Newbie 2064 - (GG)

[JamesTheNames]

JV has already been discussed a lot, but here are some early posts that stand out.

227 228

JV's tone is interesting. They emphasize that they are making reads rather than talking about the people they are reading.

Then there's this post:

one last thing JV, your sig says you're a tactical lurker. what does it mean?

Sometimes I don't post and just read the thread for a small while in a tactical way. For example, if I feel like I am tunneling someone too hard I step back and just watch for a while to see what happens without my intervention etc. More reasons too but that's the way I feel is the best explanation.

I also do it as scum

so it's not anything to read me on

JV drops this subtle "I'm town" instead of just saying "I play this way as both town and scum."

You only noticed this now? Even if I'm suspicious about Jackson I don't quite get this.

[navigatorv]

Also I have small suspicion on HEM from the NK, and then instantly posting to back their own ass up since the top town didn't die.

Are you referring to him saying we should assume Mafia is hunting PRs? If that's the case, I can see the potential, but it definitely needs a bit more than that to get me on the wagon since that just seems to be a decent assumption to make since they're the biggest threat to scum and they don't have to worry about sussing out who's town like we do them.
Not to say the possibility isn't there, but it definitely doesn't say anything definitive imo

[JamesTheNames]

On the one hand, I'm glad we didn't lose any power roles, but on the other I feel bad that both my first and last suspects were town lol

This games me vibes. I don't feel great about the vibes given. Why does this post give me not-Town vibes?

[JamesTheNames]

EBWOP
Gives*. Autocorrect.

[JacksonVirgo]

Also I have small suspicion on HEM from the NK, and then instantly posting to back their own ass up since the top town didn't die.

Are you referring to him saying we should assume Mafia is hunting PRs? If that's the case, I can see the potential, but it definitely needs a bit more than that to get me on the wagon since that just seems to be a decent assumption to make since they're the biggest threat to scum and they don't have to worry about sussing out who's town like we do them.
Not to say the possibility isn't there, but it definitely doesn't say anything definitive imo

Yeah exactly why I said small suspicion. It's nothing to push on right now.

[JamesTheNames]

Also I have small suspicion on HEM from the NK, and then instantly posting to back their own ass up since the top town didn't die.

Are you referring to him saying we should assume Mafia is hunting PRs? If that's the case, I can see the potential, but it definitely needs a bit more than that to get me on the wagon since that just seems to be a decent assumption to make since they're the biggest threat to scum and

they don't have to worry about sussing out who's town like we do them.

Not to say the possibility isn't there, but it definitely doesn't say anything definitive imo

JV has already been discussed a lot, but here are some early posts that stand out.

227 228

JV's tone is interesting. They emphasize that they are making reads rather than talking about the people they are reading.

Then there's this post:

one last thing JV, your sig says you're a tactical lurker. what does it mean?

Sometimes I don't post and just read the thread for a small while in a tactical way. For example, if I feel like I am tunneling someone too hard I step back and just watch for a while to see what happens without my intervention etc. More reasons too but that's the way I feel is the best explanation.

I also do it as scum

so it's not anything to read me on

JV drops this subtle "I'm town" instead of just saying "I play this way as both town and scum."

I'm curious how Ninja feels about what is highlighted in blue.

[NinjaStore]

JV has already been discussed a lot, but here are some early posts that stand out.

227 228

JV's tone is interesting. They emphasize that they are making reads rather than talking about the people they are reading.

Then there's this post:

one last thing JV, your sig says you're a tactical lurker. what does it mean?

Sometimes I don't post and just read the thread for a small while in a tactical way. For example, if I feel like I am tunneling someone too hard I step back and just watch for a while to see what happens without my intervention etc. More reasons too but that's the way I feel is the best explanation.

I also do it as scum

so it's not anything to read me on

JV drops this subtle "I'm town" instead of just saying "I play this way as both town and scum."

You only noticed this now? Even if I'm suspicious about Jackson I don't quite get this.

Yeah. Funny as it might sound, I feel more clear-headed tonight than I was most of last week, and I was able to process a full re-read a lot better.

[navigatorv]

Also I have small suspicion on HEM from the NK, and then instantly posting to back their own ass up since the top town didn't die.

Are you referring to him saying we should assume Mafia is hunting PRs? If that's the case, I can see the potential, but it definitely needs a bit more than that to get me on the wagon since that just seems to be a decent assumption to make since they're the biggest threat to scum and

they don't have to worry about sussing out who's town like we do them.

Not to say the possibility isn't there, but it definitely doesn't say anything definitive imo

JV has already been discussed a lot, but here are some early posts that stand out.

227 228

JV's tone is interesting. They emphasize that they are making reads rather than talking about the people they are reading.

Then there's this post:

one last thing JV, your sig says you're a tactical lurker. what does it mean?

Sometimes I don't post and just read the thread for a small while in a tactical way. For example, if I feel like I am tunneling someone too hard I step back and just watch for a while to see what happens without my intervention etc. More reasons too but that's the way I feel is the best explanation.

I also do it as scum

so it's not anything to read me on

JV drops this subtle "I'm town" instead of just saying "I play this way as both town and scum."

I'm curious how Ninja feels about what is highlighted in blue.

What's funny is I actually was wondering if that bit would be too much, but I didn't want people to latch onto the idea that I'm speaking about the scum in a way that didn't distance myself from them and go off on that train of thought. Guess I went too far in the other direction :/

[NinjaStore]

You say I didnt say that I do it as both alignments when I clearly did.

The interesting part is how you phrased it.

Oh that's what you meant.

You expect me, if I were Town, to not actively think I am town and post accordingly? If you're saying I am hinting at being Town because I am scum, answer why I would not say that as Town.

I'm thinking back to how other players have phrased similar claims in other games offsite. It could be a red herring, but it stood out to me.

[NinjaStore]

Also I have small suspicion on HEM from the NK, and then instantly posting to back their own ass up since the top town didn't die.

Are you referring to him saying we should assume Mafia is hunting PRs? If that's the case, I can see the potential, but it definitely needs a bit more than that to get me on the wagon since that just seems to be a decent assumption to make since they're the biggest threat to scum and

they don't have to worry about sussing out who's town like we do them.

Not to say the possibility isn't there, but it definitely doesn't say anything definitive imo

JV has already been discussed a lot, but here are some early posts that stand out.

227 228

JV's tone is interesting. They emphasize that they are making reads rather than talking about the people they are reading.

Then there's this post:

one last thing JV, your sig says you're a tactical lurker. what does it mean?

Sometimes I don't post and just read the thread for a small while in a tactical way. For example, if I feel like I am tunneling someone too hard I step back and just watch for a while to see what happens without my intervention etc. More reasons too but that's the way I feel is the best explanation.

I also do it as scum

so it's not anything to read me on

JV drops this subtle "I'm town" instead of just saying "I play this way as both town and scum."

I'm curious how Ninja feels about what is highlighted in blue.

What about it? Are you asking me to compare the two?

[NinjaStore]

An early day will not happen if Town does not vote until they catch up. I will say this in a seperate post after this to make it more clear. We will force policy eliminate anybody that hammers early, this is without fail we will do this. Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum. It's early days so we can easily afford a 1 for 1 (a town death for a scum death). I hope this helps explain why an early hammer is unlikely to happen, and without votes nobody will be given the pressure needed for us to solve with.

A question for everyone:

Is it actually normal on MS to have a policy like this?

Regardless, this post doesn't add up.

JacksonVirgo: If such a policy is in place, why do you think an early hammer would necessarily come from scum? I don't see why a scum would willingly suicide that early in the game.

[JacksonVirgo]

An early day will not happen if Town does not vote until they catch up. I will say this in a seperate post after this to make it more clear. We will force policy eliminate anybody that hammers early, this is without fail we will do this. Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum. It's early days so we can easily afford a 1 for 1 (a town death for a scum death). I hope this helps explain why an early hammer is unlikely to happen, and without votes nobody will be given the pressure needed for us to solve with.

A question for everyone:

Is it actually normal on MS to have a policy like this?

Regardless, this post doesn't add up.

JacksonVirgo: If such a policy is in place, why do you think an early hammer would necessarily come from scum? I don't see why a scum would willingly suicide that early in the game.

Yes it's policy. Anti-town play should be punished. And that post was specifically to avoid any scum hammers itself, not particularly to scum-read

[NinjaStore]

An early day will not happen if Town does not vote until they catch up. I will say this in a seperate post after this to make it more clear. We will force policy eliminate anybody that hammers early, this is without fail we will do this. Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum. It's early days so we can easily afford a 1 for 1 (a town death for a scum death). I hope this helps explain why an early hammer is unlikely to happen, and without votes nobody will be given the pressure needed for us to solve with.

A question for everyone:

Is it actually normal on MS to have a policy like this?

Regardless, this post doesn't add up.

JacksonVirgo: If such a policy is in place, why do you think an early hammer would necessarily come from scum? I don't see why a scum would willingly suicide that early in the game.

Yes it's policy. Anti-town play should be punished. And that post was specifically to avoid any scum hammers itself, not particularly to scum-read

That still doesn't address why you said an early hammer would be from scum.

[JacksonVirgo]

An early day will not happen if Town does not vote until they catch up. I will say this in a seperate post after this to make it more clear. We will force policy eliminate anybody that hammers early, this is without fail we will do this. Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum. It's early days so we can easily afford a 1 for 1 (a town death for a scum death). I hope this helps explain why an early hammer is unlikely to happen, and without votes nobody will be given the pressure needed for us to solve with.

A question for everyone:

Is it actually normal on MS to have a policy like this?

Regardless, this post doesn't add up.

JacksonVirgo: If such a policy is in place, why do you think an early hammer would necessarily come from scum? I don't see why a scum would willingly suicide that early in the game.

Yes it's policy. Anti-town play should be punished. And that post was specifically to avoid any scum hammers itself, not particularly to scum-read

That still doesn't address why you said an early hammer would be from scum.

You should learn to read. By stating that, scum would not hammer if they actively knew they would be eliminated. Scum would not hammer if they knew they would be eliminated the next day, therefore an early hammer D1 would come from Town, this also avoided the chance of an quick-elimination from either alignment as nobody "wants" to die. It was a *gambit* but it is now going to be enforced properly now that I've explained it and can no longer town-read from it.

[NinjaStore]

Those are definitely some great starting points for analysis orctin.
Going by general vibe, Micc definitely seems the most outwardly antagonistic. Not sure if that's a sign of him being Mafia or just an aggressive playstyle; both seem equally likely at this point. I'm very curious to see his reaction to being at E-1.
That said, while we do need to figure out who to eliminate today, this is a 2 Mafia game, so we do need to consider who might be a secondary guess after our primary choice. Not to say that we should focus all our efforts on that (chasing two hares and all that), but it's definitely something to keep in mind.
Another thing as well might be to change our thinking style. While we can definitely say that we're suspicious of several people, one thing we could consider is trying to figure out who's pro-Town. I will admit there is a potential flaw there in that it might help Mafia decide on a target so it might be best to keep quiet to ourselves about our thoughts on that front for the time being, I just thought it might help make analyzing easier.

I get a weird vibe from how nav overexplains town strat in this post.

[NinjaStore]

An early day will not happen if Town does not vote until they catch up. I will say this in a seperate post after this to make it more clear. We will force policy eliminate anybody that hammers early, this is without fail we will do this. Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum. It's early days so we can easily afford a 1 for 1 (a town death for a scum death). I hope this helps explain why an early hammer is unlikely to happen, and without votes nobody will be given the pressure needed for us to solve with.

A question for everyone:

Is it actually normal on MS to have a policy like this?

Regardless, this post doesn't add up.

JacksonVirgo: If such a policy is in place, why do you think an early hammer would necessarily come from scum? I don't see why a scum would willingly suicide that early in the game.

Yes it's policy. Anti-town play should be punished. And that post was specifically to avoid any scum hammers itself, not particularly to scum-read

That still doesn't address why you said an early hammer would be from scum.

You should learn to read. By stating that, scum would not hammer if they actively knew they would be eliminated. Scum would not hammer if they knew they would be eliminated the next day, therefore an early hammer D1 would come from Town, this also avoided the chance of an quick-elimination from either alignment as nobody "wants" to die. It was a *gambit* but it is now going to be enforced properly now that I've explained it and can no longer town-read from it.

That's not what you said.

"Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum."

[JacksonVirgo]

An early day will not happen if Town does not vote until they catch up. I will say this in a seperate post after this to make it more clear. We will force policy eliminate anybody that hammers early, this is without fail we will do this. Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum. It's early days so we can easily afford a 1 for 1 (a town death for a scum death). I hope this helps explain why an early hammer is unlikely to happen, and without votes nobody will be given the pressure needed for us to solve with.

A question for everyone:

Is it actually normal on MS to have a policy like this?

Regardless, this post doesn't add up.

JacksonVirgo: If such a policy is in place, why do you think an early hammer would necessarily come from scum? I don't see why a scum would willingly suicide that early in the game.

Yes it's policy. Anti-town play should be punished. And that post was specifically to avoid any scum hammers itself, not particularly to scum-read

That still doesn't address why you said an early hammer would be from scum.

You should learn to read. By stating that, scum would not hammer if they actively knew they would be eliminated. Scum would not hammer if they knew they would be eliminated the next day, therefore an early hammer D1 would come from Town, this also avoided the chance of an quick-elimination from either alignment as nobody "wants" to die. It was a *gambit* but it is now going to be enforced properly now that I've explained it and can no longer town-read from it.

That's not what you said.

"Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum."

Do you fuckin' read

[JacksonVirgo]

It was a *gambit*

[NinjaStore]

What was the gambit?

[JacksonVirgo]

What was the gambit?

...
can you read my posts

[JacksonVirgo]

Like actually read them

[NinjaStore]

Yes. How is explaining a policy and saying "Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum" a gambit? What were you hoping to accomplish?

[JacksonVirgo]

Yes. How is explaining a policy and saying "Enforcing it like this will make sure nobody, not even scum will hammer and if a hammer does happen it will be from scum" a gambit? What were you hoping to accomplish?

Are you fucking serious. If you actually READ MY FUCKIN POSTS you would know.


By saying that we will eliminate anyone that hammers, and I push it as serious, scum would not hammer. Therefore, it is very unlikely a speed-hammer will happen and if it does, I would know with very small doubt that the hammerer is Town.

[NinjaStore]

It's not a very effective gambit when you phrase it like that.

[JacksonVirgo]

It's not a very effective gambit when you phrase it like that.

It's low effort, so I wouldn't *not* do it.