Micro 918: Doggos Among Us [TOWN WIN]!

[theslimer3]

Votecount 1.1

dsjstr

- (0)

Hectic

- Doctor Drew (L-3)

Doctor Drew

- (0)

NorwieganboyEE

- Hectic, Espeonage (L-2)

AaronFrost

- (0)

Espeonage

- (0)

Clidd

- (0)

Not Voting: dsjstr, NorwieganboyEE, AaronFrost, Clidd - (4)

With 7 Players alive it takes 4 to lynch.
Deadline is (expired on 2020-02-08 13:00:00)

[clidd]

To my understanding for D1 if a wolf hammers then they die even if they are hammering a wolf, I meant that if someone hammers D1 and they don't die they have to be town. Am I understanding the rule correctly?

" Reminder for day 1, if a Townsmember is lynched and the last vote on them were of the Werewolf Faction (Traitor or Werewolf Goon), then they will commit suicide as well. Day 2 follows all conventions of the game. "

[AaronFrost]

To my understanding for D1 if a wolf hammers then they die even if they are hammering a wolf, I meant that if someone hammers D1 and they don't die they have to be town. Am I understanding the rule correctly?

" Reminder for day 1, if a Townsmember is lynched and the last vote on them were of the Werewolf Faction (Traitor or Werewolf Goon), then they will commit suicide as well. Day 2 follows all conventions of the game. "

My interpretation was that if anyone is hammered by a wolf then the wolf who hammered dies along with the player hammered, so if one of the traitors hammer the other traitor then both of them die. I think.

@Mod - is this correct?

[theslimer3]

To my understanding for D1 if a wolf hammers then they die even if they are hammering a wolf, I meant that if someone hammers D1 and they don't die they have to be town. Am I understanding the rule correctly?

" Reminder for day 1, if a Townsmember is lynched and the last vote on them were of the Werewolf Faction (Traitor or Werewolf Goon), then they will commit suicide as well. Day 2 follows all conventions of the game. "

My interpretation was that if anyone is hammered by a wolf then the wolf who hammered dies along with the player hammered, so if one of the traitors hammer the other traitor then both of them die. I think.

@Mod - is this correct?

If a wolf were to hammer another wolf day 1, then they wouldn’t die. It’s only for an innocent getting lynched by a wolf that would result in them dying along side them. Only for day one of course.

[AaronFrost]

Gotcha, thanks. Mechanically that means no one can be cleared.

Yeah town should absolutely never hammer here. Scum will probably never hammer their partners either since that would put them at a disadvantage numbers wise, but I think scum would be perfectly willing to sacrifice someone to get to D2.

[Espeonage]

Problem is we have brought attention to it so now we are all gonna be chilling until end of day where we are forced in to action.

[NorwegianboyEE]

You’re making it sound like you think i play with a motive in mind when i roll scum. As opposed to just coasting. Come on now. I read on the rules that if scum hammers on day 1 they die. So i started joking about it. That’s the problem with everyone who scumreads me, they think i have some kind of master galaxy mind motive with my play. When really i’m just being me.

I'm not saying you did it with a plan in mind. I just think the joke itself is more likely to come from scum because of the subconscious mindsets I explained earlier.

That’s a laughable statement.

[NorwegianboyEE]

I’m not sure you’re engaging me in good faith Hectic. It seems like you’re blowing this way out of proportion.
Is this your scum!play at last?

[NorwegianboyEE]

I’ve got a mild townread on Clidd for the deep meta dig on me. I know it’s entirely possible for scum to do the same, but it shows a level of commitment scum rarely has.

[clidd]

You’re making it sound like you think i play with a motive in mind when i roll scum. As opposed to just coasting. Come on now. I read on the rules that if scum hammers on day 1 they die. So i started joking about it. That’s the problem with everyone who scumreads me, they think i have some kind of master galaxy mind motive with my play. When really i’m just being me.

Not every action has a meticulously premeditated intention, but that doesn't mean it can't nurture a biased motivation, even if small. I believe that making jokes within a game that uses only the typed communication channel as the main source for the suggestive diagnosis of alignments is unusual, especially if you are expecting a flexible read from others. Basically, this suggests that we should, as a rule, correctly predict the comic content of a comment and differentiate it separately, even if the same content has already been used in other matches, by scum players.

@NorwegianboyEE

''

When really i’m just being me

''

- Based on what information can i confirm this ?

''

I'M WILLING TO HAMMER! DO YOU HEAR THAT? I AM WILLING TO HAMMER

''

- In our place, how would you rate this sporadic attitude, considering that it came from a player you don't know ?

[NorwegianboyEE]

Based on what information can i confirm this ?

You can't really confirm it in any other way than looking at my playstyle in general.

In our place, how would you rate this sporadic attitude, considering that it came from a player you don't know ?

I don't know. I can't put myself out of the seat of bias where i know i'm town and therefore i would rate my own behaviour as indicative of a town player.

[NorwegianboyEE]

Not every action has a meticulously premeditated intention, but that doesn't mean it can't nurture a biased motivation, even if small. I believe that making jokes within a game that uses only the typed communication channel as the main source for the suggestive diagnosis of alignments is unusual, especially if you are expecting a flexible read from others. Basically, this suggests that we should, as a rule, correctly predict the comic content of a comment and differentiate it separately, even if the same content has already been used in other matches, by scum players.

I gotta say, that's a real mouthful. And i'm starting to feel like my play has rubbed people the wrong way here. So i'll take the game more seriously from now on, although it will be annoying seeing people bring up my shitposting behaviour as something scum indicative, because i am very sensitive when it comes to foreseeing such things.

[AaronFrost]

Problem is we have brought attention to it so now we are all gonna be chilling until end of day where we are forced in to action.

What do you think of Hectic's idea of leashing the hammers?

[dsjstr]

Problem is we have brought attention to it so now we are all gonna be chilling until end of day where we are forced in to action.

What do you think of Hectic's idea of leashing the hammers?

What does leaching the hammers mean?

[dsjstr]

*leashing

[Hectic]

Means we all agree on who performs the hammer.

[Hectic]

I’m not sure you’re engaging me in good faith Hectic. It seems like you’re blowing this way out of proportion.
Is this your scum!play at last?

What gives you that impression?

[Hectic]

Hectic are you thinking that Norwee is one of the traitor wolves who's signaling to the other traitor? Because that was my first thought when I read his opening post.

Maybe

, but probably not, there's more subtle ways to indicate over posting that. I don't think there's hidden meaning in it.

[AaronFrost]

Hectic are you thinking that Norwee is one of the traitor wolves who's signaling to the other traitor? Because that was my first thought when I read his opening post.

Maybe

, but probably not, there's more subtle ways to indicate over posting that. I don't think there's hidden meaning in it.

I mean from my experience with him Norwee isn't exactly known for being subtle

Thing is if a scum were to hammer for the sacrifice play, I'm not sure if they'd announce their willingness to do it, I think they'd just do it once a wagon got to L-1. I do agree that town should be less willing to hammer because of that though and I also like the idea of leashing the hammers. I think that should be something everyone has to agree on though because scum can easily dictate who they want to hammer.

[Hectic]

Definitely, but I'm glad the rule exists where scum don't die if they hammer other scum. Because otherwise scum should always self-hammer when it's obvious we're lynching them, and it turns into a war of voting and trying to hammer them tactically when they're offline, and that's icky.



Not sure what you mean by scum would hammer for the sacrifice play. Do you mean scum would hammer town? I don't think they ever do that. They might hammer other scum for towncred though.

[Hectic]

The fun thing is that people can't refuse to hammer if we decide on someone, since we just lynch that person instead and have the hammerer be the person we originally planned to lynch.

[NorwegianboyEE]

Do you mean scum would hammer town? I don't think they ever do that.

Boy. Have you ever even played a mafia game?
Scum don't hammer town? HAH.
HAHA.

[NorwegianboyEE]

What gives you that impression?

The fact that you latched on to one thing i did and then fawned over how it's TOTALLY scum indicative and pretty much kept that read (and your vote) for the rest of the day so far.
Where are the posts where you have been actively trying to figure out the meaning behind my post? After reading my first post you pretty much went: "YEP, you're scum now.", then called it a day and went to go grab lunch.
Where's the solving? Where's the questioning? Where's the logic?

[Hectic]

Are you burden of proficiency-ing me right now?



I'm touched, but unfortunately aren't the solving machine you think I am. If something else grabs my attention, I'll ask/point it out.

[Hectic]

Do you mean scum would hammer town? I don't think they ever do that.

Boy. Have you ever even played a mafia game?
Scum don't hammer town? HAH.
HAHA.

Don't you think scum delay hammering town since they're guaranteed die there?

Oh wait, I just realised we lynch the person refusing to hammer instead in that scenario, and the townie gets to live, so it's actually worse for scum if they refuse to hammer.