yea, seems about right. She can be a bit mistifying.
Anything you care to share at all?
Your wife has gotten me obsessed with this show btw, "Carmilla." It's ******* endearing as ****.
I know. Watching a part of season 1 was our first date.
I'm not getting the same sense of conviction from Azrael that you and Umami seem to be getting. Kind of feeling like Umami is more prickly than I expected. (The initial negative comment about Azrael, "Dude, you've played with me before," stressed about "already being on people's scumlist," "lying to themselves, "don't care either way.") Word choices lean more negative than positive. Thought about it potentially being a response to rolling scum for the first time, doubting that thought because one of the few things she was positive about was the idea of rolling scum. I'm not at the murder her for christmas stage.
You're probably town, with room for me to backtrack on that at any moment. I think Osie's readlist is indicative of different playstyles and views (like what constitutes lurking). I don't mind Ter pursueing it, and kind of like that she is, but I doubt she's going to get anything useful there. I'd lie Osie to explain his Azrael read, unless I'm missing it.
Fonti, fonti, I think you’re not getting my tone, which is fair because it’s pretty neutral/dry, so it’s pretty malleable in terms of being read however the reader wants. Take last game for example, Sloth thought I was being super negative compared to prior games whereas Tom just thought I was about the same/read my comments in a jokey way. In terms of what I felt while I was writing and what I intended, Tom got the read right.
I was just joking about Azrael because I thought it was funny how he said he was super confident until he changed his mind, which I liked. His description of himself reminds me of Rhand a bit actually and Rhand is a ton of fun to play with. That plus I seem to be called out for being wish washy every day 1 I’ve every played is why I made it. It was just a contrast in playing styles and a throwaway joke—it wasn’t some deep analysis or anything. Maybe I shouldn’t post stuff like that since it’s not a read and isn’t progressing the game, but it’s the start of day 1 and it’s just what came to mind so I did. I will readily admit I’m not a fan of explaining to death comments I post that don’t really have much point/meaning (though I do think I’ve explained it now in extreme detail). I also think that your type of “why” questioning, while NAI for you, ultimately is low effort/low reward and can easily be fallen onto as a crutch if scum. To me personally it’s just demotivating especially early game, which is why I was so blunt about not caring either way. So, in conclusion, that was a super funny joke I made, right?
But yeah, agree that I haven’t gotten some crazy confident vibe from Azrael. Just trusting what he’s told me about himself. Also, not fair for me to expect you to know my play style especially when I’m sure it’s still developing. I’ve just played a good number of my games with you but you’ve played a lot more games with a lot of different players.
We should also talk about role things before eod. I'm not really sure how powerful the rolekill is in the grand scheme of things, since it effectively just empowers the regular kill. Like, we could out every role D1 and the game would still be very winnable, with the benefit of forcing scum into optimized town usage of their abilities or out themselves, and that's kind of crazy. I suspect a strategic popcorn claim on D2 or D3, outing two or three people could be useful.
In the meantime, we need to figure out conditionals. We should always state intent to hammer instead of actually hammering someone at L-1. If the survivalist is in that position, they should claim, because their role will soon be obvious anyway when they survive the lynch. A failure to claim before being lynched should be considered a scumclaim. DoB and BoD should also consider claiming, since their abilities will also out them after being killed, and that lets us discuss who they should target. A claimed DoB should be kept around until final 3, since don't have the normal double kill they get after losing one witch, and then lynched, killing them if they're scum and letting them take a shot at scum if they're town. The exception to this case if we think the survivalist is scum and they have both lives.
Dude, was having deja vu so looked up Matter Mafia and found when LW forces Axel to explain his lurker joke. Don't believe in "if you do x, you're scum" or any of that BS, but this is actually a really funny tell if Fonti is scum
One thing's for certain, there is a 3/8ths chance that scum have survivalist, meaning that they will never use their guess the role to get a double kill thing and that they know not to use that ability
yes if they kill anyone else N1 I don't think there's any protection roles at play but if town has a one shot BP Vest...I don't see how it helps town in anyway to tell the player who has it to announce it and take it off
I do think you're right in the sense that we would have to have assassin claim before survivalist, but I still think it would be optimal for both to claim day 1
Feel free to explain this, but I'ma level with you, that's definitely not-optimal and we're not doing it. Be careful not to slip info about your role if you do decide to explain it.
I do think you're right in the sense that we would have to have assassin claim before survivalist, but I still think it would be optimal for both to claim day 1
Again I ask though. What does Town get from giving up a power role via the survivalist?
yes if they kill anyone else N1 I don't think there's any protection roles at play but if town has a one shot BP Vest...I don't see how it helps town in anyway to tell the player who has it to announce it and take it off
I do think you're right in the sense that we would have to have assassin claim before survivalist, but I still think it would be optimal for both to claim day 1
Feel free to explain this, but I'ma level with you, that's definitely not-optimal and we're not doing it. Be careful not to slip info about your role if you do decide to explain it.
Actually with 7, survivalist is actually a really strong role for scum. My idea was based on the assumption (I was in the other tinyhunt game)that if given survivalist as 1 of 3 options scum would never choose it, but with these dynamics that doesn't make sense
A scum survivalist is never going to claim....it guarantees outing them as scum if they are alive d2. So basically you're asking a town survivalist to sacrifice themselves...to what end? Scum will simply rolekill them and our PR goes bye bye for no gain.
A scum survivalist is never going to claim....it guarantees outing them as scum if they are alive d2. So basically you're asking a town survivalist to sacrifice themselves...to what end? Scum will simply rolekill them and our PR goes bye bye for no gain.
Again, as I've said, different dynamics with 7 that I need to account for, but if I remember correctly (there's a good chance I don't), survivalist was a role claimed by scum in the last game even though it wasn't their actual role--it was the thrown away role
A scum survivalist is never going to claim....it guarantees outing them as scum if they are alive d2. So basically you're asking a town survivalist to sacrifice themselves...to what end? Scum will simply rolekill them and our PR goes bye bye for no gain.
Again, as I've said, different dynamics with 7 that I need to account for, but if I remember correctly (there's a good chance I don't), survivalist was a role claimed by scum in the last game even though it wasn't their actual role--it was the thrown away role
very very different--there were a bunch of VTs and instead of the guess a role and double down choice (pretty weak) they had this choose your night kill but then guess a person/role to get a chain lynch or something
Also, nice evasion, but still can you explain the dramatic change in your philosophy since our last game?
There isn't a change. Different games require different styles of play.
In this game, I am the person with the most hunt experience. Hunts are very susceptible to mechanical play, smaller hunts more so. Add in that this setup has a high offensive to defensive power balance. In a game with 12 people, I can reasonably expect myself to be alive d2 and maybe d3. If I do not survive to those Days, I will generally have other people in the game who I can expect to do the things I would have. In a game like this, where my knowledge is more valuable and the odds of any individual town being alive d2 or d3 are low, it's more important to share plans and info early.
Also, nice evasion, but still can you explain the dramatic change in your philosophy since our last game?
There isn't a change. Different games require different styles of play.
In this game, I am the person with the most hunt experience. Hunts are very susceptible to mechanical play, smaller hunts more so. Add in that this setup has a high offensive to defensive power balance. In a game with 12 people, I can reasonably expect myself to be alive d2 and maybe d3. If I do not survive to those Days, I will generally have other people in the game who I can expect to do the things I would have. In a game like this, where my knowledge is more valuable and the odds of any individual town being alive d2 or d3 are low, it's more important to share plans and info early.
Still doesn't explain the desire to get credit for stating something pretty obvious but still clearly more advantageous to town not to say (or to say when relevant) rather than to say right now
A scum survivalist is never going to claim....it guarantees outing them as scum if they are alive d2. So basically you're asking a town survivalist to sacrifice themselves...to what end? Scum will simply rolekill them and our PR goes bye bye for no gain.
Worth noting that this isn't actually true, but getting into why would actually be scum coaching, heh. Let's leave it at "don't trust someone just because they claimed and don't not trust someone just because they claimed and didn't die."
Ah, you were thinking of having the Survivalist claim and then clearing them?
yeah
can see why it's not great though
So when I talk about judging people based on their thought process, I'm also talking about that kind of thing. The way you tried to figure out how to exploit the rules, got excited about it, then backed off were all super town. Hunt setups are great because they provide a lot of opportunities like that for people to show off their thought process in a way that's very readable. Here, it helps me be pretty damn certain in my townread on you.
I may be stepping to far into a mentor role here, sorry. Let me know if it's annoying or oversteps boundaries.
Ah, you were thinking of having the Survivalist claim and then clearing them?
yeah
can see why it's not great though
So when I talk about judging people based on their thought process, I'm also talking about that kind of thing. The way you tried to figure out how to exploit the rules, got excited about it, then backed off were all super town. Hunt setups are great because they provide a lot of opportunities like that for people to show off their thought process in a way that's very readable. Here, it helps me be pretty damn certain in my townread on you.
I may be stepping to far into a mentor role here, sorry. Let me know if it's annoying or oversteps boundaries.
Cool. Also, apologies for being demotivating earlier, it wasn't my intention. I like to use that kind of why questioning to get into player's heads, and build a foundation to read them off of. It doesn't always have a specific purpose, and when it does that purpose usually works best if no one else gets it at the time I'm asking. It's worked well with you in the past, so I thought I'd try it again here. Will try to refrain from questioning you that way in the future.
I was at the top of your early town reads and now I'm null after questioning your reasons? What about my questioning felt anti town to you?
Early townleans.
None of your reason-questioning has felt outside the realm of easy questions for the sake of pushing a mislynch.
The main reason for the high townlean was a feeling of a pure lack of malice. But later on, I realized I sorta felt a lack of anything, and then there was the questioning which felt easy.
I was at the top of your early town reads and now I'm null after questioning your reasons? What about my questioning felt anti town to you?
Early townleans.
None of your reason-questioning has felt outside the realm of easy questions for the sake of pushing a mislynch.
The main reason for the high townlean was a feeling of a pure lack of malice. But later on, I realized I sorta felt a lack of anything, and then there was the questioning which felt easy.
I hate to drag this up, maybe you don’t have much else to say about it? What felt “pure” about Terrence’s posts? Could you point to an example? It doesn’t gel with my feelings about their posts, in that they seemed wooden and while fake isn’t the word, but neither is “pure” if you follow me.
I was at the top of your early town reads and now I'm null after questioning your reasons? What about my questioning felt anti town to you?
Early townleans.
None of your reason-questioning has felt outside the realm of easy questions for the sake of pushing a mislynch.
The main reason for the high townlean was a feeling of a pure lack of malice. But later on, I realized I sorta felt a lack of anything, and then there was the questioning which felt easy.
I hate to drag this up, maybe you don’t have much else to say about it? What felt “pure” about Terrence’s posts? Could you point to an example? It doesn’t gel with my feelings about their posts, in that they seemed wooden and while fake isn’t the word, but neither is “pure” if you follow me.
It's literally stated in the post you quoted. There was a seeming lack of malicious intent. But I've reconsidered due to a seeming lack of any intent whatsoever.
I was going to move my vote to Fulcrum/Umami but after catching up I'm happy leaving it on Azrael. [...]
@Sloth: See this post.
Hah. That is pretty cool, ngl.
Still, doesn't answer my question - or it does of sorts: You can say the vote there was part of the joke/post you link to here at the time, but your statements since have made it clear that at one point the vote became legitimate.
I want to know why - it doesn't have to be a particularly strong case, but there are obviously specific reasons/quotes. So?
Ter continues to not remotely try to solve the game so my vote's not changing.
Also that Osie called her "pure" is a thing. TWTBW, yea, argument could be made, but...pure? Hm.
It's a pre-50-post readlist. Any of the reads could be called a stretch. I kinda like this reaction though.
Ter has been hovering around null for me. I'll reread her once we have 150ish posts if that's prior to the end of the day phase.
Yeah, sure, I'm willing to wait for a post-#150 re-assessment. We're basically there already, anyway.
I'm not seeing what more posts will do to specifically change whatever it was you saw as pure before post #80, but it's not like this is going anywhere and I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt/time/rope.
I was at the top of your early town reads and now I'm null after questioning your reasons? What about my questioning felt anti town to you?
Early townleans.
None of your reason-questioning has felt outside the realm of easy questions for the sake of pushing a mislynch.
The main reason for the high townlean was a feeling of a pure lack of malice. But later on, I realized I sorta felt a lack of anything, and then there was the questioning which felt easy.
While I don't disagree with the end conclusion, let's talk about the underlined: You noticed the questioning, but didn't think of malice...okay.
Yet still ranked her higher than Tubba and I - did you see malice in either of us? Instead of what she did to be so high, why weren't either Tubba or I as high as her?
I was at the top of your early town reads and now I'm null after questioning your reasons? What about my questioning felt anti town to you?
Early townleans.
None of your reason-questioning has felt outside the realm of easy questions for the sake of pushing a mislynch.
The main reason for the high townlean was a feeling of a pure lack of malice. But later on, I realized I sorta felt a lack of anything, and then there was the questioning which felt easy.
I hate to drag this up, maybe you don’t have much else to say about it? What felt “pure” about Terrence’s posts? Could you point to an example? It doesn’t gel with my feelings about their posts, in that they seemed wooden and while fake isn’t the word, but neither is “pure” if you follow me.
It's literally stated in the post you quoted. There was a seeming lack of malicious intent. But I've reconsidered due to a seeming lack of any intent whatsoever.
I understand that you didn't see malicious intent and that you've since reconsidered - but that still means you had posts where you drew those conclusions from, and I want you to back up your ideas.
It doesn't seem likely for ter/osie to be partners, with only two scum this would be too blatant, so...something's wrong here, but what.
Osie, I'd like your thoughts on Azrael, Umami and I as well. Feel free to wait until Tubba answers you.
Could you quote some posts from Ter that felt pure at the time you read them, even if they don't anymore?
#8, #28, #36 were what I had read and liked. It wasn't much to go on, though.
I have an incoming wallpost where I sorta dropped everything, focused on teambuilding, and talked about thoughts from a much more in depth mass-ISO-dive. I'll probably be able to post that this evening if not earlier. I think I have maybe a 5-team POE, and one of those teams has much less going against it than any of the others.
I was going to move my vote to Fulcrum/Umami but after catching up I'm happy leaving it on Azrael. [...]
@Sloth: See this post.
Hah. That is pretty cool, ngl.
Still, doesn't answer my question - or it does of sorts: You can say the vote there was part of the joke/post you link to here at the time, but your statements since have made it clear that at one point the vote became legitimate.
I want to know why - it doesn't have to be a particularly strong case, but there are obviously specific reasons/quotes. So?
My core reason for the vote becoming more serious is that Azrael feels particularly unengaged compared to my past experience with him as usually a town leader or at least an active voice. He explicitly seems to ask others to do his work for him.
I don't put weight on early reads in the early game. I think their only purpose is to see how poeople respond to pressure and try to get a read of of that and to retrospectively analyze interactions once you have some flips. I think anyone who is genuinely confident in their early reads is lying to themselves about something, but if they're just projecting confidence or whatever it's fine--you do you as they say
I'm not getting the same sense of conviction from Azrael that you and Umami seem to be getting. Kind of feeling like Umami is more prickly than I expected. (The initial negative comment about Azrael, "Dude, you've played with me before," stressed about "already being on people's scumlist," "lying to themselves, "don't care either way.") Word choices lean more negative than positive. Thought about it potentially being a response to rolling scum for the first time, doubting that thought because one of the few things she was positive about was the idea of rolling scum. I'm not at the murder her for christmas stage.
Fonti, fonti, I think you’re not getting my tone, which is fair because it’s pretty neutral/dry, so it’s pretty malleable in terms of being read however the reader wants. Take last game for example, Sloth thought I was being super negative compared to prior games whereas Tom just thought I was about the same/read my comments in a jokey way. In terms of what I felt while I was writing and what I intended, Tom got the read right.
I was just joking about Azrael because I thought it was funny how he said he was super confident until he changed his mind, which I liked. His description of himself reminds me of Rhand a bit actually and Rhand is a ton of fun to play with. That plus I seem to be called out for being wish washy every day 1 I’ve every played is why I made it. It was just a contrast in playing styles and a throwaway joke—it wasn’t some deep analysis or anything. Maybe I shouldn’t post stuff like that since it’s not a read and isn’t progressing the game, but it’s the start of day 1 and it’s just what came to mind so I did.
I'm not entirely sure how to take the two bolded statements above but...this is something of a contradiction, isn't it? I've been guilty of not getting what Umami is driving at sometimes, but this is clear.
Prior to the second bolded statement, I would not have assumed the situation with Azrael was meant to be a joke: Even where she's saying she's being sarcastic about syncing well with his playstyle, it's not in a way that makes me think she's looking forward to engaging with it.
It all fall in line with the first bolded statement. Where she almost seems to be annoyed by it.
The mention of rhand specifically is off, as in the last two games she's displayed exasperation at the way he plays, rather than enjoyment (she likes rhand, but she's often frustrated at his playstyle, not something I would have assumed she sees as "a lot of fun to play with")
One thing's for certain, there is a 3/8ths chance that scum have survivalist, meaning that they will never use their guess the role to get a double kill thing and that they know not to use that ability
I'm not great at math, but just to confirm: Given this and later posts you make, did you forget this is a 7-player game with only 2 scum?
A scum survivalist is never going to claim....it guarantees outing them as scum if they are alive d2. So basically you're asking a town survivalist to sacrifice themselves...to what end? Scum will simply rolekill them and our PR goes bye bye for no gain.
You think that if someone claims survivalist and they live to D2, the immediate town response is to lynch them d2?
I'm not getting the same sense of conviction from Azrael that you and Umami seem to be getting. Kind of feeling like Umami is more prickly than I expected. (The initial negative comment about Azrael, "Dude, you've played with me before," stressed about "already being on people's scumlist," "lying to themselves, "don't care either way.") Word choices lean more negative than positive. Thought about it potentially being a response to rolling scum for the first time, doubting that thought because one of the few things she was positive about was the idea of rolling scum.
Azrael hasn't posted in a while and that's waning my read a bit, but it is a holiday weekend so what can you do.
In regards to conviction, he seemed deadset on me being scum/"scummy" without concern about backing it up with any actual statements - and backed off without fighting, leaving a real sense of "burst balloon" on the post where he unvoted me, which I'm choosing to see as confident town realizing his read was crap. I mentioned in an earlier post how the scummy motivation can still be there and that's still true, but this is what I mean as far as conviction goes. Do you see it differently, and if so, how?
Regarding the bolded statement on Umami: Funnily enough, this is pretty much the case I made on Umami last game, Matter Mafia. Spoiler alert, she was town and I only arrived to that conclusion not because of her actions, but mostly out of POE. I did notice the same things you are here, but I'm deciding they are NAI for her. You seem to have gotten to that conclussion on your own anyway.
Still doesn't mean she's town btw - she's good at set-up analysis, as shown in Avalon. But...I'm not sure what a scumgame from her looks like.
I suspect I'm going to scumread her almost every game until she's actually scum 'cause I don't know what that looks like.
A scum survivalist is never going to claim....it guarantees outing them as scum if they are alive d2. So basically you're asking a town survivalist to sacrifice themselves...to what end? Scum will simply rolekill them and our PR goes bye bye for no gain.
Worth noting that this isn't actually true, but getting into why would actually be scum coaching, heh. Let's leave it at "don't trust someone just because they claimed and don't not trust someone just because they claimed and didn't die."
You're in a real teacher mode this game.
Is your read on Ter evolving in any way? Can you talk about it more beyond "liking her follow up on Osie"?
Cool. Also, apologies for being demotivating earlier, it wasn't my intention. I like to use that kind of why questioning to get into player's heads, and build a foundation to read them off of. It doesn't always have a specific purpose, and when it does that purpose usually works best if no one else gets it at the time I'm asking. It's worked well with you in the past, so I thought I'd try it again here. Will try to refrain from questioning you that way in the future.
...Hm.
Man I can already tell that font as scum here with only one partner is going to be a nightmare.
Osie, I'd like your thoughts on Azrael, Umami and I as well. Feel free to wait until Tubba answers you.
Could you quote some posts from Ter that felt pure at the time you read them, even if they don't anymore?
#8, #28, #36 were what I had read and liked. It wasn't much to go on, though.
I have an incoming wallpost where I sorta dropped everything, focused on teambuilding, and talked about thoughts from a much more in depth mass-ISO-dive. I'll probably be able to post that this evening if not earlier. I think I have maybe a 5-team POE, and one of those teams has much less going against it than any of the others.
Yeah if these are the posts you're referring to, I'm not picking up pure...I'm not even sure what placed her above tubba and I.
I will await the wallpost.
My core reason for the vote becoming more serious is that Azrael feels particularly unengaged compared to my past experience with him as usually a town leader or at least an active voice. He explicitly seems to ask others to do his work for him.
Admittedly, I haven't played with him before so I wouldn't know if such a deviation is scummy by his nature. I did note he hasn't posted much but, again, willing to wait.
...Hm. Okay.
Osie, I'd like your thoughts on Azrael, Umami and I as well. Feel free to wait until Tubba answers you.
Could you quote some posts from Ter that felt pure at the time you read them, even if they don't anymore?
#8, #28, #36 were what I had read and liked. It wasn't much to go on, though.
I have an incoming wallpost where I sorta dropped everything, focused on teambuilding, and talked about thoughts from a much more in depth mass-ISO-dive. I'll probably be able to post that this evening if not earlier. I think I have maybe a 5-team POE, and one of those teams has much less going against it than any of the others.
Yeah if these are the posts you're referring to, I'm not picking up pure...I'm not even sure what placed her above tubba and I.
I will await the wallpost.
It definitely had to do with the two of you being particularly friendly, to a degree. I'm a sucker for nice people.
Not gonna comment on the claims conversation. I see some issues but since no one is expressing interest in doing so, not really something that needs to be talked about more than necessary.
I'm trying to figure out if Umami on Fonti is just a repeat of what she was doing in Mountainous - reasons seem largely the same - or if she has a legitimate point this time.
I do notice Fonti is focusing on set-up discussion and not engaging other players enough. /prods Font with a stick be more social.
Hottake: NL D1 to confirm Judge? We decide who the judge should hit before Day end.
Helps to figure out alignment
Less risk on D1 than any other day.
Thoughts?
Hottake: NL D1 to confirm Judge? We decide who the judge should hit before Day end.
D1 Solve in Micro is too common to NL, IMO. Also I'm pretty sure that we don't really have enough phases usually, even with the two extra life roles in this setup.
Man I can already tell that font as scum here with only one partner is going to be a nightmare.
Is fonti one of your lowest reads?
Nah, she's deep null/undecided.
For that matter, could you give me a rough ordered list for the players? I have a few in particular for whom I'm wondering about your read positioning based on your posts, but I'll talk about that later.
Not gonna comment on the claims conversation. I see some issues but since no one is expressing interest in doing so, not really something that needs to be talked about more than necessary.
I'm trying to figure out if Umami on Fonti is just a repeat of what she was doing in Mountainous - reasons seem largely the same - or if she has a legitimate point this time.
I do notice Fonti is focusing on set-up discussion and not engaging other players enough. /prods Font with a stick be more social.
Hottake: NL D1 to confirm Judge? We decide who the judge should hit before Day end.
Helps to figure out alignment
Less risk on D1 than any other day.
Thoughts?
*****, none of you are ever around when I'm here. This is your fault.
Not gonna comment on the claims conversation. I see some issues but since no one is expressing interest in doing so, not really something that needs to be talked about more than necessary.
I'm trying to figure out if Umami on Fonti is just a repeat of what she was doing in Mountainous - reasons seem largely the same - or if she has a legitimate point this time.
I do notice Fonti is focusing on set-up discussion and not engaging other players enough. /prods Font with a stick be more social.
Hottake: NL D1 to confirm Judge? We decide who the judge should hit before Day end.
Helps to figure out alignment
Less risk on D1 than any other day.
Thoughts?
*****, none of you are ever around when I'm here. This is your fault.
Fonti! Perfect timing. Could you talk to me about your current thoughts on Azrael? It felt like you had at least a lean on him in #82, but then you didn't really go anywhere with it.
I'm not getting the same sense of conviction from Azrael that you and Umami seem to be getting. Kind of feeling like Umami is more prickly than I expected. (The initial negative comment about Azrael, "Dude, you've played with me before," stressed about "already being on people's scumlist," "lying to themselves, "don't care either way.") Word choices lean more negative than positive. Thought about it potentially being a response to rolling scum for the first time, doubting that thought because one of the few things she was positive about was the idea of rolling scum.
Azrael hasn't posted in a while and that's waning my read a bit, but it is a holiday weekend so what can you do.
In regards to conviction, he seemed deadset on me being scum/"scummy" without concern about backing it up with any actual statements - and backed off without fighting, leaving a real sense of "burst balloon" on the post where he unvoted me, which I'm choosing to see as confident town realizing his read was crap. I mentioned in an earlier post how the scummy motivation can still be there and that's still true, but this is what I mean as far as conviction goes. Do you see it differently, and if so, how?
Regarding the bolded statement on Umami: Funnily enough, this is pretty much the case I made on Umami last game, Matter Mafia. Spoiler alert, she was town and I only arrived to that conclusion not because of her actions, but mostly out of POE. I did notice the same things you are here, but I'm deciding they are NAI for her. You seem to have gotten to that conclussion on your own anyway.
Still doesn't mean she's town btw - she's good at set-up analysis, as shown in Avalon. But...I'm not sure what a scumgame from her looks like.
I suspect I'm going to scumread her almost every game until she's actually scum 'cause I don't know what that looks like.
I believe Azrael has been around for a long time, and is generally considered to be good. I think the push on you was posturing, regardless of alignment, and it was easy, push the guy talking the most, people think you're town because why would mafia do that? I don't find him backing off particularly townie, because I doubt he was actually all that tunneled on you in the first place. This is more feels that actual reasoning.
Would recommend checking out Umami's push on me, I think it was genuinely confident and townie. As she's stated, relatively few of my games have been with her, but a lot of her games have been with me, and I think she'd be a little scared to push like that during her first scum game. Also, I think I kind of get her tone? The contradictions remind me a lot of my first few games, way back in the day.
A scum survivalist is never going to claim....it guarantees outing them as scum if they are alive d2. So basically you're asking a town survivalist to sacrifice themselves...to what end? Scum will simply rolekill them and our PR goes bye bye for no gain.
Worth noting that this isn't actually true, but getting into why would actually be scum coaching, heh. Let's leave it at "don't trust someone just because they claimed and don't not trust someone just because they claimed and didn't die."
You're in a real teacher mode this game.
Is your read on Ter evolving in any way? Can you talk about it more beyond "liking her follow up on Osie"?
No solid thoughts atm. They seem pretty low key, not the center of attention. I've been thinking about rereading their posts in isolation, can do that now.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yeah, alright.
Umami top!town.
One thing's for certain, there is a 3/8ths chance that scum have survivalist, meaning that they will never use their guess the role to get a double kill thing and that they know not to use that ability
Feel free to explain this, but I'ma level with you, that's definitely not-optimal and we're not doing it. Be careful not to slip info about your role if you do decide to explain it.
Again I ask though. What does Town get from giving up a power role via the survivalist?
Actually with 7, survivalist is actually a really strong role for scum. My idea was based on the assumption (I was in the other tinyhunt game)that if given survivalist as 1 of 3 options scum would never choose it, but with these dynamics that doesn't make sense
Do we get to know if who was the night kill attempt if they don't die?
Again, as I've said, different dynamics with 7 that I need to account for, but if I remember correctly (there's a good chance I don't), survivalist was a role claimed by scum in the last game even though it wasn't their actual role--it was the thrown away role
very very different--there were a bunch of VTs and instead of the guess a role and double down choice (pretty weak) they had this choose your night kill but then guess a person/role to get a chain lynch or something
There isn't a change. Different games require different styles of play.
In this game, I am the person with the most hunt experience. Hunts are very susceptible to mechanical play, smaller hunts more so. Add in that this setup has a high offensive to defensive power balance. In a game with 12 people, I can reasonably expect myself to be alive d2 and maybe d3. If I do not survive to those Days, I will generally have other people in the game who I can expect to do the things I would have. In a game like this, where my knowledge is more valuable and the odds of any individual town being alive d2 or d3 are low, it's more important to share plans and info early.
Still doesn't explain the desire to get credit for stating something pretty obvious but still clearly more advantageous to town not to say (or to say when relevant) rather than to say right now
yeah
can see why it's not great though
Worth noting that this isn't actually true, but getting into why would actually be scum coaching, heh. Let's leave it at "don't trust someone just because they claimed and don't not trust someone just because they claimed and didn't die."
So when I talk about judging people based on their thought process, I'm also talking about that kind of thing. The way you tried to figure out how to exploit the rules, got excited about it, then backed off were all super town. Hunt setups are great because they provide a lot of opportunities like that for people to show off their thought process in a way that's very readable. Here, it helps me be pretty damn certain in my townread on you.
I may be stepping to far into a mentor role here, sorry. Let me know if it's annoying or oversteps boundaries.
nah, it's cool
I'd appreciate it if someone would do something and entertain me.
Early townleans.
None of your reason-questioning has felt outside the realm of easy questions for the sake of pushing a mislynch.
The main reason for the high townlean was a feeling of a pure lack of malice. But later on, I realized I sorta felt a lack of anything, and then there was the questioning which felt easy.
I hate to drag this up, maybe you don’t have much else to say about it? What felt “pure” about Terrence’s posts? Could you point to an example? It doesn’t gel with my feelings about their posts, in that they seemed wooden and while fake isn’t the word, but neither is “pure” if you follow me.
It's literally stated in the post you quoted. There was a seeming lack of malicious intent. But I've reconsidered due to a seeming lack of any intent whatsoever.
Can you talk to me about your thoughts on Azrael, Fulcrum, and Umami, please?
Could you quote some posts from Ter that felt pure at the time you read them, even if they don't anymore?
Still, doesn't answer my question - or it does of sorts: You can say the vote there was part of the joke/post you link to here at the time, but your statements since have made it clear that at one point the vote became legitimate.
I want to know why - it doesn't have to be a particularly strong case, but there are obviously specific reasons/quotes. So?
Yeah, sure, I'm willing to wait for a post-#150 re-assessment. We're basically there already, anyway.
I'm not seeing what more posts will do to specifically change whatever it was you saw as pure before post #80, but it's not like this is going anywhere and I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt/time/rope.
While I don't disagree with the end conclusion, let's talk about the underlined: You noticed the questioning, but didn't think of malice...okay.
Yet still ranked her higher than Tubba and I - did you see malice in either of us? Instead of what she did to be so high, why weren't either Tubba or I as high as her?
I understand that you didn't see malicious intent and that you've since reconsidered - but that still means you had posts where you drew those conclusions from, and I want you to back up your ideas.
It doesn't seem likely for ter/osie to be partners, with only two scum this would be too blatant, so...something's wrong here, but what.
#8, #28, #36 were what I had read and liked. It wasn't much to go on, though.
I have an incoming wallpost where I sorta dropped everything, focused on teambuilding, and talked about thoughts from a much more in depth mass-ISO-dive. I'll probably be able to post that this evening if not earlier. I think I have maybe a 5-team POE, and one of those teams has much less going against it than any of the others.
My core reason for the vote becoming more serious is that Azrael feels particularly unengaged compared to my past experience with him as usually a town leader or at least an active voice. He explicitly seems to ask others to do his work for him.
Prior to the second bolded statement, I would not have assumed the situation with Azrael was meant to be a joke: Even where she's saying she's being sarcastic about syncing well with his playstyle, it's not in a way that makes me think she's looking forward to engaging with it.
It all fall in line with the first bolded statement. Where she almost seems to be annoyed by it.
The mention of rhand specifically is off, as in the last two games she's displayed exasperation at the way he plays, rather than enjoyment (she likes rhand, but she's often frustrated at his playstyle, not something I would have assumed she sees as "a lot of fun to play with")
Meh. I guess observe. Annoying.
I'm not great at math, but just to confirm: Given this and later posts you make, did you forget this is a 7-player game with only 2 scum?
Why are either of you being this overt?
In regards to conviction, he seemed deadset on me being scum/"scummy" without concern about backing it up with any actual statements - and backed off without fighting, leaving a real sense of "burst balloon" on the post where he unvoted me, which I'm choosing to see as confident town realizing his read was crap. I mentioned in an earlier post how the scummy motivation can still be there and that's still true, but this is what I mean as far as conviction goes. Do you see it differently, and if so, how?
Regarding the bolded statement on Umami: Funnily enough, this is pretty much the case I made on Umami last game, Matter Mafia. Spoiler alert, she was town and I only arrived to that conclusion not because of her actions, but mostly out of POE. I did notice the same things you are here, but I'm deciding they are NAI for her. You seem to have gotten to that conclussion on your own anyway.
Still doesn't mean she's town btw - she's good at set-up analysis, as shown in Avalon. But...I'm not sure what a scumgame from her looks like.
I suspect I'm going to scumread her almost every game until she's actually scum 'cause I don't know what that looks like.
Hah! Man, I hope you're town.
You're in a real teacher mode this game.
Is your read on Ter evolving in any way? Can you talk about it more beyond "liking her follow up on Osie"?
...Hm.
Man I can already tell that font as scum here with only one partner is going to be a nightmare.
I will await the wallpost.
...Hm. Okay.
It definitely had to do with the two of you being particularly friendly, to a degree. I'm a sucker for nice people.
I'm trying to figure out if Umami on Fonti is just a repeat of what she was doing in Mountainous - reasons seem largely the same - or if she has a legitimate point this time.
I do notice Fonti is focusing on set-up discussion and not engaging other players enough. /prods Font with a stick be more social.
Hottake: NL D1 to confirm Judge? We decide who the judge should hit before Day end.
Helps to figure out alignment
Less risk on D1 than any other day.
Thoughts?
Is fonti one of your lowest reads?
@ter get in here! Someone just called us nice!
D1 Solve in Micro is too common to NL, IMO. Also I'm pretty sure that we don't really have enough phases usually, even with the two extra life roles in this setup.
For that matter, could you give me a rough ordered list for the players? I have a few in particular for whom I'm wondering about your read positioning based on your posts, but I'll talk about that later.
*****, none of you are ever around when I'm here. This is your fault.
Fonti! Perfect timing. Could you talk to me about your current thoughts on Azrael? It felt like you had at least a lean on him in #82, but then you didn't really go anywhere with it.
I believe Azrael has been around for a long time, and is generally considered to be good. I think the push on you was posturing, regardless of alignment, and it was easy, push the guy talking the most, people think you're town because why would mafia do that? I don't find him backing off particularly townie, because I doubt he was actually all that tunneled on you in the first place. This is more feels that actual reasoning.
Would recommend checking out Umami's push on me, I think it was genuinely confident and townie. As she's stated, relatively few of my games have been with her, but a lot of her games have been with me, and I think she'd be a little scared to push like that during her first scum game. Also, I think I kind of get her tone? The contradictions remind me a lot of my first few games, way back in the day.
No. I'm not ready to talk about Ter.
Osie, your question is answered above.
Yes. The Day start will say "X survived an attempt on their life."
No solid thoughts atm. They seem pretty low key, not the center of attention. I've been thinking about rereading their posts in isolation, can do that now.