In post 1174, Lukewarm wrote:I think that a green Ari flip looks bad on you the same way that you are saying that your green flip would look bad on Ari, because then her case on you is then also coming from confirmed town.In post 1169, VP Baltar wrote:I don't see at all what would look bad for me there? Like the worst thing I think would be if someone said I had scum equity with you...which shouldn't make sense from your perspectiveIn post 1165, Lukewarm wrote:My concern at the moment is that you might know that keep associatives look bad for you, and therefore want to go first.
And imaginality has also presented you as partnered with Pav, which obviously would be more threatening to you if correct and then flipped red.
So I kinda see why scum!you would want to flip before the keep.
---
But I also think that your town!reasoning for wanting to flip first stayed fairly consistent to questioning.
This might have been a fruitless line.
In post 1159, Lukewarm wrote:What associatives from the Gate do you think will help us win the Keep after you are gone? You already have those associatives, what do they tell you?In post 1157, VP Baltar wrote:The benefit of doing the gate first is that is where the most associatives will come from. Fingers crossed, Tanner votes out imaginality and town is then up a game with good associatives to win the keep.
In post 1127, Lukewarm wrote:Currently doing this. Starting with his solve of imaginality+ari+toogIn post 1112, Lukewarm wrote:Since this has been on your mind, have you noticed him doing that this game? I might iso him for read progression now
Spoiler: Ari trajectory
Spoiler: Toog trajectory
Of note, if Balter flips scum, there is a clear difference in how he approached the scum read on Ari and the scum read on Toog. The approach to ari was definitly strong enough to affect her ability to win the keep. But his approach to toog isn't. Much more passive, even before the Toog rep out.
I don't ever see Baltar+Ari as partnered, but I can see Baltar+Toog. If he flips before either of the others
In post 1015, Lukewarm wrote:Baltar, even if you think that this is obvtown from your perspective (lol). It is not obvtown from mine.In post 981, VP Baltar wrote:@Ari - here is the short of it: I incorporated the desires of a now confirmed town player as the fundamental building block of how I sorted. Additionally, Tanner has a tendency to scum read me in almost every game we play, at least for a little while. Yet, I added Tanner to my own game, knowing that would be the case. There is no legitimate reason I would do any of that as scum...and I'd actually call that poor play on my part if I was scum. It's so obvtown from my perspective, that I think it is incredibly annoying I'm having to repeat it again.
Tanner suggested you+imaginality, and you didn't fight it.
Why would that be an obvtown move to make? It is now mechanically confirmed that that suggestion is one scum + one townie. Why would a scum player fight against it, and possibly end up in the same game as their buddy?
Tanner scum read you, but he also scum read imaginality harder imo. -- Why would a scum player fight against this arrangement?
Who do you think that scum!Baltar would want in the Gate with him and imaginality over Tanner? The other options would have been Darby, toog, numberq, and implosion. 1-2 of these names are mechanically proven to be scum. Other then implosion, all three of these are miselim bait if they are town.
Would scum!Baltar really want to place himself at the gate with him + imaginality + miselim bait, and be foreced to IC either imaginality or miselim bait over Tanner?
-----
Most of this all applies to imaginality as well, so this is not even a point for or against you. He was also amiable to the baltar+imaginality+tanner at the gate suggestion.
But, you keep repeating that this makes you obvtown, and I just don't see it.
In post 1013, Lukewarm wrote:And, I was not the one asking this question, but...In post 995, VP Baltar wrote:I actually don't? It doesn't seem to make sense since they are all xlos?In post 992, Tanner wrote:do you remember what the idea was behind this post?
In post 884, Lukewarm wrote:Do you think that imaginality having a fake looking scum read on Darby makes Darby scum or town. I was unclear the first time you mentioned itIn post 873, VP Baltar wrote:Sure, happy to have you but I'm not certain certain you're town either so...In post 868, Pavowski wrote:Doesn't matter maybe but wouldn't you consider it bonus points if you changed my mind?
I do think imaginality's read on Darby looked fake af.
In post 881, Lukewarm wrote:I don't think that any of my reasons for town reading ari were hinging on my read on tanner. When I sat down to do isos over the break, I did Ari and Implo first because they were in my game. Then I moved on to the Gate and read Tanner, and started scum reading him pretty hard, and then I agree that influenced my iso reads after that.In post 864, VP Baltar wrote:Luke, can I ask why you're townreading Ari? Based off your posting, a lot of it seems to be related to Tanner interactions where you were assuming Tanner was scum. That wasn't true, obv. Are you still townreading Ari based on those old assumptions, or are there other reasons?
But a run down
Day 1:
- offering to vote tanner in the keep
- offering to vote me in the keep
- the way her vibe matched our prior game together (laid back alt gimick, but then breaking character to check into things that ping her. see )
- the way she started questioning tanner once I put out my own worry of tanner
Day 2:
- Asking Tanner to help her pick who to vote
- And like, the fact that she just showed that she has gone and read at least 2 different games that had both me and pav in it to try and sort the two of us. Seems like a lot of effort for scum who would already be in a decent position. She did not even use anything she found in the meta to change her reads. So she had reads. Read two whole games. Came back and said "yep, I like my reads from before"
In post 769, Lukewarm wrote:I am not sure what you are saying here?In post 767, VP Baltar wrote:Implo was talking about literal first movers and I was talking about early voters in general. The fact ari said that doesn't make her +town and it's silly you'd make that assumption.
Spoiler: The posts I'm talking about
From my pov it just looks like you called me +scum in 120 and then turned around and called me +town in 138 for the exact same action, both times being agreeable with who ever made the original argument.
Are you saying that you were calling ari +scum in 120? if so, why lead it with "I agree with ari"
In post 768, Lukewarm wrote:This is a post where I am considering you being town, so makes sense that you are not seeing a scum motivation here lol.In post 763, VP Baltar wrote:Just saying what I was honestly thinking at the time. I don't even know what scum motivation you think exists.In post 759, Lukewarm wrote:Calling someone a potential town block material if they were in the null town range feel weird.
But also, why would even say this is you are scum? Wouldn't it be easier to just say 'I thought he was town, but obviously I was wrong"
The way you are dancing around the "potential town block" not meaning you actually thought he was town at the time, feels weird. And my gut reaction to that was that your day 1 reads were manufactured. BUT I don't understand why scum!you would go down this path instead of just saying that you discovered that you were wrong the moment Tanner was made an IC
In post 759, Lukewarm wrote:Calling someone a potential town block material if they were in the null town range feel weird.In post 755, VP Baltar wrote:I mean I definitely said that. I'm just saying it was not like I was simping for him in thread or something. That's why I said "potential" townbloc. I was not certain on him at all, but more in the null to potential town range. I still do think it's incredibly dumb for scum to post a reads list like that and it was the first thing I went back to now that I know he's scum.In post 751, Tanner wrote:the readslist was +town because readslists early often grab attention and scum doesn't want that - that's what you said. i assumed that meant you're townreading him.In post 748, VP Baltar wrote:I don't think I said I town read imaginality, did I?
from memory, what were your reads if he was middle of the pack?
But also, why would even say this is you are scum? Wouldn't it be easier to just say 'I thought he was town, but obviously I was wrong"
Here are a bunch of posts where Luke and I are having back and forths where he's kind of needling me on stuff or I'm calling him on bad logic while trying to answer questions.In post 725, Lukewarm wrote:But I am trying to figure out why Tanner suggesting you+imaginality+implo was bad, but you+imaginality+tanner was fine. Could that not have been tanner literally just swapping himself with his scum buddy, and achieving the same split?In post 721, VP Baltar wrote:I don't know that I was thinking about it that hard. More just like, if Tanner is scum, they have a reason for that suggestion, so let me make a suggested change to the plan and see how he reacts. I also meant what I said early in the game that I can actually read Tanner reasonably well, so I didn't see harm for myself in being in the same game with him.In post 717, Lukewarm wrote:So you thought scum!tanner might be making a suggestion that was 1 scum, 2 town to help achieve a 1-1-1 split?In post 714, VP Baltar wrote:Few reasons. I didn't think Tanner should be straight calling a location since he is a good player and if he was scum, I wasn't going to hand it to him like that. Also served as a bit of a reaction test to see how Tanner responded. Him being amenable to a slightly different version was protown
Thinking back, I don't know that he was actually the one who suggested him being there, so maybe that is a moot point? And also, you have already said you were not thinking about it that hard... hmmmm
I wish you had better answers lol
I don't think this is some massive "could never be aligned" thing, so much as I think if you compare this to his interactions with imaginality, it seems obvious these are much more directional from him.
Luke imaginality is full of softballs and no follow up really on questions...which is classic scum.
As I stated in my reread of him as well, Luke's day opening reads list features him kind of shading me more directly while landing imaginality safely in a null range.