Hah! Just realized this is a game where I don't have to worry about KJ or Vaimes trying to do their little "shouting names" bit at the end of each page.
Is this a top > bottom = town > scum list?
As you say, it's gun to your head, but can you talk more about the placing for both extremes? (Ter and Fonti)
Also, talk about this reaction a bit too, and the vote.
My first post this game was direct plagiarism of Iso's entrance in Revolution Mafia.
Readlist is top to bottom.
Fulcrum feels awkward and she is barely here, Umami isn't here, Azrael is a gutread based on feeling a little awkward. Like he's posturing a bit.
TerRaine feels pure? I like her #36, and I'm sorta wanting to believe TWTBAW or just friendly comedy on her interaction with you in the first handful of posts. It's just a lean. You seem to have less of an agenda this game than DLP, which is a good sign. Tubba is Tubba. I think even if I have seen one of his games this year, I don't remember his posts since like the second or third game of his on the site. I know he's gotten better over time, but that's about it. So I'm sorta just sorting him as an unfamiliar, intermediate-level player.
He's solidly seeming Town so far yes. If he's not, it'll become clear - the whimsy is very relaxed and Town from him though, compared to the tension before.
Also there's #30.
Osie, you place a lot of weight on exact wording? I think I recall that from DLP. What else do you look for?
Hey Tubba, I see you rolled Town this time. Good for you.
What are your thoughts on the exchanges on #7, #8, #10 and #12? Do the reactions read natural and townie?
I don’t get where #7 (i.e, the scumtell) comes from, #8 seems a little stilted and miffed sounding. Could be frustration at being caught?Dont really have a barometer for Ter’s normality though. #10 could be you building a box around Ter, honestly not sure I’m a big fan if that. I guess if you’re right you can look back on this and lord it over me. #12 is again weird and maybe that’s just because I don’t get the joke. It seems like a weak attempt to get you to back off so it might just be farts in the wind.
Hm. Good.
Throw in the conditional that I saw no "scumtell" and that #7 was me messing with her. What does that make #10 for you?
I like that you're arriving at some of the same conclusions on Ter's posts that I am without me having to spell it out. But more on that later.
That would make #10 even more sinister, and makes pointing it out and talking about it a weird strategy. Or a brilliant one. But then you’d be pocketing me. Which is probably low value, bumped up slightly by the smaller player base. However, if it’s low effort/low risk it’s worth it?
Doesn’t change the fact that her response was stiff, so at face value it’s baiting to see her reactions? So not sinister, but tricksy? Too tricksy for D1?
Short answer is I’m not climbing into your pocket yet.
Also, someone please help me with meta here. Trying to eval people without a baseline for their skill level and tendencies is like flailing with a baseball bat in a darkened room.
Hm.
Gone over me already.
Umami's a novice, but she's capable of great analysis as either alignment. I don't think she's ever had an true-Mafia game as scum yet (she's played IRL and she was scum in a Avalon game here), so I would be looking for differences in that.
For example, the fact she hasn't posted yet whereas she's usually the first off the bad. But that could easily be OOG.
Someday, not today, but someday. And god I can't wait. yeah, resistance def doesn't count
He's solidly seeming Town so far yes. If he's not, it'll become clear - the whimsy is very relaxed and Town from him though, compared to the tension before.
Also there's #30.
Osie, you place a lot of weight on exact wording? I think I recall that from DLP. What else do you look for?
Hey Tubba, I see you rolled Town this time. Good for you.
What are your thoughts on the exchanges on #7, #8, #10 and #12? Do the reactions read natural and townie?
I don’t get where #7 (i.e, the scumtell) comes from, #8 seems a little stilted and miffed sounding. Could be frustration at being caught?Dont really have a barometer for Ter’s normality though. #10 could be you building a box around Ter, honestly not sure I’m a big fan if that. I guess if you’re right you can look back on this and lord it over me. #12 is again weird and maybe that’s just because I don’t get the joke. It seems like a weak attempt to get you to back off so it might just be farts in the wind.
Hm. Good.
Throw in the conditional that I saw no "scumtell" and that #7 was me messing with her. What does that make #10 for you?
I like that you're arriving at some of the same conclusions on Ter's posts that I am without me having to spell it out. But more on that later.
That would make #10 even more sinister, and makes pointing it out and talking about it a weird strategy. Or a brilliant one. But then you’d be pocketing me. Which is probably low value, bumped up slightly by the smaller player base. However, if it’s low effort/low risk it’s worth it?
Doesn’t change the fact that her response was stiff, so at face value it’s baiting to see her reactions? So not sinister, but tricksy? Too tricksy for D1?
Short answer is I’m not climbing into your pocket yet.
lol, good call, I like sloth taking the 'here, jump under my wing young tubba' role
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
"barely here" is not really telling for font fyi. I don't now about awkward, but I am waiting on her to do more myself. That'll help.
Doesn't really seem like a good reason to have her bottom, but I do acknowledge that none of your bottom 3 do, purposefully.
That would make #10 even more sinister, and makes pointing it out and talking about it a weird strategy. Or a brilliant one. But then you’d be pocketing me. Which is probably low value, bumped up slightly by the smaller player base. However, if it’s low effort/low risk it’s worth it?
Doesn’t change the fact that her response was stiff, so at face value it’s baiting to see her reactions? So not sinister, but tricksy? Too tricksy for D1
Short answer is I’m not climbing into your pocket yet.
I was more interested in how it affected things in your assessment of Ter, actually, but this answer is an answer of sorts for that as well so.
lol @ bolded.
What if I told you there was candy inside my pocket?
Weakish Townreads circling on Tubba and Azrael for me.
For Azrael, #34 and #41 are the bulk of the reasons why. #34 doesn't match what I would expect a scum player to do, fresh after 3 continuous posts where conviction on my scumminess just drips - essentially undercutting himself for <reasons> (<reasons> could admittedly be: "sloth vote isn't taking/is drawing attention to me, better switch gears and play it off" but if that's all it takes, this is kind of a spineless move.)
#41 is an elaboration on #34, and I also specially like the last line. I like it when other players echo what I think without me writing it (like with Tubba.)
For Tubba, I've already spoke a bit about: More relaxed demeanor compared to last game, more whimsy. If he's scum here, I applaud him for learning and adapting.
I like that I'm seeing try to work things out in his own way as shown by 30 and 53, and I like how his conclusions make sense despite me not considering them at the time.
If I were to rank the to of them, I would actually put Tubba above Azrael by a marginal amount.
Note that none of these are solid, flawless cases for twoniness, but it's a good start.
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.
At the moment, I don't really care either way. It's not that interesting to me
Btw, what do you make of [sloth taking the 'here, jump under my wing young tubba' role]?
You kinda brought it up and went nowhere with it, it didn't seem like something of a throwaway comment.
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.
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.
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.
At the moment, I don't really care either way. It's not that interesting to me
Btw, what do you make of [sloth taking the 'here, jump under my wing young tubba' role]?
You kinda brought it up and went nowhere with it, it didn't seem like something of a throwaway comment.
Honestly it’s just a note for now. I’m going to watch and see where it goes. You feel different this game though. While it could be natural variance + different player group, you feel more like Waco when he was scum.
But I do agree Tubba feels a lot different in a way that makes me want to assume he’s town. That, or I would think he’s having excellent coaching, which would only come from you given recent game history but would still be super impressive.
The Gravedigger and Undertaker should very carefully weigh whether it's worth coming forward on D2 and D3 respectively. It should be if they feel like the town is on the wrong track kind of thing. In a larger game, a scum!gravedigger could do significant damage, but with the role being split and the number of possible worlds being constrained by the game size, I don't think it's always necessary to force claims there. On D2, deciding whether the previous lynch was town or mafia and then asking the gravedigger to claim only if that decision is wrong could be a good idea. It'll be a case by case decision (if the witch kill was blocked, probably assume the dead person was town, etc).
When someone does claim, I recommend rereading the game with their role in mind, and judging their decisions through that lens. Pay extra attention to their logic for claiming.
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
The Gravedigger and Undertaker should very carefully weigh whether it's worth coming forward on D2 and D3 respectively. It should be if they feel like the town is on the wrong track kind of thing. In a larger game, a scum!gravedigger could do significant damage, but with the role being split and the number of possible worlds being constrained by the game size, I don't think it's always necessary to force claims there. On D2, deciding whether the previous lynch was town or mafia and then asking the gravedigger to claim only if that decision is wrong could be a good idea. It'll be a case by case decision (if the witch kill was blocked, probably assume the dead person was town, etc).
When someone does claim, I recommend rereading the game with their role in mind, and judging their decisions through that lens. Pay extra attention to their logic for claiming.
Wait, aren't you generally against talking about specific role dynamics/coaching scum on how they should be playing?
The Gravedigger and Undertaker should very carefully weigh whether it's worth coming forward on D2 and D3 respectively. It should be if they feel like the town is on the wrong track kind of thing. In a larger game, a scum!gravedigger could do significant damage, but with the role being split and the number of possible worlds being constrained by the game size, I don't think it's always necessary to force claims there. On D2, deciding whether the previous lynch was town or mafia and then asking the gravedigger to claim only if that decision is wrong could be a good idea. It'll be a case by case decision (if the witch kill was blocked, probably assume the dead person was town, etc).
When someone does claim, I recommend rereading the game with their role in mind, and judging their decisions through that lens. Pay extra attention to their logic for claiming.
Like, what is the benefit of saying this now compared to waiting until the person claims later and then retrospectively analyzing their behavior after the claim? By not commenting you could at least have the chance of catching scum in an inconsistency? Now if there is a scum GD or UT then they are on their toes/primed on how to spin it/not have inconsistencies...
Wait, aren't you generally against talking about specific role dynamics/coaching scum on how they should be playing?
The Gravedigger and Undertaker should very carefully weigh whether it's worth coming forward on D2 and D3 respectively. It should be if they feel like the town is on the wrong track kind of thing. In a larger game, a scum!gravedigger could do significant damage, but with the role being split and the number of possible worlds being constrained by the game size, I don't think it's always necessary to force claims there. On D2, deciding whether the previous lynch was town or mafia and then asking the gravedigger to claim only if that decision is wrong could be a good idea. It'll be a case by case decision (if the witch kill was blocked, probably assume the dead person was town, etc).
When someone does claim, I recommend rereading the game with their role in mind, and judging their decisions through that lens. Pay extra attention to their logic for claiming.
Like, what is the benefit of saying this now compared to waiting until the person claims later and then retrospectively analyzing their behavior after the claim? By not commenting you could at least have the chance of catching scum in an inconsistency? Now if there is a scum GD or UT then they are on their toes/primed on how to spin it/not have inconsistencies...
Wait, aren't you generally against talking about specific role dynamics/coaching scum on how they should be playing?
Dang, accidentally put my comment in the quote. Anyway:
Like, what is the benefit of saying this now compared to waiting until the person claims later and then retrospectively analyzing their behavior after the claim? By not commenting you could at least have the chance of catching scum in an inconsistency? Now if there is a scum GD or UT then they are on their toes/primed on how to spin it/not have inconsistencies...
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
The Gravedigger and Undertaker should very carefully weigh whether it's worth coming forward on D2 and D3 respectively. It should be if they feel like the town is on the wrong track kind of thing. In a larger game, a scum!gravedigger could do significant damage, but with the role being split and the number of possible worlds being constrained by the game size, I don't think it's always necessary to force claims there. On D2, deciding whether the previous lynch was town or mafia and then asking the gravedigger to claim only if that decision is wrong could be a good idea. It'll be a case by case decision (if the witch kill was blocked, probably assume the dead person was town, etc).
When someone does claim, I recommend rereading the game with their role in mind, and judging their decisions through that lens. Pay extra attention to their logic for claiming.
Like, what is the benefit of saying this now compared to waiting until the person claims later and then retrospectively analyzing their behavior after the claim? By not commenting you could at least have the chance of catching scum in an inconsistency? Now if there is a scum GD or UT then they are on their toes/primed on how to spin it/not have inconsistencies...
Wait, aren't you generally against talking about specific role dynamics/coaching scum on how they should be playing?
Dang, accidentally put my comment in the quote. Anyway:
Like, what is the benefit of saying this now compared to waiting until the person claims later and then retrospectively analyzing their behavior after the claim? By not commenting you could at least have the chance of catching scum in an inconsistency? Now if there is a scum GD or UT then they are on their toes/primed on how to spin it/not have inconsistencies...
I very much doubt I will be alive. The advice benefits town more than it allows witches to play better.
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
My first post this game was direct plagiarism of Iso's entrance in Revolution Mafia.
Readlist is top to bottom.
Fulcrum feels awkward and she is barely here, Umami isn't here, Azrael is a gutread based on feeling a little awkward. Like he's posturing a bit.
TerRaine feels pure? I like her #36, and I'm sorta wanting to believe TWTBAW or just friendly comedy on her interaction with you in the first handful of posts. It's just a lean. You seem to have less of an agenda this game than DLP, which is a good sign. Tubba is Tubba. I think even if I have seen one of his games this year, I don't remember his posts since like the second or third game of his on the site. I know he's gotten better over time, but that's about it. So I'm sorta just sorting him as an unfamiliar, intermediate-level player.
That would make #10 even more sinister, and makes pointing it out and talking about it a weird strategy. Or a brilliant one. But then you’d be pocketing me. Which is probably low value, bumped up slightly by the smaller player base. However, if it’s low effort/low risk it’s worth it?
Doesn’t change the fact that her response was stiff, so at face value it’s baiting to see her reactions? So not sinister, but tricksy? Too tricksy for D1?
Short answer is I’m not climbing into your pocket yet.
But yeah, enjoying the holiday weekend with my fam
Someday, not today, but someday. And god I can't wait. yeah, resistance def doesn't count
lol, good call, I like sloth taking the 'here, jump under my wing young tubba' role
Yo, this game is closer to 1 to 1.
This was sarcasm, yeah?
yes, yes it was
Azrael (2): osi, fulcrum
Terraine (1): sloth
Not voting (4): az, terr, tubba, umami
Deadline is noon PST may 30th (6 days from this post)
Cool, cool.
Why won't it vibe well with you?
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
Why is someone who was not present (Umami) more of a scum read than some someone you have at least a gut read on (Az)?
Az you say feels awkward...but yet he ranks as less scummy than a player who had not yet said anything?
"barely here" is not really telling for font fyi. I don't now about awkward, but I am waiting on her to do more myself. That'll help.
Doesn't really seem like a good reason to have her bottom, but I do acknowledge that none of your bottom 3 do, purposefully.
Hm. Look back on this later.
lol @ bolded.
What if I told you there was candy inside my pocket?
...ah right, it's Memorial Day weekend. Completely forgot about that.
Explains why things are a little slow.
For Azrael, #34 and #41 are the bulk of the reasons why. #34 doesn't match what I would expect a scum player to do, fresh after 3 continuous posts where conviction on my scumminess just drips - essentially undercutting himself for <reasons> (<reasons> could admittedly be: "sloth vote isn't taking/is drawing attention to me, better switch gears and play it off" but if that's all it takes, this is kind of a spineless move.)
#41 is an elaboration on #34, and I also specially like the last line. I like it when other players echo what I think without me writing it (like with Tubba.)
For Tubba, I've already spoke a bit about: More relaxed demeanor compared to last game, more whimsy. If he's scum here, I applaud him for learning and adapting.
I like that I'm seeing try to work things out in his own way as shown by 30 and 53, and I like how his conclusions make sense despite me not considering them at the time.
If I were to rank the to of them, I would actually put Tubba above Azrael by a marginal amount.
Note that none of these are solid, flawless cases for twoniness, but it's a good start.
Anything you care to share at all?
Your wife has gotten me obsessed with this show btw, "Carmilla." It's ******* endearing as ****.
Also that Osie called her "pure" is a thing. TWTBW, yea, argument could be made, but...pure? Hm.
You kinda brought it up and went nowhere with it, it didn't seem like something of a throwaway comment.
I was going to move my vote to Fulcrum/Umami but after catching up I'm happy leaving it on Azrael.
@TerRaine: Prior to Umami posting, I felt Azrael was higher than a non-poster. Now I'm less certain.
@Sloth: See this post.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Honestly it’s just a note for now. I’m going to watch and see where it goes. You feel different this game though. While it could be natural variance + different player group, you feel more like Waco when he was scum.
But I do agree Tubba feels a lot different in a way that makes me want to assume he’s town. That, or I would think he’s having excellent coaching, which would only come from you given recent game history but would still be super impressive.
When someone does claim, I recommend rereading the game with their role in mind, and judging their decisions through that lens. Pay extra attention to their logic for claiming.
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.
Survivalist should claim today
Wait, aren't you generally against talking about specific role dynamics/coaching scum on how they should be playing?
Dang, accidentally put my comment in the quote. Anyway:
Like, what is the benefit of saying this now compared to waiting until the person claims later and then retrospectively analyzing their behavior after the claim? By not commenting you could at least have the chance of catching scum in an inconsistency? Now if there is a scum GD or UT then they are on their toes/primed on how to spin it/not have inconsistencies...
vote fulcrum
D1 is exactly the worst day for a survivalist to claim. It guarantees they wont make it to d2 if they're town.
Oh, but TerRaine, you haven't heard my plan yet
Also, aren't we guaranteed that if scum kill any one other than survivalist they won't make it to day 2?
I very much doubt I will be alive. The advice benefits town more than it allows witches to play better.
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
Not if we mislynch and get an angel save. Survivalist's best usage is to tank a shot and get confirmed as town, so, we don't want them to out.