal is "to survive" as opposed to "to lynch scum".
I've never said anyone who ignored me was scum, so don't know where this is coming from. I also made a clear distinction between people who should be mad with me and people who shouldn't be, but I guess I'll try again.
I have been telling Anty and GJ that I will govern their suspects all game. They have shown subtle signs of frustration, sure, but they haven't gotten pissed or attempted to do anything meaningful about it. I find this scummy: normally, a townie's third suspect has nowhere near the same confidence that first one has and thus compromising so easily is suspicious to me.
Your TS suspicions are based on his personality, as I told you.
That IMAB case I am skeptical of because "moving around blame to cover up holes" is not a scumtell I or anyone I know has ever subscribed to, but I will get to it when I have the time.
And this right here is the biggest gripe I have with your read on EtR: we are playing a game with two scum teams. That means that any member of any scumteam can genuinely scumhunt just like a townie can. This becomes more difficult later game, when your team mates come under pressure or it becomes incredibly advantageous to lynch a townie over an opposing scum but OB didn't have to deal with any of that. And you're giving his slot a 100% pass because of something he did in 6 pages in a game where he could genuinely scumhunt as scum.
And this is the biggest problem with me accepting your EtR read at face value; I know that an overwhelming majority of your read is based on something that really really really shouldn't matter at this point.
Except my OB read isn't based on him scumhunting, it was based on him flipping his ***** when confronted with TS's double-speak and going berserk until he basically had to be replaced. Ironically, it's not unlike your read of the people who have fought back against your use of the governor power.
I don't give players who replace in a complete pass based on their predecessor, but I don't restart them at flat 0, either. Because they have the same alignment, unless one of the players is exceptionally good and the other is exceptionally bad, they should bear a passing resemblance to each other in scumminess which should be pretty apparent from the beginning. See, for instance, Necarg and Sir Chris - the latter is a much better player than the former, but the fact that he couldn't escape his predecessor's scumminess was how we eventually caught him by casting his (SC's) posts in a different light.
"Some good analysis of the game so far?" What point are you making here? What am I supposed to glean from your post here?
EtR's 259 isn't doing anything. He said he thought I was town (boring), he said he "didn't like how DoT was twisting Rodemy's words" (boooring), and he called your stance on IMAB's claim problematic (booooooring). I find none of those stances a risky for a hypothetical scum-EtR, I find none of those stances to possess any particular sort of insight; hell, the only stance he provides that is even original is his interpretation of DoT approaching Rodemy which is a very very shallow observation that doesn't impress me much at all.
You and I are judging him by different standards. This post is clearly a set of comments that occurred to him as he read through. So what if it's shallow? What I care about is whether he shows he cares about getting good information, and the questions he asks here are good ones, even if they aren't going to suddenly free scum from the bedrock.
Furthermore, if we buy your premise that scum can do good scumhunting, then we have nothing useful to go on. You're essentially asking us to jump completely past the usual first step, which is "is X playing like a townie or a scum would usually play?" and get into the metaphysics of it all, which is silly. My PBPA's premise is very simple: he's asking good questions and trying to do right. Which is far more than I could say for my four scum suspects.
I disagree very strongly with his nitpicking of DoT's phrasing: it's a very shallow observation and normally pretty rare from people unless they believe in Freudian slips, and people who do always pursue them with more vigor than the half-hearted potshot EtR offered. I don't think someone saying "the point of the game is to ask questions and cast suspicion" is a scum tell and would vomit in my mouth and on the floor if you felt differently. The rest of his observations I really want to break down here because they are not interesting by any stretch of the word whatsoever:
1) Accusing Anty of votehopping - I'm sorry, is this a deep observation to make? I personally agree that anyone with eyes and fifth grade reading comprehension could accuse of Anty doing something like that, do you disagree?
2) Wow, TS is super aggressive. It feels fake. - Again, I am confused why this is an observation that makes you believe that EtR could possibly be town; it's easy as hell to point out because yep, TS is aggressive. I've played with him before. He was aggressive there too.
Appears I referred to the wrong post. Perils of not using hyperlinks. But it looks like you found your way to 366 just fine.
Again, you're holding him to a crazy-high standard, and missing my point. I don't care if his positions are Sherlockian, I just care if they reflect an attempt to do good work.
Like I said, I don't think "cast suspicion" is a scum tell, either, but I wouldn't fault someone for thinking it was. It does look like a scum-slip if you don't think much about it. And what you seem to be suggesting is EtR is trolling through the thread looking for the littlest slip-up and then triumphantly crowing "I got one!" which isn't indicated in what he says. He's offput and inquisitive, not polishing his axe. Again, I like that thoughtfulness.
Same for the Antny thing - who cares if it's deep? I think he was right - Antny's behavior to that point showed him scurrying from wagon to wagon without ever laying down roots, which is exactly what EtR says.
Also, for someone criticizing EtR for a lack of nuance, your summary of EtR's point misses its nuances. TS isn't being aggressive, he's using charged language - his abuse of the word "horrific" is the tip of that particular iceburg - and exaggerating constantly for reasons that aren't at all clear in the PBPA. After all, if OB is playing so "horrifically", why does he need to say things like "Insults Tom's English based on paragraph spacing, capitalization, etc."? (Especially when he himself has decried supposed rhetorical/logical violations by others and told them to "take a class" on it.) The whole post is larded down with emotion to make up for a dearth of reason, which seems to suggest someone only pretending to be truly aggressive. Which, again, is a good point!
Do I wish EtR made it more thoroughly? Of course. But I'm not going to blame him for not living up to my lofty expectations for how townies should play. If I felt like that, I'd think Seppel is also scum... Oh, right, you also think that. Well, maybe we're just going to have to differ on the fundamentals of mafia theory. :\
It's evidence for how unwilling to pursue his suspicions he really is; the biggest problem with EtR is that he hasn't felt or honestly pursued anything, and that's incredibly unnatural. In a game like this, that doesn't happen to town. It happens to scum.
Except the "poking-and-prodding" method isn't unique to him. Axelrod has played much the same way this game. And, yes, at one point I thought he was scum for it, before I dove down into his posts and saw the earnest effort in his questions, too.
Based on the lack of depth in this analysis and your subsequent post about reactions to your ability, Nacho, I hate to say it, but I think you're blindered. You're seeing everything through the lens of "must be a scum post". I promise, I'm not coming into this conversation with an agenda - I'm willing to admit I'm wrong at any time in the face of reasoned criticism. But so far, all I'm getting is how adamantly you believe this and how little you have to actually back it up. You want it to be right. And I'm sorry to tell you that it's not.
EtR's #414 said that he thought DoT was town because it looked like he was genuinely scumhunting and not slinging mud.
That is NOT an "insightful comment". That is a generic townread. I can make that post about anyone in the entire game and it applies because it is so generic.
The opposite of playing for survival is playing to piss people off, which is what TS was doing. The the reason I enjoy playing with TS as much as I do is because he's unafraid to push his opinions and doesn't really care how he words them; he steps on people's toes, he's harsh, he's blunt, but he says what's on his mind. That playstyle is "the opposite of playing for survival", being offended when someone insults you is not. It is natural and a human being response, not an alignment indicative one.
Again, you're oversimplifying what EtR said. Let's check the tape:
@Tom - I withheld my vote because I wanted to hear more from DoTA. His most recent post doesn't fully change my mind about him, but it does lessen my concerns.
Why? What about it does that?
Most of this game he's seemed nervous. He's said stuff that sounds really bad, but in this post where he provides his reads (limited as they may be) it seems like he is actually looking into people's motivations and not just slinging mud.
That's exactly what I'd say about DoTArchon right now, especially in regards to his claim debacle. And caring about motivations is the hallmark of good scum-hunting (whereas focusing on the superficial is the hallmark of bad scum-hunting, which is where scum can hide).
Also, you're absolutely wrong about the opposite of "playing for survival". This is not a game about making enemies, this is a game about finding enemies. TS absolutely fails to grasp that, and that's why I loathe him.
"Playing for survival" I define as "doing the bare minimum necessary to not arouse any suspicion of what you post". Like the word "good", it has more than one opposite - you can be an ******** and not just playing for survival, but you can also be intelligently commenting and thus not be merely playing for survival. Put it another way - I look at it as the difference between "playing for survival" and "playing for progress" - because townies care less about surviving than mafia. Hence why lurking is a scum tell. EtR's posts may not be setting him up for a Player of the Year award, but they're definitely not anywhere near as shallow and superficial and generally canny as you make them out to be.
(Of course, there are more nuances to this model than even the above captures. For example, a player could be making more than mere "posts for survival" and still be scum; this is where OMGUS lies, turning all criticism against your critics and living like a mad syphillitic king, for instance. This is what I'm accusing TS of doing. But EtR's behavior fits well into the model as defined, and on the town side.)
Tunneling is not a scumtell.
You've been tunneling like crazy on IMAB. IMAB has been tunneling on DoT and you. I tunneled on Wildfire.
It's completely natural to have a strong suspect and try to ram it through; EtR avoiding a town tendency isn't a town tell, sorry.
No, "tunneling" is a buzzword people throw around so they don't have to actually talk about what people mean when they refer to tunneling behavior. But tunneling in the sense I described - using "have you seen how bad X is?" as an all-purpose answer to all criticism, feedback, or attempts to pry you out of your rut - absolutely is. Because if scum benefit when they have to post as little substantive information as possible so they can hide in plain sight, then having to only identify one scum suspect and ride them out for the entire day is great for scum. That's tunneling.
As with all things, tunneling behavior isn't enough; you also have to care about tunneling motivation, which is also what I was saying - because there's a very noticeable difference between "focusing on someone because you absolutely believe they're scum" and "focusing on someone so you don't have to talk about anything else". I don't think any of the above examples qualify (not even IMAB's - all criticisms aside, he definitely has his convictions), which is why I haven't called them such.
But this is all to miss what I was actually saying about EtR, which is I like how he continues his focus on TS without getting carried away or using it as an opportunity to not actually play the game. He cares about getting good results from his pressure. I like that. That's what townies do. Once again, you're clearing away any nuance by returning to the reductive "buzzwordification" problem.
Do you know what EtR didn't do?
Push a scumread on Sir Chris. Making tiny observations and taking potshots at scum means nothing if you don't put anything behind it. EtR didn't.
Are you so blindered that you missed the post immediately below 1141?
I'm comfortable voting for Sir Chris after we see a vote count. I think he's at 7, but I don't want to vote without confirmation.
If that's not calling a scumread in your book, then I don't know what is.
Re: the slip.
No. No no no no no.
The original slip that IMAB brought up was accusing EtR of focusing on the Seer aspect of his role and not the gunsmith. He then claimed that Necarg, who did the exact same thing that supposedly town!EtR did, scumslipped. No. Town don't see scum doing something that they did (and was wrongly accused about) and say "oh hey, maybe it actually was a slip!".
That's not the point I actually care about. The point I care about is the fact that IMAB accused EtR of doing that "selectively caring" thing and didn't accuse Necarg of the same thing. Especially considering how Necarg flipped, it suggests IMAB had a hidden motive to not question why Necarg seemingly only cared about the seer ability.
(Obviously, nobody spotted this at the time, hindsight is 20/20, etc. But the point I'm making is it's a very clever insight from EtR, and not one I'd expect scum to focus on. So +town points to him.)
The rest falls yet again under this two umbrellas of (a) you're holding him to a ridiculously high standard of insightfulness and (b) you're missing his point (the tordeck thing; EtR's entirely correct that IMAB's logic is really shifty, jumping from "I've done this as scum" to "nobody would do this as town"), with the above "scum-slip" point mixed in as (c).
I also know who targeted you. There's literally no reason for EtR to share that information with the town as scum. Why would he?
If he's a werewolf, I think he says who targeted me, because it helps the mafia and the werewolves avoid the problem they ran into last night of shooting the same target. True, he might not know what Zionite's ability does, but shooting me is a net-win for both teams, and that could effectively send the signal of "don't worry about Xyre, we've got him covered - you guys shoot another known townie, like Nachomamma". Because as Seppel has pointed out, the scum teams' incentives aren't unaligned - they can essentially win together if they just clear out the town.
In short, your scum read on EtR seems to be almost entirely based on you believing him to be scum because of his interactions with you. You're holding him to an exceptionally high standard for insightfulness which cuts right past both his attempts at genuine critical analysis and the motivations for his posts.
Again, I agree, EtR's play could be better. But what he has done has consistently shown him to be trying. He hasn't been playing at all like scum. You'd realize that if you gave him an honest chance.
And sorry, that was another brain-fart typo. Let's clarify: You've cleared Dota of being a werewolf. Dota blocked Nacho. Nacho had my item. Blocking my item's ability does nothing for the mafia. If Dota's mafia, he should have just blocked Zionite as they killed him (setting aside that if he were mafia, he'd also never have backtracked on his jailkeeper claim, because it would be almost impossible to prove he was lying).
The fact that he blocked Nacho anyway suggests either (a) he blocked Nacho for a tactical reason, or (b) he blocked Nacho because he actually believed he was a JK. Because he wouldn't have a tactical reason as mafia, if (a) is true, he's a werewolf, and you lied about your result.
So lynching Dota gives us no information about you, since even if he flips mafia somehow, we still have no idea whether you have a seer-shot or are a werewolf faking one. But lynching you gives us quite a bit of information about Dota - if you flip town, he's confirmed town. If you flip scum, we get to go back and check your interactions to determine if he's a werewolf whom you were covering for.
And again, to everyone else: the only reason we're even having this discussion is because tom and Dota have through shoddy play created enough murk for IMAB to hide in. We should have lynched imab Day 3, after tom went to his grave ferociously denying imab's result and imab conveniently failed to claim his result until after the tom wagon was in full swing Day 2. For losing focus and lynching Wildfire instead, I'm partly responsible and quite regretful. I'm not making this mistake again.
Unvote, Vote imabusinessman
This ends now. Nacho, if you want to governor him, I'm willing to argue with you until the ends of the earth on this, and I'd much rather risk you disagreeing with me and saving IMAB than risk letting a townie get lynched because of your role. Because then, I can say I did everything I could to win the game.
I'm not changing my vote today. You all can ride with me, or ride without me.
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
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
How is he confirmed town? That makes 0 sense. That makes even less sense than your previous post which made almost no sense. When was DoTA cleared of being mafia? Because his night action was foolish? That lines up with mafia perfectly.
tom and Dota created murk for me to hide in? Tom's behavior created clarification and Dota's behavior was downright detrimental to town. If you have a problem with "murk being created" then you should absolutely want to lynch DoTA, especially since...
Doesn't line up with...
In fact. That second quote looks staged in light of your behavior today.
Tomorrow we might have to lynch Xyre. I was told his alignment made him like confirmed town but I'm doubting that more and more now. At some point behavior has to factor in. The fact that he put up a wall and said he wouldn't respond to people he considered scum is also a huge red flag.
EtR still scum.
imabusinessman still slinging mud
Calling you scum is a read not slinging mud. It's a Euphemism for "anti-town faction". Is this your first game of mafia?
If you want to see slinging mud take a look at your own posts or Xyre's accusations that people are trying to be disruptive to gain tactical advantages. That's slinging mud.
@Axelrod
1. You're town.
2. Now that it's finally been mentioned I wanted to bring this to your attention...
Of all the people who have claimed to have re-read the game you're the only person to have noticed that I did indeed explain why I switched my read on Tordeck. This should finally put to rest the notion that tomsloger was telling the truth about not having a gun. Why do you think EtR, tomsloger and Xyre "missed" this? tomsloger is a confirmed liar when it came to not having a gun, not having looked up role information, and to have made a number of false accusations towards other players (btw EtR, tomsloger is another player you should look at if you have problems with mudslinging)and yet Xyre is still relying on tom's death throws to send shade my way.
Point 7: Sir Chris has replaced in for Necarg. TS seems to be saying that the arguments against Necarg were mainly meta arguments that looked scummy, but now that Sir Chris has replaced in we'll have to see if he still looks scummy. TS seems to be saying that if the slot is scummy, it's scummy, and the fact Sir Chris is replacing in doesn't just magically change his prior impression of the "slot." That all sounds fine to me. Anty criticizes because he says that TS is reducing the case against Necarg to one about meta when TS hasn't actually been making any meta arguments against Necarg. He says TS seems to just "forget" all his other arguments. This is another one that requires follow-up to see what TS was actually saying about Necarg previous to this. It could be relevant one way or the other.
Point 8: TS made a post where he was guessing who the scum were, and he guessed 6 scum slots. DOTA asked him how he knew there were 6 scum. Anty thinks this is a good catch of a possible slip. I'm less impressed, as my default assumption at the start was that there were probably 6 scum with 3/3 teams also. It is slightly relevant that Anty is corect here that TS doesn't actually answer the question DOTA asked: "How do you know there are 6 scum?" He just criticises DOTA for referring to an old post with outdated reads. When this is followed up on, TS just says he's not sure how many scum there are and he's not familiar with set-ups. It's kind of a weak response from TS. So I'm crediting this one as a real point.
Point 9: TS attacks Tom for his poor performance (not just in this game, but in a prior game). TS essentially says Tom had bad reads in the other game and he's got bad reads now, and that Tom himself should have no confidence in his own reads because of how wrong he was before. This is kind of BS from Tapping. To say, "you were wrong in that other game and therefore you have no idea how to read people" is both bad logic and kind of petty.
Point 10: Again accusing TS of buddying up to Nacho, to the point of changing his own read of Tom to "leantown" based just on Nacho's opinion. I'm not a huge fan of this logic from TS either. The part where he essentially defers to nacho on the reads "against his better judgment" - not the buddy part, which I think is less of a point.
Point 11: Anty thinks he sees a post which could possibly be indicative of scum TS trying to get help from his scumbuddy Sir Chris. This one is not a point. Anty himself says this one "may be off the mark."
Point 12: Tapping says that since Sir Chris has replaced in he hasn't done anything to make TS suspicious. Anty doesn't like that TS seems to "forgive and forget" how scummy he thought Necarg was before. I'm not sure I can agree with this point either, as (1) it wasn't like TS was all up and down screaming for Necarg's head before, and (2) He seems appropriately cautious about Sir Chris. He's not saying he thinks he's Town, just that he's watching him and hasn't seem anything scummy yet.
Point 13: Accuses TS of "chainsaw" voting for Tom, after Tom has voted for Sir Chris. I'm not a big fan of this point, as it seems to rely on linking TS and Sir Chris as scum together, and the "chainsaw" voting logic doesn't follow for me.
Point 14: Again he points out what appears to be an attempt at buddying, or at least Tapping linking himself with Nacho, saying how he was "on" Tom before, with Nacho, about his different style of play in this game. Eh, it's a minor point.
Point 15: Tapping wants a claim from Tom even though Nacho has said he will pardon Tom. Anty says there is no reason for this. I disagree. If I though someone was scum, I wouldn't back off from pressing them just because the "Governor" role said he would pardon. I would probably be trying to convince the Governor he was wrong, and one way to possibly do that is by forcing out a claim.
I will say I don't like the way TS asks the question "would anyone else like to see a claim?" As opposed to just pressing for it himself. It's a little passive and deferential?
Point 16: TS asks EtR (in a very snarky way) to explain what specific language (or post) I (Axelrod) made that made him (EtR) feel better about me. He also cautions EtR not to use language that TS has used himself so he (EtR) won't contradict himself again. I'm not sure what this all refers to. I don't like this post because TS is snarky and condescending, but maybe not for the same reasons Anty doesn't like it.
Point 17: Still thinks that TS voting for Tom after Nacho has said he will pardon is scummy. I still think this is wrong.
Point 18: After snarking at EtR, now TS almost seems to defend EtR against IAMB. IAMB calls a post of EtR's "contentless garbage" and TS responds "but we have all these other juicy targets to lynch first..." It's a minor point.
Point 20: Accuses TS of a flip-flop on Jobie, when TS is asked who his top suspects are after the trio of Tom, Xyre, Zionite, and TS mentions EtR and Jobie. Apparently, according to Anty, just a few pages earlier, TS had Jobie leaning Town. If true, this is another minor point. TS isn't saying Jobie is scum here, just that he's "taking another look" at him, presumably because of posts that have happened.
Point 21: Anty notes a post where TS defends Sir Chris (true).
Point 22: TS gets super-frustrated with Nacho saying he will Govern Tom. Kind of explodes with "this is bull****" Anty seems tickled that TS is now mad at Nacho after all the buddy-buddy he did. I'm more interested in the part where TS calls lynching Sir Chris "disgusting (even if he might be scum)." That's just kind of an extreme response when you are not even sure the player in question is Town. TS is making a meta call (following Wildfire here, I believe) that Sir Chris will get killed by a scum team either way, so lynching him is dumb. Also threatens to hammer himself to get out of the game.
Point 23: TS says Xyre's case against Sir Chris has "no merit." I wonder if he still feels that way and thinks Xyre just got lucky, or if he is capable of admitting to being wrong. I'm also interested in the part here where TS seems to now be casting aspersions on Nacho, criticizing people for just accepting his claim and not casing him, and saying the ability seems anti-town. I think it's possibly relevant that Nacho (in addition to threatening to Govern Tom) is going after Sir Chris at this juncture. That seems to be what has changed TS opinion on him almost as much as the Governor thing.
Point 24: TS calms down and "Thanks" Nacho, and moves his vote over to Huntzilla. Anty says this is exactly what a scum who was buddy with Chris would do. Anty isn't quoting all of TS posts, so I don't know what, if anything TS was saying about Hunt. If TS wasn't saying much of anything about Hunt, this looks worse for TS. So, another point that might require some research.
Point 25: TS is challenged on his read of Sir Chris and claims that he was "open" to evidence that Sir Chris was scum, but that there wasn't much. I agree with Anty that TS didn't not appear very open at all to any evidence that Sir Chris might be scum.
Point 26: Anty says that TS was willing to "clear" Zionite for handing out gifts, but not clear Xyre for doing the same. He is still very suspicious of Xyre. This one is much less of a point as TS got a gift from Zionite and knows what it does, whereas he doesn't know what Xyre's gift does and he was previously suspicious of Xyre.
Point 27: Notes that TS has not made a case against anyone this game, though he's posted a ton, yet TS is always asking other people to make cases. Eh. It's minor.
Man, these things always get out of control lengthwise. Of these points, I like 9, 10, 16, 21, 22, 23 and 25. 7 and 24 require some more research. A few others are minor points I can agree with but that don't really say much about TS's alignment.
I think there is enough here for me to say that Anty's case appears genuine, however, and not just something he was fabricating to try and push a mis-lynch. That's enough for me to call them as not being on the same team, at least. And it's also generally in Anty's favor for him to do the work.
I'm not reading TS's response to all this right now.
Either you and I can have an honest conversation about the reasons to lynch IMAB, or you can try to form a lynch without my vote. Because even if we lose, at least then my conscience will be clear. At least then I can say I did everything I could to point out the scum and deliver a coherent strategy for the day and lost due to other people's arrogance.
The fact that you haven't chimed in on any of my PBPAs or analyses about GJ, Antny, TS, imab, or ETR, even as you continue to list many of them on your kill-or-save lists, totally baffles me. You're supposed to be our last line of defense, which means you're supposed to care about what we have to say! But instead you just keep the blinders on and continue to deliver opinions from on high, "kill you, save you", like Jesus Christ on a bender.
So I'm done. If we lose and IMAB is scum, you lost it for us. That's it. Hands washed.
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
(1) I think Anty was being genuire in his attack on TS. That only means that they would not be on the same scum team.
(2) It makes me feel a bit better about Anty.
Of course, if that's all he's done this game, then it isn't all that much either.
Thanks for responding to the two least important parts of that analysis.
The bolded part is just total nonsense. Even if the mafia are dim, they don't do anything for no reason. What you're suggesting - the only way Dota can be mafia - is that we accept that he did something for no reason. And you give us no reason to believe he acted with no reason. Which is nonsensical.
And by "murk" I mean they did just enough to make your investigations not suspicious. tom was adamant about not having a gun, but because he was a neutral and because he was super fidgety, enough people believed he could have maybe made a mistake to give you a pass. And Dota's naivety has given just enough rope to hang himself despite the fact that the only way he could be scum based on your investigation would be if either he had a stroke last night or you're lying. In both cases, your investigation looks worse for you, and it's only because you had the good luck to investigate two people who've done their damndest to hang themselves that you continue to draw breath.
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
Real post when I get home.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
Well, the thing is, Tom is still not a "confirmed liar" for saying he didn't have a gun. The only person confirming this is you. That's not confirmed. I'll agree Tom was wrong when he says that you switched to a Town view of Tordeck for no apparent reason. But I can't quite ascribe the malicious motivations that you seem to want me to ascribe here. It seemed a pretty off the cuff remark.
Did EtR and Xyre miss this? Is you "flip-flopping" on Tordeck a big part of their case against you? If so, I'll agree that isn't a super strong point (although, you should note that while I acknowledge that you gave a reason for switching your opinion, I also said I didn't think your reason was that great.)
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
@Nachos: Remember Newbie 1653? I was town and I was involved in every single mislynch in that game. Town can be wrong. Remember how it ended? You voted Austerior instead of Plotinus (who did admittedly play a damn strong game) and town lost. You're also wrong on occasion. Imab has been at L-1 twice in this game if I remember correctly. Xyre's post to you above is pretty close to why I was suspecting that you lied about your role, you've been deflecting wagons away from players that the majority believe are scum and I can't figure out why.
Okay, I see this post on DOTA. Was that it?
This is why I don't play much anymore. This is too much damn time spent for too little result.
Now I'm looking at GJ.
Nacho, if your still here tomorrow please reread both Dota and TS. I don't see how you can townclear either based on their play.
vote EtR
Best lynch possible given Nacho's stance.
Crap, I might even have to make a case now.
I think this might be the real deal guys.
#2196
This is GJ finally giving his big "reads" post of the game. The below quote is his response to DOTA's jailkeeper claim:
Does the guy who's role is Bodyguard say that? In that way?
I do not read this, at all, as someone who is skeptical of a claim because he himself has a protective role. I read this as a guy who is considering believing the claim because no one else has claimed a protective role. Which you just would not do if you yourself had a protective role.
This is just wrong.
#1876
This is apparently in response to this post from TS:
How, exactly, would this preclude TS from being a Mafia, even assuming it excluded him from being a Werewolf (which, how does it do that?). This one reeks of inside knowledge.
But you are choosing to listen to someone who has demonstrated that they were a habitual liar to cast shade my way.
@Axelrod
I will never see tom as anything other than a habitual liar. He's got a body of work on this.
You are a Bodyguard? What "reason to believe" did you have? What does the second part of this even mean?
...Except for that part where he cleared you of being a Werewolf. We've talked about this already.
Vote: Gentleman Johnny
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
Mafia not WW.
For the most part of days 1 and 2, I was in the invitational, and ground pounding the crap out of it.
I am trying to figure out if you missed where I said I believed a jailer and my role could co-exist in the same game, or purposefully ignoring that part. We have had several claimed power investigative roles, 2 protective roles didn't seem to be too much of a stretch.
there was a reason I wasn't reading him as mafia before (I'll go back and read that), but come on. You really think TS being buddies with Chris mentions his death in that way at all?
A bodyguard instead of a doctor typically means that the investigative roles are usually stronger. You never see watcher + doctor in a game, due to how absurd the interactions could be. Elite bodyguard gave me the implication that with two scum groups, there was likely no other killing abilities, considering how elite bodyguard works.
As far as the 2nd part goes. Don't worry about it.
XKCD had a jailkeeper, bullet proof, and a doctor that was bulletproof while using his ability. I think it's fairly safe to assume my ability could exist by itself with a jailkeeper.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
You just wouldn't.
Xyre, can your gift kill a non-werewolf? Does that make any sense at all with the role GJ is claiming?
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
That's not quite how it works.
The GJ way path to no lynching:
And you are choosing not to clarify this...why?
The GJ way path to no lynching:
The GJ way path to no lynching:
And this right here is the biggest gripe I have with your read on EtR: we are playing a game with two scum teams. That means that any member of any scumteam can genuinely scumhunt just like a townie can. This becomes more difficult later game, when your team mates come under pressure or it becomes incredibly advantageous to lynch a townie over an opposing scum but OB didn't have to deal with any of that. And you're giving his slot a 100% pass because of something he did in 6 pages in a game where he could genuinely scumhunt as scum.
And this is the biggest problem with me accepting your EtR read at face value; I know that an overwhelming majority of your read is based on something that really really really shouldn't matter at this point.
"Some good analysis of the game so far?" What point are you making here? What am I supposed to glean from your post here?
EtR's 259 isn't doing anything. He said he thought I was town (boring), he said he "didn't like how DoT was twisting Rodemy's words" (boooring), and he called your stance on IMAB's claim problematic (booooooring). I find none of those stances a risky for a hypothetical scum-EtR, I find none of those stances to possess any particular sort of insight; hell, the only stance he provides that is even original is his interpretation of DoT approaching Rodemy which is a very very shallow observation that doesn't impress me much at all.
I disagree very strongly with his nitpicking of DoT's phrasing: it's a very shallow observation and normally pretty rare from people unless they believe in Freudian slips, and people who do always pursue them with more vigor than the half-hearted potshot EtR offered. I don't think someone saying "the point of the game is to ask questions and cast suspicion" is a scum tell and would vomit in my mouth and on the floor if you felt differently. The rest of his observations I really want to break down here because they are not interesting by any stretch of the word whatsoever:
1) Accusing Anty of votehopping - I'm sorry, is this a deep observation to make? I personally agree that anyone with eyes and fifth grade reading comprehension could accuse of Anty doing something like that, do you disagree?
2) Wow, TS is super aggressive. It feels fake. - Again, I am confused why this is an observation that makes you believe that EtR could possibly be town; it's easy as hell to point out because yep, TS is aggressive. I've played with him before. He was aggressive there too.
It's evidence for how unwilling to pursue his suspicions he really is; the biggest problem with EtR is that he hasn't felt or honestly pursued anything, and that's incredibly unnatural. In a game like this, that doesn't happen to town. It happens to scum.
EtR's #414 said that he thought DoT was town because it looked like he was genuinely scumhunting and not slinging mud.
That is NOT an "insightful comment". That is a generic townread. I can make that post about anyone in the entire game and it applies because it is so generic.
The opposite of playing for survival is playing to piss people off, which is what TS was doing. The the reason I enjoy playing with TS as much as I do is because he's unafraid to push his opinions and doesn't really care how he words them; he steps on people's toes, he's harsh, he's blunt, but he says what's on his mind. That playstyle is "the opposite of playing for survival", being offended when someone insults you is not. It is natural and a human being response, not an alignment indicative one.
Tunneling is not a scumtell.
You've been tunneling like crazy on IMAB. IMAB has been tunneling on DoT and you. I tunneled on Wildfire.
It's completely natural to have a strong suspect and try to ram it through; EtR avoiding a town tendency isn't a town tell, sorry.
Do you know what EtR didn't do?
Push a scumread on Sir Chris. Making tiny observations and taking potshots at scum means nothing if you don't put anything behind it. EtR didn't.
Re: the slip.
No. No no no no no.
The original slip that IMAB brought up was accusing EtR of focusing on the Seer aspect of his role and not the gunsmith. He then claimed that Necarg, who did the exact same thing that supposedly town!EtR did, scumslipped. No. Town don't see scum doing something that they did (and was wrongly accused about) and say "oh hey, maybe it actually was a slip!".
"His analysis in general makes sense to me" is a lazy observation, let's break down that lovely observation yet again.
1) "Xyre called Necarg scum! Xyre is town!" - lame
2) "Xyre voted Necarg! Xyre is town!" - lame
3) EtR has an attack on IMAB for pointing out that Tordeck could have had a post restriction and still produced content, which is a horrible, terrible, no good observation. Tordeck COULD have produced more content, he was being lazy. This is a fact. Trying to use Tordeck's townflip against IMAB is slimy and terrible and would be very surprised if it was an observation you actually agreed with.
4) "Third and fifth positions on a wagon are scummy!" - lame
5) "I agree with a Tom post!" - don't care
6) "IMAB attacks me for scumslipping like he attacked Necarg for scumslipping!" - I don't understand why this was posted here. I don't understand how he could think that Necarg scumslipped by doing the same exact thing that he did.
7) "Xyre continued to vote Necarg! Xyre is town!" - wow Xyre it's no surprise you liked this post!
8) "Seppel's reads were bad! I think town!" - lame
And I guess there are a few more but this is an overwhelming majority of DoT's analysis post you agree with; I think it's your turn to show me exactly what.
I also know who targeted you. There's literally no reason for EtR to share that information with the town as scum. Why would he?
I do realize a majority of this post has a bit of an aggressive edge to it; I apologize for that, I'm trying to type fast and the way I do that is by listening to music with hard, angry beats and this usually translates in my writing.
EtR hasn't done jack *****.
When I read his posts, I see nothing more than garbage, garbage accusations; you seemed to have liked a couple of his posts because they were long-ish but what good observations specifically did he bring up in them? The only thing you could really substantiate that was good was a poke at Anty for being a survivalist, but, again, this isn't a reason to call him town because scum can scumhunt genuinely and that point is both incredibly obvious and incredibly not original. Bring me a reason to call him town.
But before I do that, here's a thinking experiment for you:
I have the power to control the lynch and bring it wherever the hell I want. I have been playing like a dick. It also means that, if I have bad reads, I can singlehandedly lose the game for town. How do you think scum approach me in a situation like that? Personally, I think they play nice - I think they move where I tell them to lynch, and I don't think they get in my face and yell at me and suspect me and tell me I'm going to be the reason the town loses the game.
Now, think of my govern targets: IMAB, TappingStones, you, DoT.
Do you remember the only person with the gall to say that I was scum? IMAB. No one else had the balls to say "**** you Nacho, your role is bull*****, you are scum". IMAB did. He continuously held this position until I rammed through the lynch on Huntzilla and Sir Chris was shot by the Mafia team. Even today, he has appealed to me personally more consistently and angrily than anyone else with maybe the exception of you.
Now think of TappingStones, who was one of the first people to attack me. You thought that he hated me because of the way he went after me early game. I somehow don't think that scum, no matter how crazy, would do that to someone who could carry their team to victory. You point out his aggressiveness as a reason for him being scum; you're wrong, read his other games and see how wrong you are. You point out how he sheeps me and follows me and defers to me, read through his play in Predator Mafia to see why you're wrong; his play evolved during that game as he tried to ram through lynches on whoever he cared about and **** everyone else and then other players picked up on things he wasn't seeing and he started trusting "experienced players" more closely. Even now, he's reminding me to use my ability conservatively so I don't **** everyone over.
Think of DoT, who got paranoid of me because I was wielding too much power and blocked me over it. Who is currently pointing out that I was wrong a bunch in the first game I played together and please don't do that to us again, who has shown signs of paranoia over me the entire game.
Now, think of you, who is telling me that it's my fault if we lose and you're going to lynch IMAB whether I make us no lynch or not because **** you, you're governing my scumreads.
This is how townies act. You should be pissed that I'm leaning back on my throne and telling you what you can and cannot do because it's complete and utter bull*****. This is how you four are acting.
Now, take Gentlemen Johnny. I have been threatening to govern his scumreads for pretty much the entire game. Shouldn't he be frustrated? Shouldn't he be pissed? You can tell me he's a chill guy and doesn't get mad or whatever, but I saw him expose frustration at no one posting but I *didn't* see him show frustration at me saying that I was going to bring his scumreads to endgame with me; hell, the closest he got to expressing that sort of frustration is his little twitter line egg along at your wall post which he is saying while he is completely happy to vote within my suspects.
Take Anty, who is doing the same exact thing. He's snipped at me. He's said "Nacho you're governing all of my suspects!". But he hasn't dug his heels in and tried to change anything because he is still holding out for that hope where I say "I'm governing Anty and there's nothing anyone can do about it!".
Now think of EtR. What has EtR's interaction been with me?
What has Seppel's?
Axelrod is an odd duck. I'm recently slotting him into town because I liked the late doublevoter reveal (only reason to hide it would be if he was scum going for endgame, don't think he'd just suddenly reveal it because massclaim) and because I like some of his latest drive and because this is a read of yours that I'm trusting a bit.
What you're identifying as characteristics of TS and IMAB - sullen aggression - unique to you and your role, I'd say are characteristics of who they are in every respect. When things don't go their way, when people disagree with them, they pout, they name-call, they go on the offensive. Same for your existence. That doesn't make them townies, that makes them themselves. Much in the same way that a kid pouting because his mother won't buy him candy still has a hidden agenda.
Likewise, someone who ignores your existence and tries to find a way to beat an unfair game could be town or scum. I, for example, had no reason to complain about your methods until they negatively affected by ability to lynch people I needed lynched, in part because I used you to confirm myself. As a winner of the game, I didn't need to bother. That didn't make me scum, though, as you know. So the extrapolation crumbles further.
You can't just assume that the winners of the game, the people who don't complain, are sinister, and the people who do complain are good. That's cartoonishly simplistic.
So instead, why don't we talk about how TS meets all criticism by implying that the criticism is only being brought because the person criticizing him is scum, in perhaps the most subconscious OMGUSing behavior I've ever seen. Let's talk about how IMAB spreads blame around to cover up the serious holes in his cover story. Let's talk about how GJ and Antny have done absolutely nothing except protect their own skins. But let's stop talking about the caprices of your universe. Because you ain't God.
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've never said anyone who ignored me was scum, so don't know where this is coming from. I also made a clear distinction between people who should be mad with me and people who shouldn't be, but I guess I'll try again.
I have been telling Anty and GJ that I will govern their suspects all game. They have shown subtle signs of frustration, sure, but they haven't gotten pissed or attempted to do anything meaningful about it. I find this scummy: normally, a townie's third suspect has nowhere near the same confidence that first one has and thus compromising so easily is suspicious to me.
That IMAB case I am skeptical of because "moving around blame to cover up holes" is not a scumtell I or anyone I know has ever subscribed to, but I will get to it when I have the time.
I don't give players who replace in a complete pass based on their predecessor, but I don't restart them at flat 0, either. Because they have the same alignment, unless one of the players is exceptionally good and the other is exceptionally bad, they should bear a passing resemblance to each other in scumminess which should be pretty apparent from the beginning. See, for instance, Necarg and Sir Chris - the latter is a much better player than the former, but the fact that he couldn't escape his predecessor's scumminess was how we eventually caught him by casting his (SC's) posts in a different light.
You and I are judging him by different standards. This post is clearly a set of comments that occurred to him as he read through. So what if it's shallow? What I care about is whether he shows he cares about getting good information, and the questions he asks here are good ones, even if they aren't going to suddenly free scum from the bedrock.
Furthermore, if we buy your premise that scum can do good scumhunting, then we have nothing useful to go on. You're essentially asking us to jump completely past the usual first step, which is "is X playing like a townie or a scum would usually play?" and get into the metaphysics of it all, which is silly. My PBPA's premise is very simple: he's asking good questions and trying to do right. Which is far more than I could say for my four scum suspects.
Appears I referred to the wrong post. Perils of not using hyperlinks. But it looks like you found your way to 366 just fine.
Again, you're holding him to a crazy-high standard, and missing my point. I don't care if his positions are Sherlockian, I just care if they reflect an attempt to do good work.
Like I said, I don't think "cast suspicion" is a scum tell, either, but I wouldn't fault someone for thinking it was. It does look like a scum-slip if you don't think much about it. And what you seem to be suggesting is EtR is trolling through the thread looking for the littlest slip-up and then triumphantly crowing "I got one!" which isn't indicated in what he says. He's offput and inquisitive, not polishing his axe. Again, I like that thoughtfulness.
Same for the Antny thing - who cares if it's deep? I think he was right - Antny's behavior to that point showed him scurrying from wagon to wagon without ever laying down roots, which is exactly what EtR says.
Also, for someone criticizing EtR for a lack of nuance, your summary of EtR's point misses its nuances. TS isn't being aggressive, he's using charged language - his abuse of the word "horrific" is the tip of that particular iceburg - and exaggerating constantly for reasons that aren't at all clear in the PBPA. After all, if OB is playing so "horrifically", why does he need to say things like "Insults Tom's English based on paragraph spacing, capitalization, etc."? (Especially when he himself has decried supposed rhetorical/logical violations by others and told them to "take a class" on it.) The whole post is larded down with emotion to make up for a dearth of reason, which seems to suggest someone only pretending to be truly aggressive. Which, again, is a good point!
Do I wish EtR made it more thoroughly? Of course. But I'm not going to blame him for not living up to my lofty expectations for how townies should play. If I felt like that, I'd think Seppel is also scum... Oh, right, you also think that. Well, maybe we're just going to have to differ on the fundamentals of mafia theory. :\
Except the "poking-and-prodding" method isn't unique to him. Axelrod has played much the same way this game. And, yes, at one point I thought he was scum for it, before I dove down into his posts and saw the earnest effort in his questions, too.
Based on the lack of depth in this analysis and your subsequent post about reactions to your ability, Nacho, I hate to say it, but I think you're blindered. You're seeing everything through the lens of "must be a scum post". I promise, I'm not coming into this conversation with an agenda - I'm willing to admit I'm wrong at any time in the face of reasoned criticism. But so far, all I'm getting is how adamantly you believe this and how little you have to actually back it up. You want it to be right. And I'm sorry to tell you that it's not.
Again, you're oversimplifying what EtR said. Let's check the tape:
That's exactly what I'd say about DoTArchon right now, especially in regards to his claim debacle. And caring about motivations is the hallmark of good scum-hunting (whereas focusing on the superficial is the hallmark of bad scum-hunting, which is where scum can hide).
Also, you're absolutely wrong about the opposite of "playing for survival". This is not a game about making enemies, this is a game about finding enemies. TS absolutely fails to grasp that, and that's why I loathe him.
"Playing for survival" I define as "doing the bare minimum necessary to not arouse any suspicion of what you post". Like the word "good", it has more than one opposite - you can be an ******** and not just playing for survival, but you can also be intelligently commenting and thus not be merely playing for survival. Put it another way - I look at it as the difference between "playing for survival" and "playing for progress" - because townies care less about surviving than mafia. Hence why lurking is a scum tell. EtR's posts may not be setting him up for a Player of the Year award, but they're definitely not anywhere near as shallow and superficial and generally canny as you make them out to be.
(Of course, there are more nuances to this model than even the above captures. For example, a player could be making more than mere "posts for survival" and still be scum; this is where OMGUS lies, turning all criticism against your critics and living like a mad syphillitic king, for instance. This is what I'm accusing TS of doing. But EtR's behavior fits well into the model as defined, and on the town side.)
No, "tunneling" is a buzzword people throw around so they don't have to actually talk about what people mean when they refer to tunneling behavior. But tunneling in the sense I described - using "have you seen how bad X is?" as an all-purpose answer to all criticism, feedback, or attempts to pry you out of your rut - absolutely is. Because if scum benefit when they have to post as little substantive information as possible so they can hide in plain sight, then having to only identify one scum suspect and ride them out for the entire day is great for scum. That's tunneling.
As with all things, tunneling behavior isn't enough; you also have to care about tunneling motivation, which is also what I was saying - because there's a very noticeable difference between "focusing on someone because you absolutely believe they're scum" and "focusing on someone so you don't have to talk about anything else". I don't think any of the above examples qualify (not even IMAB's - all criticisms aside, he definitely has his convictions), which is why I haven't called them such.
But this is all to miss what I was actually saying about EtR, which is I like how he continues his focus on TS without getting carried away or using it as an opportunity to not actually play the game. He cares about getting good results from his pressure. I like that. That's what townies do. Once again, you're clearing away any nuance by returning to the reductive "buzzwordification" problem.
Are you so blindered that you missed the post immediately below 1141?
If that's not calling a scumread in your book, then I don't know what is.
That's not the point I actually care about. The point I care about is the fact that IMAB accused EtR of doing that "selectively caring" thing and didn't accuse Necarg of the same thing. Especially considering how Necarg flipped, it suggests IMAB had a hidden motive to not question why Necarg seemingly only cared about the seer ability.
(Obviously, nobody spotted this at the time, hindsight is 20/20, etc. But the point I'm making is it's a very clever insight from EtR, and not one I'd expect scum to focus on. So +town points to him.)
The rest falls yet again under this two umbrellas of (a) you're holding him to a ridiculously high standard of insightfulness and (b) you're missing his point (the tordeck thing; EtR's entirely correct that IMAB's logic is really shifty, jumping from "I've done this as scum" to "nobody would do this as town"), with the above "scum-slip" point mixed in as (c).
If he's a werewolf, I think he says who targeted me, because it helps the mafia and the werewolves avoid the problem they ran into last night of shooting the same target. True, he might not know what Zionite's ability does, but shooting me is a net-win for both teams, and that could effectively send the signal of "don't worry about Xyre, we've got him covered - you guys shoot another known townie, like Nachomamma". Because as Seppel has pointed out, the scum teams' incentives aren't unaligned - they can essentially win together if they just clear out the town.
In short, your scum read on EtR seems to be almost entirely based on you believing him to be scum because of his interactions with you. You're holding him to an exceptionally high standard for insightfulness which cuts right past both his attempts at genuine critical analysis and the motivations for his posts.
Again, I agree, EtR's play could be better. But what he has done has consistently shown him to be trying. He hasn't been playing at all like scum. You'd realize that if you gave him an honest chance.
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