Newbie 1389 Trouble in River City Game Over Scum win

[cAPSLOCK]

Vote count it wrong. I changed to Jason in 184. Did I do something wrong?

[cAPSLOCK]

OK before the crash I made a strong post accusing JasonWazza of being a giant hypocrite by accusing me of not scum hunting when all he has done is stick to a RVS voter from day one and contributing nearly nothing more than yelling and being generally unpleasant.

Then I made a list that went like:

Red flags:
Jason ... See above
Likeabauss he keeps fishing for reads and info by promising it in return but then welshing.

Eyebrow raises:
Fferyllt... Jus can't shake the spooky feeling I get. No real basis yet.

Null for the rest at the moment.

[JasonWazza]

Lol, yes i stuck to an RVS vote cause it landed on a scum but.

I did reply but that crash.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

[Cheery Dog]

Why do you have jason leaning town? I've thought that aside from his all-but-tunneling cAPSLOCK, he's contributed little in the way of scumhunitng/reads and prior to Thursday or Friday he'd been a lurksack.

His rage at being called out in less than 24 hours seemed slightly town motivated. Plus I don't think I've actually seen him get angry as scum in past history - that's not much to go on, and I think I'm going to have to actually watch him as last time we met I tunnelled him incessantly.

I'm still not liking his cAPS vote, but not bad enough that it would ruin an otherwise fine townread.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

No one else has voted you?

There is a point of opportunism when the person he quoted before voting actually has a town read on you, but I can see how he didn't realise that at the time since I never mentioned that until afterwards.

Actually I probably should be leaving you at null because my mind is trying to mput the read on you because meta, when it probably doesn't actually mean what I think it means.

[cAPSLOCK]

Lol, yes i stuck to an RVS vote cause it landed on a scum but.

I did reply but that crash.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

And my pre crash reply to that accusation was simple. I did not have to wait for someone else to vote you. I was just being careful about voting for you with the wrong motivation. Since I have been your tunneling target I waited more than if I had been an observer alone. But as others have also noted your obsessive behavior I was able to discount the weight of my bias.

Since the crash ive been thinking... Bottom line, if you are town your obsession is a mistake. This is the only part that still gives me pause. If you are scum you are playing a fairly bad game by doing this. Unfortunately, even though this greatly supports an asshole read it is not as supportive of a scum read as I wish it was...

UNVOTE:

[sikon327]

Welp, quite a bit's happened since my last read-through. I have finally given the part of the thread since my departure a read. Here are my thoughts:

Lynx_Shine

's recent resurgence of posts is welcomed. She demonstrates a townish desire to create content. I like her atm.

CheeryDog

/

iamkingdavid

: Well, kingdavid's behaviour struck me as potentially scummy at the time, but now that he has had to replace out, his lurking becomes a decidedly null tell. His replacement, CheeryDog, starts off by taking a good read of the thread and providing lots of content -- leans town for now. A more thorough read of the content itself is pending.

likeabauss

' decision to finally throw down a vote in earnest has honestly kind of eased the tension I felt towards him. Good to see him being direct. On balance, many have noted that he's demonstrating a very... strange tendency to hold back on stating his cases until other players say something. That's odd to me. Why hold back? I still don't fully understand the goal of doing this. Surely you want to hear how they respond to your accusations -- the fact that fferyllt's responses to your accusations were "no content" could have a lot to do with her not knowing why you were accusing her. Maybe you have a reason for this! It's just odd to me.

fferyllt

... well, I'm becoming more and more suspicious of her. Although I still have my reservations about bauss, her response to his pressure just bugs me. She provides reads on three players, sure, and then she does something interesting: she suddenly starts "talking herself into" a scumread on Kueshina -- the other most viable wagon at that time. The fact that she chose that moment to get suspicious of her (when she herself was under pressure) bugs the shit out of me.

But not quite enough, as it is, to put her at L-2 with 9 days left on the clock. So, moving on...

Kueshina

: Still not convinced they're scum. Their defensive behaviour seems, as before, more to me like that of a newcomer than that of a scum player. Seems pressure's coming off of them anyway.

JasonWazza

: For some reason, before, I... didn't really notice Jason's lack of obviously scumhunting content. A lot of his earlier posts were directed at me, needling out the more poorly-thought-out aspects of my attack on likeabauss. His more recent attack on cAPS just bugs the shit out of me. It seems... sloppy? Everything else in his history is a lot of discussing how to use meta, and such.

cAPSLOCK

seems, to me, to have at least demonstrated effort towards scumhunting towards various players, stating reads, explaining them (succinctly), etc.

TheTrollie

: I would be very interested to know

why

you think I'm scum. I'd like to hear explanations for your other reads too, of course, but I take particular interest in your read on me, for obvious reasons.

I realize a lot of the points in here are kinda sorta pilfered from things other people have said, and this is all a bit quick-and-dirty. I'll give the thread a better readthrough when I get the chance.

[fferyllt]

Why do you have jason leaning town? I've thought that aside from his all-but-tunneling cAPSLOCK, he's contributed little in the way of scumhunitng/reads and prior to Thursday or Friday he'd been a lurksack.

His rage at being called out in less than 24 hours seemed slightly town motivated. Plus I don't think I've actually seen him get angry as scum in past history - that's not much to go on, and I think I'm going to have to actually watch him as last time we met I tunnelled him incessantly.

I'm still not liking his cAPS vote, but not bad enough that it would ruin an otherwise fine townread.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

No one else has voted you?

There is a point of opportunism when the person he quoted before voting actually has a town read on you, but I can see how he didn't realise that at the time since I never mentioned that until afterwards.

Actually I probably should be leaving you at null because my mind is trying to mput the read on you because meta, when it probably doesn't actually mean what I think it means.

This comes off pretty damn hedgy Cheery Dog.

[Lynx_Shine]

I'm just coming on long enough to say I'll still be away for a short while. I have a dentist appointment tomorrow (have been missing school because of the toothache and things) and will have a big "I missed things" post in a couple days depending on how things go.

[fferyllt]

Guys, 3 posts in 24 hours.

You're making me crazy.

Lynx, hope you are feeling better. toothaches suck.

[cAPSLOCK]

Yes. What do we need to do to stimulate some conversation? I will answer any questions you ask.

[fferyllt]

What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of full, ranked reads lists?

This is not exactly a random question. It's relevant to player behaviors in this game.

[likeabauss]

This is only true for some players - how big a kneejerk reaction is generally depends on what the actual case is and how much sense the it makes to the player in question.
If I poke your knee it would do something completely different to if I hit your knee with a sledgehammer.

I disagree here, but point noted. She defended against an accusation that I made about somebody else. That seems suspicious to me, like having a guilty conscience. It wasn't enough for a vote, but it piqued my interest. Coupled with my other points, it supports my scummy read.

Why are you coninsually waiting for other people's opinions?

Same reason we are all here asking questions, and probing strange statements/logic, etc. It helps us gather information about the other players in the game. Hypothetical situation... Let's say we hang Fferyllt and find out she is mafia. With literally no heat on Fferyllt, nor a case against her at the time I asked that question, we can look back at that point and see who answered that they were suspicious of her. I would argue that a scum partner would never generate early wagon momentum on her with just my vote and such a simple question. They would likely avoid answering, and wait to see what shakes out. Therefore, of the other players in this game, I can whittle one or two people off the scum list by virtue of the fact that they said "Hey, yeah, she is sort of suspicious."

I like to do this in early game days, so that later we can look back and do associations/disassociations to narrow the field a bit farther. If we don't start building a trail of breadcrumbs early though, we lack the content later.

Also, take into consideration that at the time, we had a number of players who weren't posting much. I like to try and draw people into the game, so sometimes I throw out a curve ball and see who swings. You'll note I've tried to engage a few different people by non-conventional methods this game. (specifically Kueshina, cAPSLOCK, Fferyllt, and JasonWazza.) If you want me to clarify on any of those instances, I'm happy to.

This same thing has stuck in my craw as well. He did it with me and was then fairly evasive when I asked for his half of the bagain.

I responded to you fairly clearly/completely in post 146. I'm happy to clarify if you have questions, but evasive doesn't seem to be the right word. I thought I was pretty forthcoming with my reasons/logic in that post.

likeabauss

' decision to finally throw down a vote in earnest has honestly kind of eased the tension I felt towards him. Good to see him being direct. On balance, many have noted that he's demonstrating a very... strange tendency to hold back on stating his cases until other players say something. That's odd to me. Why hold back? I still don't fully understand the goal of doing this. Surely you want to hear how they respond to your accusations -- the fact that fferyllt's responses to your accusations were "no content" could have a lot to do with her not knowing why you were accusing her. Maybe you have a reason for this! It's just odd to me.

Please see post 146. Sometimes you keep a few thoughts close to your chest. If I come on here, and text wall ramble about all the reasons why I think Fferyllt is mafia, she changes playstyle and adapts, and I can't get enough votes to lynch her despite the fact that I am quite sure she is mafia. I can lay out a 10 point logical argument why she should hang, but she will then work to refute all 10 points and convince everybody she is town. Whereas if I fluidly point things out in spurts, and she adapts to them fluidly in response, (this involves me leaving a few key pieces of my case off the table), I can begin to demonstrate a history of her changing her posting/play to refute my claims against her.

Q) Why would an experienced mafia player change their play in response to another player's accusations if they were town?
A) They wouldn't. Its a guilty conscience maneuver again, like she exhibited previously.

Just me posting that paragraph above is giving her an opportunity to step up her game. She now knows of another way I'm trying to pin her down. I think we can all agree that an experienced mafia player can/will evade the noose for quite some time. Without night info, (if the town even has a role that can garner night info), it may be hard to hang a Fferyllt on game play alone just because she is good.

Another note, if I do something that seems suspicious a couple of times, and somebody calls me out on it... it helps me identify them as actually scum hunting. Sure, scum might try to pin me up on something but I doubt they'd push hard to hang a townie on Day 1. Its too risky of a play in a game this size I feel, with the level of experience and involvement we are seeing. So, later on in the game I can look back at the people who thought I was suspicious and say to myself "Self, those folks are probably town as they were scumhunting in earnest on Day 1." But it doesn't mean I stop doing it... if it's working for me, why would I stop?

TL;DR - I'm confident that Fferyllt is scum. But the more I share at this stage, the more she'll just adapt her game play to appear more townish. (Well maybe not anymore since I just shared that she's doing it.)

Does anybody else have any original observations about why Fferyllt is or could be mafia? We've only had a couple people contribute unique observations to the thread in support of this theory.

[cAPSLOCK]

What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of full, ranked reads lists?

This is not exactly a random question. It's relevant to player behaviors in this game.

This, like poker, is an incomplete information game. The advantages and disadvantages are intertwined... Even the same.

Lists give information. That information is useful to both town and scum. But in the end I believe it does town more good as town has much much much less info to start with. So to me, more information is always good.

[fferyllt]

What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of full, ranked reads lists?

This is not exactly a random question. It's relevant to player behaviors in this game.

This, like poker, is an incomplete information game. The advantages and disadvantages are intertwined... Even the same.

Lists give information. That information is useful to both town and scum. But in the end I believe it does town more good as town has much much much less info to start with. So to me, more information is always good.

I feel this way in general about mafia, but regarding reads lists I have seen some downsides, especially in games where players' relative skill levels aren't entirely clear. Specifically, I have seen that the scum teams will pore over town reads lists in choosing their night kills, and players getting huge praise for being uber town move up in kill priority, excluding whatever power-role hunting the scum team is able to do.

In games where some players' skill levels are known, then players' abilities factor into the kill and other scum-target decisions - read accuracy, ability to build bandwagons, scumhunting, etc.

I don't do ranked lists very often any more for those reasons, but my thoughts about players will definitely go into the thread.

[fferyllt]

I haven't been tunneled this aggressively in quite a while. bauss, your case is basically cobwebs from my perspective. There is literally nothing to refute when your argument is essentially that stuff I do is by definition scummy because I'm scum. Being effective is the best demonstration of alignment that I know how to do and that's what I'm focusing on.

[likeabauss]

I haven't been tunneled this aggressively in quite a while. bauss, your case is basically cobwebs from my perspective. There is literally nothing to refute when your argument is essentially that stuff I do is by definition scummy because I'm scum. Being effective is the best demonstration of alignment that I know how to do and that's what I'm focusing on.

Is this all you got from my posts against you? You're belittling my case against you as, "You're scum and you're doing scummy stuff." Really?

What is your definition of being effective? Ask questions about general concepts of game play? That's like an icebreaker game at a Mafiaholics Anonymous meeting. "Hi, I'm Fferyllt and I like town blocs. It's been 37 seconds since my last mafia post."

[Cheery Dog]

Also, take into consideration that at the time, we had a number of players who weren't posting much. I like to try and draw people into the game, so sometimes I throw out a curve ball and see who swings. You'll note I've tried to engage a few different people by non-conventional methods this game. (specifically Kueshina, cAPSLOCK, Fferyllt, and JasonWazza.) If you want me to clarify on any of those instances, I'm happy to.

The non-conventional methods are what I'm asking about, specifically all the times you've asked someone to give reasons for their read with bribery that you'll then follow up with your reasons for a read on someone else.
Why don't you just give your reasons at that stage, because they shouldn't be effected by what someone's reasons on somebody different are

[fferyllt]

I haven't been tunneled this aggressively in quite a while. bauss, your case is basically cobwebs from my perspective. There is literally nothing to refute when your argument is essentially that stuff I do is by definition scummy because I'm scum. Being effective is the best demonstration of alignment that I know how to do and that's what I'm focusing on.

Is this all you got from my posts against you? You're belittling my case against you as, "You're scum and you're doing scummy stuff." Really?

What is your definition of being effective? Ask questions about general concepts of game play? That's like an icebreaker game at a Mafiaholics Anonymous meeting. "Hi, I'm Fferyllt and I like town blocs. It's been 37 seconds since my last mafia post."

Like I said earlier, I know my alignment and I know what motivates my posts. It's a combination of my win condition, my personal goals in mafia, and my role as IC.

You finding scummyness in my posting behavior may be partially my fault, especially initially, but I am what I am and I believe that my motivations are visible in my post.

[likeabauss]

The non-conventional methods are what I'm asking about, specifically all the times you've asked someone to give reasons for their read with bribery that you'll then follow up with your reasons for a read on someone else.
Why don't you just give your reasons at that stage, because they shouldn't be effected by what someone's reasons on somebody different are

For starters, exaggerating and/or restating things incorrectly is always a scummy maneuver to me.

For clarity, I did that exactly ONCE. It was with my prime scum suspect in an attempt to garner some additional information from her. If you hadn't noticed, Fferyllt has been dodging a number of direct questions since I made my case against her. She asked for my thoughts on Kueshina/Sikon. I wanted an answer specifically on how she felt about Trollie. Horse trade ensues. Go back and re-read mine and Fferyllt posts from 170-179 for the exchange.

Why Trollie? I was lightly suspicious of Morthas before replacement, and I remain suspicious of Trollie. If I'm right about Fferyllt, and she is mafia, then her reads/interactions with my secondary suspect are helpful to me (as well as his interactions in response to her.) I was trying to develop content without tipping my hand.

[fferyllt]

If you hadn't noticed, Fferyllt has been dodging a number of direct questions since I made my case against her.

I have not intentionally dodged questions. But, tbqh I probably am not reading your posts as closely as I should any more because I've got you filed under "terminal case of tunneling". I'll go back through your recent posts and see if I can spot actual questions (as opposed to narrative) today. If I miss something, please re-ask.

[TheTrollie]

forgot about this game...woah

[fferyllt]

Ok, so...questions you asked me, bauss.

I found this one. I'm including my post that yours was in response to.

The convo started in my post 142 where I disagreed with something iamkingdavid wrote about sikon's early posts having an apologetic air to them.

The reply was in 154.

There is so little about Sikon in those posts, you've really got me scratching my head. I'm wondering if you made a little Freudian slip and are just covering.

Did you mean to mention another name?

I mean, Lynx doesn't even mention Sikon except to say "condolences." You barely mention an FoS and an apologetic tone in your post. I'd hardly call it a conversation... In fact you pointing me to it just seems like you're trying to show me that you're "Scum hunting" and get back on my good side. Sorry not buying it.

I believe that Kue is town. If anybody else wants me to articulate why, I'm happy to. But for now, I'll barter with you...

Share your analysis of Trollie with us, and I'll respond with my analysis of Kue?

And this post is actually a good example of your narrative spinning and overall tone that turns me off to the point where I'm not reading your posts so closely, myself. That's poor play on my part regardless of my alignment. I have a feeling I've brushed off some questions as rhetorical because the answers look so obvious. Sort of like this one.

This is the part of Lynx's response that was about sikon. If you read 154 again, you will see that Lynx' quote below was just below a quote of my post about sikon.

Agreed that being soft spoken isn't a scumtell on its own. Everyone's a bunch of strangers for most of us.

On to another post.

I haven't been tunneled this aggressively in quite a while. bauss, your case is basically cobwebs from my perspective. There is literally nothing to refute when your argument is essentially that stuff I do is by definition scummy because I'm scum. Being effective is the best demonstration of alignment that I know how to do and that's what I'm focusing on.

Is this all you got from my posts against you? You're belittling my case against you as, "You're scum and you're doing scummy stuff." Really?

Yes. Really. And this is another good example of your narrative spinning and overall denigrating tone.

What is your definition of being effective? Ask questions about general concepts of game play? That's like an icebreaker game at a Mafiaholics Anonymous meeting. "Hi, I'm Fferyllt and I like town blocs. It's been 37 seconds since my last mafia post."

I play a primarily reads-based game. In games with unusual mechanics and set-ups I put thought into the game design and the numbers, but that's not where my real strengths lie. My game is primarily about developing and refining reads, working with players I read as town and working to lynch players I think are scum. Effectiveness is measured by results, something we don't have on day 1, but I am confident that my alignment will be apparent to most players as the game progresses.

As IC, part of my role is to share the relation of general concepts to the current game-state. I do this in newbie games regardless of the SE/IC/Newb status of my role.

I'm going to ramp down the snark in my replies to you after this. But, I hope that pointing up why your posts to me are not getting much of my attention will suggest ways you could make your own engagement efforts more fruitful.

[fferyllt]

Why do you have jason leaning town? I've thought that aside from his all-but-tunneling cAPSLOCK, he's contributed little in the way of scumhunitng/reads and prior to Thursday or Friday he'd been a lurksack.

His rage at being called out in less than 24 hours seemed slightly town motivated. Plus I don't think I've actually seen him get angry as scum in past history - that's not much to go on, and I think I'm going to have to actually watch him as last time we met I tunnelled him incessantly.

I'm still not liking his cAPS vote, but not bad enough that it would ruin an otherwise fine townread.

The fact is this, you having to wait for someone else to vote, to vote me, is scummy and opportunistic as fuck.

No one else has voted you?

There is a point of opportunism when the person he quoted before voting actually has a town read on you, but I can see how he didn't realise that at the time since I never mentioned that until afterwards.

Actually I probably should be leaving you at null because my mind is trying to mput the read on you because meta, when it probably doesn't actually mean what I think it means.

This comes off pretty damn hedgy Cheery Dog.

And no response. I think your experiential meta on me is pretty mixed. I left this comment alone while the vengeball game was in progress, but since it is ended, I'm coming back to it. In our first game, Donner Party, you were convinced enough of my scumminess after a day 1 where I wound up with about 2 town reads, 2 scum reads and a pile of null reads that you targeted me for your vig kill.

My alignment in that game is a matter of record now.

In the vengeball game you modded, I was much more aggressive, but given how quickly the first lynch happened (with very little input from me and my hydra partner unfortunately) I had to get aggressive or town would be in a no-win situation after the next lynch.

Both styles of play are well within the space where my town game lives.

What do you think of jason's continued low level of engagement in this game since he was out of that game?

It worries me. So does your reaction to it.

[Cheery Dog]

The non-conventional methods are what I'm asking about, specifically all the times you've asked someone to give reasons for their read with bribery that you'll then follow up with your reasons for a read on someone else.
Why don't you just give your reasons at that stage, because they shouldn't be effected by what someone's reasons on somebody different are

For starters, exaggerating and/or restating things incorrectly is always a scummy maneuver to me.

For clarity, I did that exactly ONCE. It was with my prime scum suspect in an attempt to garner some additional information from her. If you hadn't noticed, Fferyllt has been dodging a number of direct questions since I made my case against her. She asked for my thoughts on Kueshina/Sikon. I wanted an answer specifically on how she felt about Trollie. Horse trade ensues. Go back and re-read mine and Fferyllt posts from 170-179 for the exchange.

Why Trollie? I was lightly suspicious of Morthas before replacement, and I remain suspicious of Trollie. If I'm right about Fferyllt, and she is mafia, then her reads/interactions with my secondary suspect are helpful to me (as well as his interactions in response to her.) I was trying to develop content without tipping my hand.

My memory goes off when reading the whole thread at once in some locations. Your other two bargaining moments (one of which you've already explained slightly) were to do with reasons for the same people.

You're dodging her questions more than she has been dodging yours.

[Cheery Dog]

And no response. I think your experiential meta on me is pretty mixed. I left this comment alone while the vengeball game was in progress, but since it is ended, I'm coming back to it. In our first game, Donner Party, you were convinced enough of my scumminess after a day 1 where I wound up with about 2 town reads, 2 scum reads and a pile of null reads that you targeted me for your vig kill.

My alignment in that game is a matter of record now.

In the vengeball game you modded, I was much more aggressive, but given how quickly the first lynch happened (with very little input from me and my hydra partner unfortunately) I had to get aggressive or town would be in a no-win situation after the next lynch.

Both styles of play are well within the space where my town game lives.

What do you think of jason's continued low level of engagement in this game since he was out of that game?

It worries me. So does your reaction to it.

I haven't done anything about your meta this game or even looked at your styles from the two games. (I try not to use meta from hydra posting ever anyway - unless it's for the same hydra, separating who posted what is annoying for meta purposes even when you are signing your posts)

I've been trying to work out if Jason is just being slightly inactive regardless of alignment since seeing him disappear and lose vengeball, but in all the recent completed games I found of his he'd died night 1, which was before the disappearing spree.