Really digging the new Licid. Interesting way to avoid the card disadvantage of auras. I'm salivating at the chance to get to play with some of these new cards they've revealed.
I've had him on my bad feelings list for a bit now. Him not knowing that he flip flopped on the KK situation doesn't make me feel any better about him. Still unsure of Kank, but this is all gut I'm going with.
- The combination of Truk proposing a mass soft claim and later suggesting that he himself wouldn't have agreed to the claim if he were a town PR makes me think he's a VT.
- KCC had what was probably the most balanced view on lynching KK D1. She came in saying she'd be surprised if KK was scum, but at the same time was fine with a KK lynch because of the info it provided -- which she followed through on by posting an analysis of KK's wagon in her first D2 post.
- She voted to lynch you for the right reason.
- Her posting in general has been Grade-A despite it coming too infrequently.
- Basic #70 makes no logical sense to me if KCC is scum.
I've had a very town read on her the whole game as well, but the naked vote on IB stings.
Most of your questions can be answered with a simple "because I kinda suck at this game, and am playing here to try and become better." The big thing I noticed in my last game here is that the players who tended to be better at finding scum did so with a lot of meta logic. Iso had one player pegged within like four or five posts of the game starting, but it was through knowledge of tells that player has. I don't know how to approach the meta here, because its my second game in several years here and I don't even recognize any of the names that were used then.
I understand that most people get better by jumping in and throwing out questions and whatnot, but I'm not really good at that. I pick and choose things that give me a negative vibe and I ask about those specifically. Most of the time it ends up helping other players more than it does myself, but a contribution is a contribution. 100+ hours without anything is hardly a contribution, but since, as you put it, I'm on the chopping block, I've been more focused on trying to save my own neck than looking at what other folks are doing, since I'm pretty terribad at that to begin with.
iPot, playing the newbcard doesn't help your cause.
I'm playing without meta as well, apart from some reading I did on this forum.
It's a disadvantage, but also an advantage: some people are really good at controlling their meta, and us not knowing it spares us from that trap.
Focussing on saving your own neck exclusively will get you lynched. People will see you as overly defensive and not helping town.
I have a town read on you, and I don't want to see you get mislynched just because you choose to hide behind your newbness.
So please share your reads with us and your reasons for them, even if they are gut. The only way you can advance on them is when we comment on them.
I wasn't really intending on it being a "newb" card, more its rather disheartening to come from a place where I am one of the better players to a place where the tactics that get me results elsewhere are fairly bad here. I'm better at drawing attention to myself and letting other people analyze the goings on than actually analyzing them myself.
As far as my reads, Kank and IB are the only people that aren't really sitting right with me. I don't know any posts specifically that are making me feel this way, its kind of an overall thing.
Most of your questions can be answered with a simple "because I kinda suck at this game, and am playing here to try and become better." The big thing I noticed in my last game here is that the players who tended to be better at finding scum did so with a lot of meta logic. Iso had one player pegged within like four or five posts of the game starting, but it was through knowledge of tells that player has. I don't know how to approach the meta here, because its my second game in several years here and I don't even recognize any of the names that were used then.
I understand that most people get better by jumping in and throwing out questions and whatnot, but I'm not really good at that. I pick and choose things that give me a negative vibe and I ask about those specifically. Most of the time it ends up helping other players more than it does myself, but a contribution is a contribution. 100+ hours without anything is hardly a contribution, but since, as you put it, I'm on the chopping block, I've been more focused on trying to save my own neck than looking at what other folks are doing, since I'm pretty terribad at that to begin with.
But then you go on to (again) say that the possibility of KK being a Bomb factored into your decision to not hammer him. So in that case let me repeat my question: if that worry was tangible enough to -- on some level -- stop you from hammering KK, why wouldn't you voice that concern? Every player that hammers a scum-aligned Bomb is going to be town! And following that, what was special about KK? Could PSR have just as likely been a Bomb?
Because it would have been a little bit awkward to say "Hey I don't wanna hammer because I'm afraid he's gonna be a bomb" when there was nothing going on anywhere in regards to this game that factored into that. I mentioned it off handedly that I don't like hammers because of bombs. The line you quoted and then oranged also had an implied "because of bombs" at the end of the sentence.
So you voted PSR to make her claim, or more specifically, to put her in a position in which it would be expected of her to claim.
And again you aren't reading what I am saying. Someone said that PSR didn't have to claim because she was no longer in claim range, and it looked to me that he was saying that in order to give her an excuse for why she wasn't claiming. As I understand it, day talk is common for mafia here but I do not know if its mandatory. It appeared to me that someone may have been trying to give their scum buddy an excuse, so I was removing the excuse.
Again, I did NOT actually expect her to claim, because I did not believe that the lack of a claim was because of not being in range any more. But I DID believe that a convenient excuse was being given to a player that I believed to be scum.
jd wasn't (I know he wasn't because of his response to Wessel in this post). He was clearly calling you out on things that KK's alignment had no bearing on.
That's why I used the phrase "just about." I didn't say that EVERYONE thought it with 100% assuredness, but the vast majority of the people in the game did believe it.
Concerning the first point, that's not even a defense. Town and mafia both make mistakes. Hypothetically, if you flip scum, you could post those first two sentences in the postgame chat and they would still make perfect sense.
Concerning the second point, I've read your posts in Deitriptychos now and your language is consistent. I'll drop this.
Wasn't meant to be a defense. Was meant to be an explanation. Just because you are attacking me doesn't mean I have to be defensive. The fact of the matter is that I don't know why those two words were there. The only thing I can think is that I was in a rush for whatever reason and that I thought I was making a different point there than I actually was. There are also times where I will be typing things, think about something and go back and either expand on the point I was making or change how I order my thoughts. That may be what happened there, but I don't know, as I don't remember what was going on in my real life when I made the post.
You're not commenting on Rhand, but his actions (and no specific actions at that). That "read" on Rhand doesn't preclude Rhand being scum whose actions you just didn't see as scummy -- nor does it say that you think he's town. It's noncommittal.
Is a person not defined by their actions?
Which is useless. The town win-con isn't "you win when all dicky players are dead." You presented four reads in that thread and all four were useless (and you also said "everyone else is kinda 50/50 to me at the moment").
I'm also interested in seeing if you can find anything on KittyCupCake. She's been acting odd to me lately, but nothing I can put a finger on.
You too?
I have a ridiculously strong town read on KCC. Could either of the two of you at least try to put a finger on her "odd" behavior?
@iPot
If you plan on responding to my last responses to you, could you do it before Wessel cases you?
Sorry, I thought I had. Anywho, I'm basically just sitting back trying to watch the goings on. My biggest problem is that all my reads are gut type reads, and nothing anywhere close to concrete.
1. Do you have any response to the points I made against you? You said you were awaiting it.
2. If you "really don't know what to think," what do you want to do Today? Failing that, what do you think the town should do?
@2: My plan today is to do what I've been doing. Looking for things that stick out to me more than others and asking questions.
@1: I don't wanna try and deal with all the quotes in the post, so I'm going to just do quotes of your questions specifically.
Not even close. PSR had only ever got to 3 votes (L-4) at that point.
iPot said he was unaware how many votes were on PSR here. An hour later, DRey posted a vote count. Then, later that day, iPot made his next post.
The fact that his account is inconsistent is much worse than his cautiousness in voting.
Are you saying that I didn't vote PSR when I "should" have? Because, as I also stated, I would vote him in my own time. I didn't feel like voting him at that particular moment, so I didn't. Yes, not knowing the actual number of votes on him at the time was a part of why I didn't do it, but it was far from the entirety of it.
So it seems that iPot didn't hammer KK because he had a stronger scum read on PSR. Fine.
...but that doesn't jive with this. iPot goes from suggesting that he didn't hammer KK because he had the stronger read on PSR to saying he didn't hammer KK because of the possibility he was a Bomb.
(By the way, if for whatever bizarre reason you have a "fear" of a player being a scum-aligned Bomb, why wouldn't you voice that fear? Whoever hammers a scum-aligned Bomb is going to be town, even if it isn't you.)
...and then he goes back to saying he didn't vote KK because he'd rather see a PSR lynch. Extremely wishy-washy.
Why not both? Also, as both you and myself had pointed out, the bomb fear is irrational/bizarre. There was no logical reason why I would think any particular player is a bomb, I just hate to hammer. On top of which, I had a stronger read on PSR than KK, so as opposed to worrying "did I hit the bomb, did I hit the bomb" for x hours, I placed a vote on the player I had a stronger feeling about.
You're also neglecting to mention that I was also trying to keep PSR in claim range. PSR said she wasn't going to claim, and several folks asked her to do so. Someone(Tetris I think)pointed out that she was no longer in claim range since someone had unvoted, which to me implied that he was saying she didn't have to/wasn't claiming because she wasn't in claim range. I put her back there, under the personal theory that she was scum and didn't want to use what I thought at the time would have been another safe claim(since I believed that KK was using a safe claim at the time as well). I had still assumed she wouldn't claim, but I didn't want an excuse to be handed to her when it could be prevented.
Re: the first paragraph, pushing someone to L-2 to get them to claim and thinking they won't claim despite that are not mutually exclusive.
Re: the second paragraph, this whole defense depends on KK being scum. jd's point against you did not require KK to be scum.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say with your first part here. As stated before, I wasn't trying to get PSR to claim. I was trying to remove an excuse NOT to claim.
@Second Point: As far as I can tell, just about everyone was under the assumption that KK was scum, and more or less accepted it as fact. I was working under those assumptions.
This post followed a prod on iPot. This was all he had to say (if you're so worried about your "self-image," as you say, why didn't you apologize or do anything else here?).
I never actually got a prod PM, that time. I've received one since, but it was for day 2. As I told the mod when I was prodded, I tend to check the thread a couple times a day, make note of something then go about my day. I don't always realize how long it has been since I post, ask KCC I had to have gotten fifty damn prods in Deit mafia. I'm not silent as a tactic, I'm silent because I'm forgetful.
Two words in here that scream scumslip: "he's dead." Why would town say that? If Wessel flips town with that claim, he's not dead -- that's the point of testing the claim! He'd only be dead if he were NK'd, which it looks like iPot was planning ahead for. I'll be getting back to this in a few posts.
Also, the first paragraph is serious overcompensation, and it would've been overcompensation even if "what would have been the harm in testing Wessel's role claim?" had actually been a scummy question rather than a perfectly reasonable one, especially in light of there being no N1 NK.
I actually don't know why I added the "he's dead" right there when I did. The only thing I can figure is I had my thoughts twisted as I was typing them. And as for the second point, again, I don't know what to tell you. Its just a phrase I use. The same as many people use the phrase "To tell the truth" or "Honestly, 'x'" and folks say that its a scummy phrase despite the fact that it tends to be something people type sub consciously whether they are town or scum.
If that's a "lame tactic" than scumhunting is nothing but lame tactics. You overqualified a post in a scummy way and Kank called you out on it; that's all there is to it. Also, why did you say you didn't have a retort and then retort immediately afterward?
Sure, we'll go with that. Again, its not something I do to try and get suspicion off of me, its just a phrase. Also, I didn't see what I said there as a retort, so much as why I don't see why what I said was as scummy as some folk tend to think it is.
iPot doesn't actually present a read on Rhand here.
This is just false. I don't see how "I haven't seen anything to make me think he is scum" is not a read?
iPot doesn't point out a single scummy thing that Tetris had done. So why the scummy read?
Ok, less a scummy read and more a "dick" read then?
Okay, this post is why I think "he's dead" from two posts back is a scumslip: iPot is now saying that the worst-case scenario is that we lynch Wessel and he doesn't die. 1) He must've known that the worst-case scenario involved town-Wessel dying based on having said "he's dead," and 2) he had no good reason for saying "he's dead" in that other post because he knew that, potentially, Wessel wouldn't die (as happened).
One would think that this post actually clarified what I meant to say in the original post where I said "he's dead." You're right, I had NO good reason to say it, and again, I'm not even sure WHY I said it.
That's an overstatement; iPot did not have his vote on PSR for most of the Day. Both time-wise and post-wise iPot was voting PSR for less than 50% of D1 -- and while iPot was on PSR's wagon while it was at L-1, iPot went out of his way to make sure that his own vote didn't put her there ("Well, since I wont be putting him at L-1, I'm fine with vote: PSR"). Again, iPot is not only being overcautious but inconsistent -- which defeats the purpose of overcaution.
What I should have said there is "most of the end of the day." I was accused of fence sitting, when at the same time I had a vote on a person for most of the time that it was important. I didn't want to put her at L1 because, again, I thought she was scum and didn't want her to self hammer when we could have more discussion.
I think you've used up your allocation of "my main meta is different than MTGS" excuses. You can't present something as absolute truth without actually providing the evidence to show that -- this is a very weak fallback.
[url=http://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=102]My entire post history at Efedknights.com[/url]
[url=http://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?board=108.0]The Mafia Boards at efedknights.com[/url]
[url=www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?topic=16123.0]The Fallout Thread of the Arkham City Mafia game, where I took MVP[/url]
[urlhttp://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?topic=15972.0]The Arkham City Game Thread[/url]
I was scum in the Arkham City Game.
[url=http://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?topic=16438.0]The Emotional Spectrum Mafia Game Thread[/url]
I was town, but culted, in this game. Its still ongoing, and I was lynched Day 2.
There is the proof of my normal activity in mafia. Again, if you read any of the games there, you will see how different the meta there is in comparison to here. Hell, in Walking Dead Mafia, which I was a co mod for, one of the cult players convinced everyone in the town to vote no lynch for the rest of the game so as to be able to cult as many of them as possible, so they could beat the Zombies(who were LIKE a cult, but made up of dead players. They had a QT they could talk on, and for every 3 of them they had 1 vote they could use in the thread. All players in the game had a 30% chance to re-kill a zombie player)
Another (probably null) question: why didn't you ever ask Iso about safe claims on MTGS?
I didn't think to ask him since I had already asked it in the thread. What Iso and I had talked about and what was going on in the game were two completely different subjects, we've not spoken about the game at all except for me telling him my role because I was unsure if mentors got that information or not.
The post was arbitrary yet summed up the entirety of iPot's posts lately: ridiculous and pointless. If iPot is town, he's not doing a very good job of proving it.
I'm not trying to prove I'm town. I'm questioning and trying to find things that don't look right to me and see if it sets off any red flags.
Someone asked me what my reads were at the moment, and as it stands I don't really know what to think. I'm not that great at "reading" other players, I'm just trying to do the best I can. Hell, both of the reads I did have this game were wrong, so I'm wary of making any more judgements at the moment. For the people that have suspicions on me, its understandable. As I've stated, I'm still trying to acclimate myself to this meta, and part of that for me is learning how each player plays. Since this is my first time to actually play with most of you, I'm having something of a hard time.
What? I seriously don't get you. How's that scum telling at all? Or just telling. Oh no, I couldn't give you a third town other than a dead player how scummy of me! NO I don't have a town lean on Wessel because we all know for certain that he's town. Why would you want me to offer useless and redundant information? Would you prefer me to lie and say that I have a third certain town lean? Or shut my mouth and not mention my belief that JD's NK mean anything? Please tell me exactly what did I do that's scummy and how this absurd attempt of censoring my opinions is not.
How is listing a known living town redundant information, but listing a known dead town not?
3rd town lean: That would have been JD. I disagree with Kank that he was picked for killing for being irrelevant. I actually think that he was getting onto something lately and was silenced but Kank's apparent ability to know how scum thinks has been noted After I'm done with TMCT's re-read I'll do a JD re-read.
Singling out a couple posts and making it look like it represents the entirety of my activity is cool though. I guess.
That's awfully defensive. Why would you say my posts were made to look like they represented the entirety of your activity, when I was clearly talking about your activity in the context of KK being at L-1?
What games have you played, btw? JD did make a comment on your behavior being similar in Deitriptychos.
If you remember waaaay back in day one, PSR makes a post that has links to Basic 21 and Deitriptychos. I was also in American Pie Mafia, but I have almost no memories of Basic 21 and American Pie, and didn't even remember being in said games until I was looking through my post history.
All input is appreciated; if my logic is flawed, I would like to know how.
Your logic is flawed because those things can't be taken as absolutes. Let's use iPot is an example: you exclude iPot because he was neither on KK's wagon when it was at L-1 nor was one of KK's defenders. Which is true, but because he was being noncommittal, making posts like this:
I had actually wanted to vote PSR a long while back, but was unaware of how many votes were on him at the time. And then by the time I WAS aware of his vote count, I think he was close to lynching. Since then votes have been coming off of him, and I just haven't bothered to make a vote since I don't see the point in doing so yet. We have plenty of time left in the phase for discussion, which from what I've experienced is never a bad thing.
TLDR: I'll vote him, just in my own time basically.
I see good points on both of them. I have a stronger read on PSR, but that is admittedly biased since I haven't liked much of what he's done this phase, a good portion of it being attacking me for what I feel, and others have stated, is no reason. My problem is that I don't really know what his goal was. I don't know if he thought I was going to buckle and maybe slip and say something scummy, or what. The attack itself was scummy as hell, but I can't see what the scum motivation behind it so early in the game was. His actions since then have not helped him in my mind either but, again, bias. His deflection of arguments via "ad hom" when at least a couple people have said there was none there left a sour taste in my mouth.
As far as KK, knowing now that safe-claims are sometimes a thing here, I don't like his initial coming out and full claiming. Thalia is one of those roles that in this game I could see being a safe claim because she is so prolific both as a card and a character in the lore for Innistrad and people would expect her to be in the game. His repeated use of "I'm an honest person, you can totally trust me" type argument doesn't sit well with me either.
In short, I would be fine with either of the two of them being lynched. Your vote put him(PSR) at L-2, and from my experience last game I think that means he's supposed to full claim now? I'll hold off my vote for now on those grounds.
At the time of the first post, KK had 6 votes and PSR had 4. The only other player without their vote being used was MirrorEntity, who had yet to be replaced. Very noncommittal for no good reason, because PSR wasn't even in claim range.
I don't like to throw my vote around willy nilly. I don't see why I HAD to vote for PSR at that point. Yes, I thought he was scummy, but on day one I am loathe to vote anyone on gut instincts. My track record, especially here, is not near positive on day 1 reads. Again, ask IB, JD or KCC.
In the second post (this is more relevant to your point), iPot plops down on a rather large fence -- that's not defending KK, but it's not any better. It's a way to stay off his wagon without defending him.
In short, your logic is well-thought-out but doesn't trump behavior.
I don't know what my "fence" was. I was comfortable with lynching either of them, but didn't want to be the one to put either of them in hammer range, especially since PSR hadn't claimed at that point. As soon as it was pointed out after someone unvoted PSR that he was no longer in claim range, I voted her to put her right back in claim range, because from my experience in my last game here that's kinda the protocol.
Singling out a couple posts and making it look like it represents the entirety of my activity is cool though. I guess.
I've had him on my bad feelings list for a bit now. Him not knowing that he flip flopped on the KK situation doesn't make me feel any better about him. Still unsure of Kank, but this is all gut I'm going with.
I wasn't really intending on it being a "newb" card, more its rather disheartening to come from a place where I am one of the better players to a place where the tactics that get me results elsewhere are fairly bad here. I'm better at drawing attention to myself and letting other people analyze the goings on than actually analyzing them myself.
As far as my reads, Kank and IB are the only people that aren't really sitting right with me. I don't know any posts specifically that are making me feel this way, its kind of an overall thing.
I understand that most people get better by jumping in and throwing out questions and whatnot, but I'm not really good at that. I pick and choose things that give me a negative vibe and I ask about those specifically. Most of the time it ends up helping other players more than it does myself, but a contribution is a contribution. 100+ hours without anything is hardly a contribution, but since, as you put it, I'm on the chopping block, I've been more focused on trying to save my own neck than looking at what other folks are doing, since I'm pretty terribad at that to begin with.
Because it would have been a little bit awkward to say "Hey I don't wanna hammer because I'm afraid he's gonna be a bomb" when there was nothing going on anywhere in regards to this game that factored into that. I mentioned it off handedly that I don't like hammers because of bombs. The line you quoted and then oranged also had an implied "because of bombs" at the end of the sentence.
And again you aren't reading what I am saying. Someone said that PSR didn't have to claim because she was no longer in claim range, and it looked to me that he was saying that in order to give her an excuse for why she wasn't claiming. As I understand it, day talk is common for mafia here but I do not know if its mandatory. It appeared to me that someone may have been trying to give their scum buddy an excuse, so I was removing the excuse.
Again, I did NOT actually expect her to claim, because I did not believe that the lack of a claim was because of not being in range any more. But I DID believe that a convenient excuse was being given to a player that I believed to be scum.
That's why I used the phrase "just about." I didn't say that EVERYONE thought it with 100% assuredness, but the vast majority of the people in the game did believe it.
Wasn't meant to be a defense. Was meant to be an explanation. Just because you are attacking me doesn't mean I have to be defensive. The fact of the matter is that I don't know why those two words were there. The only thing I can think is that I was in a rush for whatever reason and that I thought I was making a different point there than I actually was. There are also times where I will be typing things, think about something and go back and either expand on the point I was making or change how I order my thoughts. That may be what happened there, but I don't know, as I don't remember what was going on in my real life when I made the post.
Is a person not defined by their actions?
Fair enough.
Sorry, I thought I had. Anywho, I'm basically just sitting back trying to watch the goings on. My biggest problem is that all my reads are gut type reads, and nothing anywhere close to concrete.
The Arkham City Game Thread
Made a mistake on one of my links.
@2: My plan today is to do what I've been doing. Looking for things that stick out to me more than others and asking questions.
@1: I don't wanna try and deal with all the quotes in the post, so I'm going to just do quotes of your questions specifically.
Are you saying that I didn't vote PSR when I "should" have? Because, as I also stated, I would vote him in my own time. I didn't feel like voting him at that particular moment, so I didn't. Yes, not knowing the actual number of votes on him at the time was a part of why I didn't do it, but it was far from the entirety of it.
Why not both? Also, as both you and myself had pointed out, the bomb fear is irrational/bizarre. There was no logical reason why I would think any particular player is a bomb, I just hate to hammer. On top of which, I had a stronger read on PSR than KK, so as opposed to worrying "did I hit the bomb, did I hit the bomb" for x hours, I placed a vote on the player I had a stronger feeling about.
You're also neglecting to mention that I was also trying to keep PSR in claim range. PSR said she wasn't going to claim, and several folks asked her to do so. Someone(Tetris I think)pointed out that she was no longer in claim range since someone had unvoted, which to me implied that he was saying she didn't have to/wasn't claiming because she wasn't in claim range. I put her back there, under the personal theory that she was scum and didn't want to use what I thought at the time would have been another safe claim(since I believed that KK was using a safe claim at the time as well). I had still assumed she wouldn't claim, but I didn't want an excuse to be handed to her when it could be prevented.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say with your first part here. As stated before, I wasn't trying to get PSR to claim. I was trying to remove an excuse NOT to claim.
@Second Point: As far as I can tell, just about everyone was under the assumption that KK was scum, and more or less accepted it as fact. I was working under those assumptions.
I never actually got a prod PM, that time. I've received one since, but it was for day 2. As I told the mod when I was prodded, I tend to check the thread a couple times a day, make note of something then go about my day. I don't always realize how long it has been since I post, ask KCC I had to have gotten fifty damn prods in Deit mafia. I'm not silent as a tactic, I'm silent because I'm forgetful.
I actually don't know why I added the "he's dead" right there when I did. The only thing I can figure is I had my thoughts twisted as I was typing them. And as for the second point, again, I don't know what to tell you. Its just a phrase I use. The same as many people use the phrase "To tell the truth" or "Honestly, 'x'" and folks say that its a scummy phrase despite the fact that it tends to be something people type sub consciously whether they are town or scum.
Sure, we'll go with that. Again, its not something I do to try and get suspicion off of me, its just a phrase. Also, I didn't see what I said there as a retort, so much as why I don't see why what I said was as scummy as some folk tend to think it is.
This is just false. I don't see how "I haven't seen anything to make me think he is scum" is not a read?
Ok, less a scummy read and more a "dick" read then?
One would think that this post actually clarified what I meant to say in the original post where I said "he's dead." You're right, I had NO good reason to say it, and again, I'm not even sure WHY I said it.
What I should have said there is "most of the end of the day." I was accused of fence sitting, when at the same time I had a vote on a person for most of the time that it was important. I didn't want to put her at L1 because, again, I thought she was scum and didn't want her to self hammer when we could have more discussion.
[url=http://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=102]My entire post history at Efedknights.com[/url]
[url=http://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?board=108.0]The Mafia Boards at efedknights.com[/url]
[url=www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?topic=16123.0]The Fallout Thread of the Arkham City Mafia game, where I took MVP[/url]
[urlhttp://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?topic=15972.0]The Arkham City Game Thread[/url]
I was scum in the Arkham City Game.
[url=http://www.efedknights.com/boards/index.php?topic=16438.0]The Emotional Spectrum Mafia Game Thread[/url]
I was town, but culted, in this game. Its still ongoing, and I was lynched Day 2.
There is the proof of my normal activity in mafia. Again, if you read any of the games there, you will see how different the meta there is in comparison to here. Hell, in Walking Dead Mafia, which I was a co mod for, one of the cult players convinced everyone in the town to vote no lynch for the rest of the game so as to be able to cult as many of them as possible, so they could beat the Zombies(who were LIKE a cult, but made up of dead players. They had a QT they could talk on, and for every 3 of them they had 1 vote they could use in the thread. All players in the game had a 30% chance to re-kill a zombie player)
I didn't think to ask him since I had already asked it in the thread. What Iso and I had talked about and what was going on in the game were two completely different subjects, we've not spoken about the game at all except for me telling him my role because I was unsure if mentors got that information or not.
I'm not trying to prove I'm town. I'm questioning and trying to find things that don't look right to me and see if it sets off any red flags.
Someone asked me what my reads were at the moment, and as it stands I don't really know what to think. I'm not that great at "reading" other players, I'm just trying to do the best I can. Hell, both of the reads I did have this game were wrong, so I'm wary of making any more judgements at the moment. For the people that have suspicions on me, its understandable. As I've stated, I'm still trying to acclimate myself to this meta, and part of that for me is learning how each player plays. Since this is my first time to actually play with most of you, I'm having something of a hard time.
How is listing a known living town redundant information, but listing a known dead town not?
JD is dead. We know he was town...
I will await your case then.
(For the record, LOVE these posts.[/sarcasm])
If you remember waaaay back in day one, PSR makes a post that has links to Basic 21 and Deitriptychos. I was also in American Pie Mafia, but I have almost no memories of Basic 21 and American Pie, and didn't even remember being in said games until I was looking through my post history.
I don't like to throw my vote around willy nilly. I don't see why I HAD to vote for PSR at that point. Yes, I thought he was scummy, but on day one I am loathe to vote anyone on gut instincts. My track record, especially here, is not near positive on day 1 reads. Again, ask IB, JD or KCC.
I don't know what my "fence" was. I was comfortable with lynching either of them, but didn't want to be the one to put either of them in hammer range, especially since PSR hadn't claimed at that point. As soon as it was pointed out after someone unvoted PSR that he was no longer in claim range, I voted her to put her right back in claim range, because from my experience in my last game here that's kinda the protocol.
Singling out a couple posts and making it look like it represents the entirety of my activity is cool though. I guess.