My first post was literally just me explaining how my real life can interfere with my availability. Yes, I jumped on Chemist and then slowly backed off. Was testing the waters to see if anyone else would jump in but I suspect that scum were smart enough to see the bait. (Or they were already voting for him)
I don't have enough evidence to arrive at a conclusion yet. We're on basically Day 1 or at least the first full day of play. I'm not going to blindly pick one of three possibilities without having enough evidence to make an informed conclusion.
Having said that, in terms of likelihood, I'm inclined to believe that C is most likely. It's still early in the day and I think we need to get more discussion in before we can get good enough reads.
In post 116, Jamelia wrote:Hmm. Next time should I just agree with what everyone else is saying? If the goal is to find out who mafia is, and we have more than the majority of the game jumping on the bandwagon, odds are Chemist shouldn’t be scum right? Like I obviously can be wrong here but if we’re going on the logic of “well other people did it then so will I”, then a lot of people have seem scummy so far.
A) i didnt say you should automatically agree with everyone else
B) the post read like you were trying to diffuse the wagon on chemist
I'm trying to diffuse the wagon on something that I didn't think was scummy to begin with. I agree that Chemist hasn't cleared anything up, which IS scummy to me. But the original post at hand was not scummy.
My opinion is that the bandwagon "yes, chemist IS scummy" immediate reaction is bizarre, especially when everyone just automatically agreed without follow up.
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 4:15 pm
by Mr Oobsy
I'm going to go ahead and add
Dyrenz
to my
Town
list which already includes
Leucostictie
and
Jamelia
.
Part of the reason is his
"detective work"
(as
Chemist1422
put it).
Micc
is complaining about it being suspicious for being an
"analysis without conclusion"
but I admit I've had the urge to post something similar myself. I've refrained only because my philosophy is
"too much info is as good as no info"
, especially if that info is extremely inconclusive.
For the record I have no intent to vote today.
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 4:16 pm
by Micc
In post 125, Dyrenz wrote:My first post was literally just me explaining how my real life can interfere with my availability. Yes, I jumped on Chemist and then slowly backed off. Was testing the waters to see if anyone else would jump in but I suspect that scum were smart enough to see the bait. (Or they were already voting for him)
Literally the line after that is you talking about why you didn't do something because you thought it would look scummy...
But anyway, lets say that hypothetically Player A did jump on the chemist's wagon and put him to L-1, or Player A falls for the bait as you described it. Why do you think that is scum indicative?
In post 125, Dyrenz wrote:I don't have enough evidence to arrive at a conclusion yet. We're on basically Day 1 or at least the first full day of play. I'm not going to blindly pick one of three possibilities without having enough evidence to make an informed conclusion.
Having said that, in terms of likelihood, I'm inclined to believe that C is most likely. It's still early in the day and I think we need to get more discussion in before we can get good enough reads.
I understand you want more information and thus more discussion, but consider this:
How has you presenting three possible explanations for what you observed and expanding no further added discussion to the game? Isn't that the equivalent of me telling you that the solution to 2 + 2 is either less than 0, equal to 0, or greater than 0. Sure, what I said is true, but it didn't really help answer the problem.
Is it possible that you contributing your opinion about something adds discussion to the game, even if your opinion turns out to be wrong?
. Sadly the odds are still against me hitting a scum with a random vote at this point, so I will try to narrow down at least one additional player between now and my next post.
Why do you think Jamelia is Town?
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 5:46 pm
by skitter30
I think we should try to lynch scum today, in case the nk doesnt elucidate who scum is
Wny do u think the nk will make scum obvious tomorrow?
Leu - classic newbtown, i feel
Farren - feels like they're doing busywork. Like being present bit not really moving things
You - i've seen a lot of new players do the 'why should we lynch today? We might hit town!' bit. It usually comes from town, but not always.
They're usually willing to vote tho - i feel like scum kinda instinctively understands that to facilitate mislynches, they need to vote. Kinda doubt that scum abdicate that responsibility. They need 5 townies dead, and by leaving it all to nks, the game will take double as long. I dont think scum purposefully set out not to vote, it just isnt a scummy mindset
Haven't seen any reason to put you in the other direction yet, and you've been active enough not to drift there automatically. I agreed with your ping on Chemist.
Nothing you've said against me is based on twisting what I've said, misrepresenting it, or appealing to emotion. Seems to come from just not being familiar with how I operate.
Why do you think Norwegianboy is townie?
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 5:49 pm
by Farren
In post 124, Micc wrote:Don't like these posts. The first is an admission that Dyrenz altered his play based on how he thought it would be received by other players. I think that's a thought that comes from a scum mindset and not a town one. I think the first line in the second post is a misrepresentation of what happened. Additionally the analysis doesn't come to a conclusion which raises a red flag that his goal was to make an analysis not to make a read. Something I also think is more likely to come from scum than town.
I feel better about Micc now.
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 5:59 pm
by Farren
In post 134, skitter30 wrote:I think we should try to lynch scum today, in case the nk doesnt elucidate who scum is
Wny do u think the nk will make scum obvious tomorrow?
Leu - classic newbtown, i feel
Farren - feels like they're doing busywork. Like being present bit not really moving things
You - i've seen a lot of new players do the 'why should we lynch today? We might hit town!' bit. It usually comes from town, but not always.
They're usually willing to vote tho - i feel like scum kinda instinctively understands that to facilitate mislynches, they need to vote. Kinda doubt that scum abdicate that responsibility. They need 5 townies dead, and by leaving it all to nks, the game will take double as long. I dont think scum purposefully set out not to vote, it just isnt a scummy mindset
All of that being said you should be voting
My pronoun is listed; please use it. Thanks.
With regards to not really moving things: what exactly do you mean by that?
Posted: Mon Aug 26, 2019 6:33 pm
by Micc
In post 132, Mr Oobsy wrote:Why don't I intend to vote today? In my opinion, tonight's kill will give us enough information to guarantee a Mafia lynch tomorrow. So why risk lynching a Townie today when we're lynching half the Mafia tomorrow regardless?
That take is incredibly optimistic. I don't intend to be mean about it, but I think you're wrong. I'd be happy to explain the theory behind site meta being the way I described it below, because that's an important part of the newbie experience, but you're probably going to need to have a more open mind than you've expressed through your confidence in lynching correctly given what it mathematically 2/8 odds on Day 2.
In post 22, Leucosticte wrote:As someone who hasn't drunk the Kool-Aid of that particular community, I'm just kinda curious what your perspective is.
I wouldn't drink that kool-aid either.
Site meta is that there's only one way to kill scum and that's to lynch them. The town needs to maximize the number of lynches it makes in a game because that maximizes odds of lynching all the scum. That all starts with lynching someone Day 1. And not just any random person decided by plurality, but someone who the majority of the playerlist thinks is scum. We've got 10 whole days to figure that out by asking questions, analyzing answers and making reads.
I recommend checking out some of the other completed games in the Newbie Queue to get a better idea of the trajectory of games on this site.
In other news skitter's early reads are lining up with mine, which makes me want to town read her.
In post 137, Farren wrote:With regards to not really moving things: what exactly do you mean by that?
At the risk of rudely stepping in and answering for skitter, my thoughts are that you've poked around asking your fair share of questions, but haven't given a lot to go off with regards to how the answers you receive affect your reads. In a way, it's a less extreme example of what I'm currently pushing Dyrenz for.
In post 137, Farren wrote:With regards to not really moving things: what exactly do you mean by that?
At the risk of rudely stepping in and answering for skitter, my thoughts are that you've poked around asking your fair share of questions, but haven't given a lot to go off with regards to how the answers you receive affect your reads. In a way, it's a less extreme example of what I'm currently pushing Dyrenz for.
I'll wait to hear what she has to say as well. To address your point:
I'm okay with Leucosticte so far. Chemist, unsure. Jamelia, slight scumlean. Dyrenz I haven't engaged with yet, but based on your case, slight scumlean. Although that was based on your first and second point, not your third.
In post 79, NorwegianboyEE wrote:
You might claim your vote was meaningless, but that's not the way i saw it. In my mind you were trying to achieve a lynch with little to no discussion, then when the people reacted to your push and retracted their own votes you changed your story.
Hey, can you describe ur previous mafia experience, if any?
Yeah, i've been playing mafia games (I still do) on a forum that is originally intended to be the discussion plaza for a smiley sandbox game called Everybody Edits. It's a very tight-knit community, so the games could be very intense and emotional. Needless to say, i've learnt all of my mafia experience from that site. So since we were a relatively isolated community i might not always know off the "proper way" to do things on mafiascum, nor do i have much experience playing against anonymous players like i've already explained in an earlier post. But i'm trying my best to weed out the mafia in this game regardless.
In post 99, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Not really. I don’t think we should put any voters away from the equation just because they didn’t hammer.
On your previous site, how do lynches work / go down?
Hmm, what exactly are you asking here? If you're wondering about the rules then the games worked exactly like normal, lynch quota is filled= player dies.
If you're asking how we went about with our scumtell and day 1 lynches... etc, then that's a entirely different ballpark. I'd say we usually looked at who were acting "unnaturally aggressive" or "unlike themselves." Since we were all quite acquainted with the personalities of each player. There was also an instance where a day 1 lynch was quickly reaching L-1 and one of the voters gave a BS excuse about how "everyone else seems to be doing it, so i guess we're lynching X... !Lynch X" And was quickly narrowed down as the primary suspect, everyone changed their vote to her and she was lynched. Revealing her to be mafia. That's the sort of play i am experienced with. I hope that is the answer you were looking for.
How quickly do hammers happen, and can people change their vote after voting?
That varies, sometimes hammering happens quickly, sometimes it happens at almost the last second. The faster hammer votes are usually seen as more suspicious unless there is nothing else to be gained from discussion at that point. As for your second question, yes.
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:06 am
by NorwegianboyEE
And just so my stance is clear, i still think voting Chemist is the best choice out of everyone so far.
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:33 am
by skitter30
ok, so why do you think it's likely that chemist was trying to stay on a wagon to make a hammer happen at taht stage of the game
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:42 am
by NorwegianboyEE
To hinder discussion and make a lynch happen without seeming guilty because two people already voted. That’s the feeling i got from the language he used in his comment.
Of course, one can never be sure what sort of motivation Chemist had in his mind when he wrote that comment, but i don’t see anyone i’d switch my vote to atm.
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 6:12 am
by Mr Oobsy
The reason I think
Jamelia
is
Town
is this post:
In post 94, Jamelia wrote:So I read through everything and tried analyzing as much as possible. My brain actually hurts from trying to form opinion's of scuminess so, yeah. LOL
I agree with the opinion that Leucostictie is pretty neutral, but I wouldn't agree that he is auto-town or whatever. I appreciate the indepth analysis but I found at times the wording of how townspeople should act to be almost a: "I think this is the way Town in this game should play!" versus "I am town, but I wouldn't be surprised if other Town played this way".
I personally don't blame anyone for voting for someone based on inactivity, including Dyrenz' back on Page 2. He hasn't been on since I've started talking and stuff. I think that voting for someone based on inactivity when I personally haven't seen any overt scuminess makes sense?
That's all I really have right now. This is fun! LOL
It feels genuine. That's all.
I think
skitter30
's post explaining why he thinks I'm
Town
is suspicious:
In post 134, skitter30 wrote:i feel like scum kinda instinctively understands that to facilitate mislynches, they need to vote. Kinda doubt that scum abdicate that responsibility. They need 5 townies dead, and by leaving it all to nks, the game will take double as long.
This implies drawing the game out is a good thing, based on the fact
Mafia
do not want it. If
Mafia
don't want it,
Town
should want it. The longer the game, the more informed our votes can be.
In post 94, Jamelia wrote:So I read through everything and tried analyzing as much as possible. My brain actually hurts from trying to form opinion's of scuminess so, yeah. LOL
I agree with the opinion that Leucostictie is pretty neutral, but I wouldn't agree that he is auto-town or whatever. I appreciate the indepth analysis but I found at times the wording of how townspeople should act to be almost a: "I think this is the way Town in this game should play!" versus "I am town, but I wouldn't be surprised if other Town played this way".
I personally don't blame anyone for voting for someone based on inactivity, including Dyrenz' back on Page 2. He hasn't been on since I've started talking and stuff. I think that voting for someone based on inactivity when I personally haven't seen any overt scuminess makes sense?
That's all I really have right now. This is fun! LOL
It feels genuine. That's all.
I see nothing about that post that can't be sincerely written from a scum POV.
- Trying to form opinions of "scuminess" when one is scum is arguably more difficult than trying to form opinions of "scuminess" when one is town.
- Not wanting to think Leucosticte is auto-town: scum would want to keep their options open; the more potential mislynches, the better.
- Not wanting to blame people for voting on inactivity. Effectively defending people - could be defending a scumpartner, if the scumpartner's vote falls into this category.
- Having fun. NAI.
So why does sincerity about things that both scum and town could be sincere about justify a town read?
to be