Newbie 2016: Snapdragons (Game Over)

[ClarkBar]

Not sure if this was discussed yet but if you have a tpr you need to claim the exact role. That's why we have a matrix setup. So we can confirm/deny it was a cc

Also, nobody asked for a claim. Is a claim supposed to be automatic at E-1with nobody stating intent to hammer? And why is it more beneficial for town to have the specific role claims than it is for scum? Wouldn't knowing what setup we likely are in help scum more than town? Is counter-claiming D1 considered good play?

[72offsuit]

Battle Mage replaces Blopp.

See this is an issue now, I don't like playing with Battle Mage, I feel like he's too important as asset for town as scum and town, which is just a huge pain.

is that a compliment? <3

I don't want to scare you, but I'm on a rich vein of scumhunting form at the moment!

No pressure, but if you don't eliminate scum today, I'm eliminating you tomorrow

[72offsuit]

I've previous played 2 games with BM

[72offsuit]

Hi BM!

Again I want to say how sorry I am for letting myself almost get replaced. I was whiny in the beginning of the game about the slow place, and so of course it would be me to then contribute to the problem. I work on weekends, and with the holiday and some other life stuff I got completely wrecked. I do virtually nothing during the week, so my posting will be a lot more consistent.

I'll say this regarding much of what I've read in the last few pages: I am not going to go read a past game to see how players behaved in it. I have said (and still believe) that behavior/activity levels being different in one game to another is something I think is noteworthy and could be AI. So I'm not dismissing that as a reasonable motive to vote for somebody. But, unless something very clear is brought to my attention then I don't think I'm going to hop on a wagon because of meta.

I don't have a problem with LL's reasoning for voting Blopp even if it is kind of a reach. I can follow the reasoning and don't necessarily disagree. I do fear quick hammers, but that fear shouldn't stop a player from having some L-1 pressure. I also buy LL's claim for now. I feel uncomfortable giving town-reads, but LL is a town lean for me.

My vote on Homura stands and I guess we'll see if there is a replacement or if Homura returns. Obviously I can't point any fingers regarding activity levels, but it's the lack of trying to engage other players in a meaningful way that bothers me. Half-heartedly sharing opinions and having only one vote that was in the RVS and not even a random reason given bugs me.

I'll keep looking at stuff and see if I can't get some questions goings. I'm also happy to answer any questions, in fact that might help me in figuring out my own feelings on some things.

Given what you've said here, then what are your thoughts on Quick's push on me?

[72offsuit]

Spoiler:

Raya, your positioning WRT Blopp is odd. I was okay with the sheep vote in 39 because you seemed genuinely interested in the case. Somewhere down the line the same case you found worth pushing you have decided is worth scumreading for having been pushed. 45 is odd in retrospect. You say that you won't move your vote from Blopp to Clark because you want to hear from Blopp, but you also concede that we're not going to get info out of Blopp's responses anymore because Clark addressed my case for her (47). If Blopp has had an out provided to her already, what's the point of keeping your vote on her?

Nice attempt at discrediting me. Not gonna work. I was interested in the case but when Blopp went MIA and no replacement was coming in the near future AND he got to L-1 I saw that the scumminess actually came from within the wagon. I did join the wagon to see what came of it just like I said and what came of it was I found out you're scum. As for Blopp having an out, taking my vote off was going to give much less info and I talked to Clark without using my vote and got responses that lead me to believe he is town. I did not abandon what I said about Clark and also did not abandon the wagon on Blopp at the same time. The point of keeping my vote is because the vote wasn't just to get a response to what you said. It was also for the reaction to a wagon.

67 is also really weird. Why is there a scumlean on me for not removing my vote on someone that I scumread and not a scumlean on the player who replaced in, put Blopp at E-1, and invited a quickhammer? It feels like Raya's setting up to push me later for this and doesn't feel at all like a genuine read. In 106 you call a 2-line post that I prefaced with "Perhaps it is a coincidence" in 63, "Bad and reachy." Why did you consider my speculation a case at the time? What sort of content did you expect 63 posts into the game that would push the game forward while not being, to some degree, "bad and reachy"? Further, in 67, you scumleaned me for not unvoting but said nothing about 63. Further, you keep calling my push reachy. What about being reachy is scummy? Do you believe that my goal D1 as town is to find an elimination target that has an >Random chance of being scum? Even if my stance on Blopp is reachy, do you not believe that it represents scum equity in the Blopp slot that is >Random? You yourself have continually scumread Blopp

the entire game

while simultaneously pushing me for scumreading her. Why do

you

scumread her? Your initial vote on the slot was a sheep vote, which you yourself admitted was only cast to "see where this goes." Blopp never responded, therefore it never went anywhere, yet you progressed into constantly calling her slot scummy while illustrating none of that progression publicly. And despite you insisting that I'm pushing a mislynch, you hold that you think her slot is scummy.

The difference is Jam was open and clearly stated it was L-1 and their intents etc. You came back and were quiet about it. I really don't see scum coming in, putting someone at L-1 and then inviting the mislynch. Maybe case wasn't the best word choice but I do consider anything with multiple reasons to scumread someone a case. You're nitpicking on wording. There's early game bad and reachy and then there's just bad and reachy and yours was bad. I don't see a town thought process, I see scum trying to make something up out of nothing. I don't see the problem with not saying anything about 63 then.. Reachy is scummy because scum are trying to make scumreads when they are informed and know they're scumreading town. That means they need to make up reasons for why that person is scum which can lead to reachiness. Yes I believe that's your goal as town. I no longer scumread Blopp. Thought I made that clear, sorry. Reactions from Blopp didn't go anywhere no, but the wagon is telling as well.

Why did you ask 72o if his thoughts of Blopp had changed at all in 148 when Blopp has been MIA since his initial vote? Why would his thoughts have changed, and why did you have a special interest in hearing his thoughts on the Blopp slot rather than others, like the slot you have been pushing: me? Your stance on Blopp honestly feels like you tried to distance early and are not awkwardly trying to defend her (anyone else hear the distant revving of a chainsaw) while maintaining your early, unexplained scumread on her to appear consistent. In 181 you have decided that the

only

reason Blopp is scummy is lack of content. This seems to be a deterioration in your read on her since your earlier scumlean on her 67. What reason did you have to scumlean Blopp in 67, and why did it disappear by 181. She hadn't been gone for long enough for lack of content to be a reason to scumlean her, and it was early enough in the game that other slots had just as little or less content. So please, educate me on your thought process here.

I forgot Blopp hadn't posted since then. His post was early game and I never referred back to see when Blopp's last post was. How is that even scummy...

But I'm not maintaining my scumread on her. I seriously think she's a mislynch and I said that you're pushing a mislynch several times which clearly means I'm townreading her. Keep in mind when reading my 181 that it was written during a reread. And in my reread I decided that you're likely scum and Blopp is town.

Let's move on to 182. You say that my case is scummy because I'm pushing a spot that isn't around to respond, but my case is premised on

why

that slot isn't around to respond. Do you believe it is possible that I believe in my reads? If so, why is my push scummy? Do you stop pushing a scumread because they leave the game or choose not to respond? Later on your argument against me more clearly becomes that you believe I'm pushing a miskick (218). How do you differentiate town pushing town from scum pushing town? What about my push on Blopp indicates that it is a push I would make as scum but wouldn't make as town? If you are still holding Blopp as scummy, how can my push so obviously be a miskick? I can only clearly be pushing a miskick if I'm pushing an obvtown slot, no? Please explain to me how you know I'm pushing a miskick on a slot you scumread.

Your push is scummy because you seem to want it lynched regardless of whether there is or is not a replacement. And your whole case is on the premise that they're not here but you're not considering the MANY other possible reasons for that and you're ignoring me when I ask you about them. I've already explained many times why your push seems like scum pushing town and not town pushing town. (bad case, reachy, not caring about the replacement, stated you'd want to lynch if the replacement claims VT, not considering other possibilities for being MIA, pushing someone who currently doesn't have a voice, etc)

On to 228. The first thing you do is appeal to authority with Homura. That's laughable because I have more experience than Homura, so if you are using experience as a reason to accept or deny my push, you should be taking my side. Moreover, it's not that I haven't considered other possibilities for Blopp flaking. It's that among all possible explanations, I believe that the explanations leading to scum!Blopp hold more equity than those leading to town!Blopp. I think the deletion of her avatar answers back

many, if not all

of the NAI explanations for her flaking, and when left with only scumAI and townAI explanations for a newbie dipping after getting immediate pressure from multiple players in response to a post they made, my experience leads me to believe that there are far more prevalent scumAI explanations than townAI. Further, you say in the same post that you don't find Blopp's behavior particularly AI. Again, explain to me your earlier scumread on Blopp if her behavior suddenly isn't AI.

You don't have experience in Newbie games on this site though. Your experience can not be compared in this context. Explain to me why Blopp couldn't have just came in, deleted her avatar with intent to get a new one, then just never did and siteflaked. Tell me why Blopp couldn't have just decided they want nothing to do with this site regardless of alignment and deleted their avatar and siteflaked. This is why I don't find it AI. You're telling me this player should be lynched regardless of what the replacement says (if they claim VT) when all you have is a flimsy case with several counter-arguments.

A particular line I feel warrants a response,

So basically what you're saying in that second line is unless Blopp slot is a power role you won't consider anything the replacement has to say and won't reconsider your read.

Yeah. That's pretty much what I'm saying. The goal D1 is always to find a slot that has a >Rand chance of being scum and voting there. The goal D1 is not to solve the game. If a slot with high scum equity claims VT, you eliminate them. You don't go searching through slots with lesser scum equity and get more claims, either outing a TPR or further limiting the pool of TPR for scum to choose from for their NK. It's called best practical play.

I do agree that once a player claims VT it's probably for the best to lynch them unless they suddenly become very obvtown, however your wording is making me think that even before the replacement claims anything you won't care about what they have to say. They'll only claim once they get to L-1 with intent, so what if that never happens?

I'm not 100% convinced Blopp is town. I just don't trust your case on her and I don't believe it to be a good case with good intentions. The more I believe you're pushing for a mislynch the more I believe Blopp is town though. And yes Blopp flipping town does give info but why should I push for a flip on Blopp when I'm sure you're scum pushing for a mislynch on Blopp.

Either you think I'm scum pushing for a miskick or you don't. If you are so convinced that I'm scum pushing for a miskick, why would you say that you are not 100% convinced Blopp is town. Even if it is a true statement, what compelled you to throw it out there. It feels a lot like building a safety net for Blopp being kicked, either today, or tomorrow if I were to be kicked today. At some point that slot

will

flip, and when it does you need to have already saved face, and this is part of you trying to do that.

Because I don't 100% know you're scum. I just really really think you are. If you're not then I wouldn't be 100% convinced Blopp is town. My basis for Blopp being town is you being scum and I don't do D1 associations during D1.

Also, anyone who doesn't read this as scum is a joke of a player,

If you're so happy with flipping town and you're actually town why not let us flip you. We'll get more info from that than Blopp's flip.

Just saying that it's inconsistent to be willing to flip town for info but be unwilling to flip yourself when that would give us even more info.

See bolded part ^
The "I forgot" line. It's scummy because this sort of play doesn't come from a town mindset. From what I gather Raya's scumread on LL appears to primarily revolve around his vote on Blopa. Town in general is more balanced and open to re-evaluate their reads as town does NOT know alignments. I think !TownRaya here, would focus more on Blopa's posting (or lack of), to follow-up on the veracity of their reads.

Thus, I think the "forgetting" that Blopa hasn;t posted since, as Raya has said here in 354
AND
Raya's questioning myself on the progress of my read on Blopa in [post]148[/post] , speaks volumes.


Need more votes on the Raya elimination locomotion.
Choo choo choo
Hop on board the Raya express, no ticket required to ride this train!

[Raya36]

Not sure if this was discussed yet but if you have a tpr you need to claim the exact role. That's why we have a matrix setup. So we can confirm/deny it was a cc

Also, nobody asked for a claim. Is a claim supposed to be automatic at E-1with nobody stating intent to hammer? And why is it more beneficial for town to have the specific role claims than it is for scum? Wouldn't knowing what setup we likely are in help scum more than town? Is counter-claiming D1 considered good play?

Remind me tomorrow and I'll find and link the game at the post needed for this explanation. It was explained well there and executed well and lead to a town win. The basic idea is that the matrix is to town's advantage to determine if a PR is viable or not since scum will ALWAYS claim a PR to not get lynched. We can't just get a claim as "TPR" and blindly trust it.

Also I'll respond to anything that needs responding to in your post about me tomorrow as well

[72offsuit]

Hi BM!

Again I want to say how sorry I am for letting myself almost get replaced. I was whiny in the beginning of the game about the slow place, and so of course it would be me to then contribute to the problem. I work on weekends, and with the holiday and some other life stuff I got completely wrecked. I do virtually nothing during the week, so my posting will be a lot more consistent.

I'll say this regarding much of what I've read in the last few pages: I am not going to go read a past game to see how players behaved in it. I have said (and still believe) that behavior/activity levels being different in one game to another is something I think is noteworthy and could be AI. So I'm not dismissing that as a reasonable motive to vote for somebody. But, unless something very clear is brought to my attention then I don't think I'm going to hop on a wagon because of meta.

I don't have a problem with LL's reasoning for voting Blopp even if it is kind of a reach. I can follow the reasoning and don't necessarily disagree. I do fear quick hammers, but that fear shouldn't stop a player from having some L-1 pressure. I also buy LL's claim for now. I feel uncomfortable giving town-reads, but LL is a town lean for me.

My vote on Homura stands and I guess we'll see if there is a replacement or if Homura returns. Obviously I can't point any fingers regarding activity levels, but it's the lack of trying to engage other players in a meaningful way that bothers me. Half-heartedly sharing opinions and having only one vote that was in the RVS and not even a random reason given bugs me.

I'll keep looking at stuff and see if I can't get some questions goings. I'm also happy to answer any questions, in fact that might help me in figuring out my own feelings on some things.

So you believe LLs claim but he is only a town lean?

And I agree on your Homura point but it's not strong enough for it to be my leading case. Could you ISo Raya and let me know how you feel about them.

This is a for fun question and part of my experimental ways of playing.(I know we are out of rqs and wifom and not aftual scumhunting blah blah blah. Just let me be me.) If you were town who is your scum team at this point, and if you were mafia who would your partner be? Please answer both sides and just have fun with the answers. I don't have any day to back anything up but I have theories so this will help me improve as a player. Anyone else is free to answer this as well.

If I was scum, my partner would be TTJT, Clark or Quick.

[72offsuit]

By the way, does anybody think with good odds LL is a mason? If not then we can narrow down the game a bunch.

I gave my mason solve for LL already. If not with 72 I think it's a fools errand to try and speculate more than that.

He has already said he is not a mason with myself, so why are you bringing this up again?

[72offsuit]

If I'm not mistaking, that's 4 votes. I have a TPR. Let's move on.

Not sure if this was discussed yet but if you have a tpr you need to claim the exact role. That's why we have a matrix setup. So we can confirm/deny it was a cc

No....

Noone has claimed intent to hammer. Why would we get an exact role claim?

[72offsuit]

I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.

So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.

Ok but this same reaction can come from town too.. It's not scum indicative.. It's NAI

And thus why I didn't join the Blopp wagon. I was giving the benefit of the doubt but at the same time understanding why someone would push it. I felt I had bigger fish to fry over the Blopp and Luciano case and had said I wouldn't really weigh in and focus elsewhere until a replacement came in.

Similarly now that BM has replaced in I want to see were Luciano goes from there.

This is good and town thinking. Scum would likely choose a side I think even just lightly.

Another scummy post from Raya.

Why is BM's post "good and town thinking"?

Scum 101 tactic is to hedge bets, fence-sit and to simply wait and see where the chips fall, to see what vote is most advatageous for scumagenda, before making their play with more information available. Just like sitting on the button in poker - Last player to act has more information to make their move.

[Raya36]

If I'm not mistaking, that's 4 votes. I have a TPR. Let's move on.

Not sure if this was discussed yet but if you have a tpr you need to claim the exact role. That's why we have a matrix setup. So we can confirm/deny it was a cc

No....

Noone has claimed intent to hammer. Why would we get an exact role claim?

Because Lucky already claimed a PR

[Raya36]

This is the game I was referring to
https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=83266

This is where to start for the PR claim thing

You need to claim the exact role, Umlaut. If you just say "investigative PR", you can get away with living while scum, because town can't counterclaim you.

[72offsuit]

If I'm not mistaking, that's 4 votes. I have a TPR. Let's move on.

Not sure if this was discussed yet but if you have a tpr you need to claim the exact role. That's why we have a matrix setup. So we can confirm/deny it was a cc

No....

Noone has claimed intent to hammer. Why would we get an exact role claim?

Because Lucky already claimed a PR

So what's your point?

[72offsuit]

If I'm not mistaking, that's 4 votes. I have a TPR. Let's move on.

Not sure if this was discussed yet but if you have a tpr you need to claim the exact role. That's why we have a matrix setup. So we can confirm/deny it was a cc

No....

Noone has claimed intent to hammer. Why would we get an exact role claim?

Because Lucky already claimed a PR

So what's your point?

[Raya36]

This is the game I was referring to
https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=83266

This is where to start for the PR claim thing

You need to claim the exact role, Umlaut. If you just say "investigative PR", you can get away with living while scum, because town can't counterclaim you.

Hectic is town in this and umlaut is scum btw

[72offsuit]

I actually read that game because I was technically in it on the wining team in Newbie 2010

In that scenario, I agree, that the player in that spot has to claim an exact role.

The CRITICAL DIFFERENCE between the scenario here and in that game, was that Umlaut was at E-1, with INTENT TO HAMMER EXPRESSED.

[TheThirteenthJT]

I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.

So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.

Ok but this same reaction can come from town too.. It's not scum indicative.. It's NAI

And thus why I didn't join the Blopp wagon. I was giving the benefit of the doubt but at the same time understanding why someone would push it. I felt I had bigger fish to fry over the Blopp and Luciano case and had said I wouldn't really weigh in and focus elsewhere until a replacement came in.

Similarly now that BM has replaced in I want to see were Luciano goes from there.

This is good and town thinking. Scum would likely choose a side I think even just lightly.

Another scummy post from Raya.

Why is BM's post "good and town thinking"?

Scum 101 tactic is to hedge bets, fence-sit and to simply wait and see where the chips fall, to see what vote is most advatageous for scumagenda, before making their play with more information available. Just like sitting on the button in poker - Last player to act has more information to make their move.

I think you either confused the player this was directed at or I confused my read of it.

[72offsuit]

I went back to analyze the Blopp flake and it's so bizarre. I can see newbie players leaving for a bit and returning to see 4 votes on then as a bit overwhelming but I felt the pressure up to the point they removed their avatar was not that high. I've seen (and done so myself) people drilled early game as newbies which would cause enough frustration for a rage quit. This early wagon was rather tame. But at the same time why return at all to remove your avatar? Clearly no intention of returning and thus rage quit possibility over just not returning/forgetting about the site.

So here's the final scenario I have in my head. Blopp comes back because they remember they are in a mafia game, see 4 votes on them, says screw this, removes avatar and leaves forever.

Ok but this same reaction can come from town too.. It's not scum indicative.. It's NAI

And thus why I didn't join the Blopp wagon. I was giving the benefit of the doubt but at the same time understanding why someone would push it. I felt I had bigger fish to fry over the Blopp and Luciano case and had said I wouldn't really weigh in and focus elsewhere until a replacement came in.

Similarly now that BM has replaced in I want to see were Luciano goes from there.

This is good and town thinking. Scum would likely choose a side I think even just lightly.

Another scummy post from Raya.

Why is BM's post "good and town thinking"?

Scum 101 tactic is to hedge bets, fence-sit and to simply wait and see where the chips fall, to see what vote is most advatageous for scumagenda, before making their play with more information available. Just like sitting on the button in poker - Last player to act has more information to make their move.

I think you either confused the player this was directed at or I confused my read of it.

That's my confusion.

[72offsuit]

Idk y i thought BM posted that. The point still stands, I don;t see why that is town "good thinking"

[ClarkBar]

Another scummy post from Raya.

Why is BM's post "good and town thinking"?

Good question, and I'll admit I'm confused about the confusion...

Scum 101 tactic is to hedge bets, fence-sit and to simply wait and see where the chips fall, to see what vote is most advatageous for scumagenda, before making their play with more information available. Just like sitting on the button in poker - Last player to act has more information to make their move.

I can dig the "scum 101" thing. How do you square that with how Raya has been playing? She has been virtually solely focused on LL, and has given generous town-reads. That doesn't sound to me like a player who is fence-sitting or simply waiting for things to fall into place.

[JamSV]

With regards to [post=]354[/post] I don't think it solves suspicions of raya for people. In terms of tone and vibes it comes across indeed more towny than scummy, but content strikes me more scummy than towny. (just regarding that post)

What strikes me more as off. Why would LL claim a PR when he did? He'd just get killed of by scum N1. Unless the following occurs, he wants to be a martyr and take a hit for town N1 which is obviously false by the way he's playing. He's jail keeper, he hits a scum today and jails the other scum tonight. One of the scum is a rolecop, aka meaning we're in column 2, and there aren't 2 masons to counterclaim. Which one feels the most obvious/likely? The latter.

[72offsuit]

I don't see how PR speculation helps town at all.
Its just a matter of do you believe !TownPR-LL claims in that spot or not within the current gamestate. Nothing about the claim seemed fake to me.

[JamSV]

I don't see how PR speculation helps town at all.
Its just a matter of do you believe !TownPR-LL claims in that spot or not within the current gamestate. Nothing about the claim seemed fake to me.

This is going to sound really petty but I find it so annoying, when you make a brief post, with 2 points, where 1 is taken into account, but the other one is completely ignored so the person can try to make a point, and their point is whether the 2nd point exists or not. The answer to your question is literally in the same one you were referring to. Read.

[Raya36]

I actually read that game because I was technically in it on the wining team in Newbie 2010

In that scenario, I agree, that the player in that spot has to claim an exact role.

The CRITICAL DIFFERENCE between the scenario here and in that game, was that Umlaut was at E-1, with INTENT TO HAMMER EXPRESSED.

I agree that there's a difference but Lucky has already claimed so we can't just let them slide by because they claimed a PR when it can't be verified.

[Raya36]

I don't see how PR speculation helps town at all.
Its just a matter of do you believe !TownPR-LL claims in that spot or not within the current gamestate. Nothing about the claim seemed fake to me.

I don't believe the claim. A TPR wouldn't claim so quick. And Lucky says he has experience in newbie games. He wouldn't claim the second he was put at E-1 without any intent. Its like he was waiting for that