Mafiascum.net

Here is a thought experiment.

Which is more likely? Luke tries to mudsling with both townies at the gate, or he mudslings with 1 town and 1 scum while completely ignoring the other townie?

I think the latter option doesn't make a lot of sense.

he was mudslinging only with you, though?

In post 1924, Tanner wrote:why shouldn't i be getting worried here that you got sick of my indecision and told him to initiate flipping the keep first (like, he first started talking how he's gonna vote) so you could use this argument?

I'd say the same exact counterargument I said to imaginality: It really wouldn't have made sense from my perspective at that point in the game to try some type of gambit at the Keep.

Do you think Luke had a decent chance of getting the votes at the Keep? If yes, then the gambit he pulled was very dumb.

If I'm sitting at the Gate at that time with Tanner saying "I'm probably going to vote VP at some point," am I going to be like "oh shit, we need to gambit at the Keep!" Hell no. I just sit on my hands and wait my turn.

Now, think about imaginality on a team at that point? They feel like they are likely to lose the gate. The pressure is super high because I won't shut the fuck up about want the gate resolved. So they decide to charge into the keep, hoping an eventual Ari town flip makes me look bad and the balance at the gate at least shifts more toward 50/50.

The scum motivation for an imaginality team is clear, and not at all clear for a VP team. I would have no reason to be impatient as scum.

In post 1926, Tanner wrote:he was mudslinging only with you, though?

Did you and him exchange some disagreements D1?

In post 1928, VP Baltar wrote:Tanner saying "I'm probably going to vote VP at some point,"

Vote imaginality, thinking VP was town, I mean of course.

In post 1929, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 1926, Tanner wrote:he was mudslinging only with you, though?

Did you and him exchange some disagreements D1?

i mean, on day 1, back when it wasn't even known who was gonna go where. how does it make sense to categorize us as "players on the gate"?

In post 1931, Tanner wrote:

In post 1929, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 1926, Tanner wrote:he was mudslinging only with you, though?

Did you and him exchange some disagreements D1?

i mean, on day 1, back when it wasn't even known who was gonna go where. how does it make sense to categorize us as "players on the gate"?

Fair point. Just still saying he never really did shit with imaginality. But let's set that point aside even. Do you see what I'm saying about the game state and motivation for a risky Luke move? I just don't think that makes sense from a VP-Luke team perspective

In post 1932, VP Baltar wrote:Do you see what I'm saying about the game state and motivation for a risky Luke move?

i mean, i get it. like, i was thinking of a game where town was similarly on the brink of winning, and scum started panicking and doing weird gambits. and here i'm like, if i really am about to hammer baltar correctly, what's the scumteam doing? where's the urgency? and then i realize not only did luke commit the unalive, rh9 did the weird sudden vote thing, and i'm like hmMMM

hammer gate correctly*, you get it

"but what if that's what he wants me to think tho?"

In post 1933, Tanner wrote:

In post 1932, VP Baltar wrote:Do you see what I'm saying about the game state and motivation for a risky Luke move?

i mean, i get it. like, i was thinking of a game where town was similarly on the brink of winning, and scum started panicking and doing weird gambits. and here i'm like, if i really am about to hammer baltar correctly, what's the scumteam doing? where's the urgency? and then i realize not only did luke commit the unalive, rh9 did the weird sudden vote thing, and i'm like hmMMM

You think that my reaction-vote has to do with me wanting to shield Baltar?

In post 1933, Tanner wrote:

In post 1932, VP Baltar wrote:Do you see what I'm saying about the game state and motivation for a risky Luke move?

i mean, i get it. like, i was thinking of a game where town was similarly on the brink of winning, and scum started panicking and doing weird gambits. and here i'm like, if i really am about to hammer baltar correctly, what's the scumteam doing? where's the urgency? and then i realize not only did luke commit the unalive, rh9 did the weird sudden vote thing, and i'm like hmMMM

Right, I had the same concern when implo has been like "what if we get crazy and do the wall first!"

Scum are trying to find ways to shake up the game I think. Luke losing the keep put them at a huge disadvantage because there is still the chance you see my towniness.

In post 1935, RH9 wrote:You think that my reaction-vote has to do with me wanting to shield Baltar?

no, that it has something to do with you shielding imaginality. like, if you're scum here, and imaginality is scum, and you see me about to hammer imaginality, that's straight up game losing. you *have* to do something to ~shake things up a bit~.

In post 1937, Tanner wrote:

In post 1935, RH9 wrote:You think that my reaction-vote has to do with me wanting to shield Baltar?

no, that it has something to do with you shielding imaginality. like, if you're scum here, and imaginality is scum, and you see me about to hammer imaginality, that's straight up game losing. you *have* to do something to ~shake things up a bit~.

Oh. Makes sense but I'm Town.

sure. maybe implo is the scum and that's why he wants to resolve the wall. maybe numberq is the scum and he's not reacting because he's not here. maybe baltar is scum so of course scum at the wall isn't panicking because why would they?

I believe in you Tanner. I know you can see the evidence and I'm asking you to trust that evidence. I don't think I've been evasive at all this game. I've answered all questions. I've scumhunted my butt off and pushed the game in protown ways.

There is no need to stay up until 3am. Drop that hammer. Bring us justice and let's party.

In post 1922, RH9 wrote:I think that imaginality scumslipped in 1919. There's no way, town!imaginality talks about winning at the Wall after scum!Baltar flips. Only possible scenario here is that scum!imaginality knows that town!Baltar is not going to flip scum at the Gate.

Implosion's question was premised on Wall flipping first. That's the context i responded to

In post 1928, VP Baltar wrote:

In post 1924, Tanner wrote:why shouldn't i be getting worried here that you got sick of my indecision and told him to initiate flipping the keep first (like, he first started talking how he's gonna vote) so you could use this argument?

I'd say the same exact counterargument I said to imaginality: It really wouldn't have made sense from my perspective at that point in the game to try some type of gambit at the Keep.

Do you think Luke had a decent chance of getting the votes at the Keep? If yes, then the gambit he pulled was very dumb.

If I'm sitting at the Gate at that time with Tanner saying "I'm probably going to vote VP at some point," am I going to be like "oh shit, we need to gambit at the Keep!" Hell no. I just sit on my hands and wait my turn.

Now, think about imaginality on a team at that point? They feel like they are likely to lose the gate. The pressure is super high because I won't shut the fuck up about want the gate resolved. So they decide to charge into the keep, hoping an eventual Ari town flip makes me look bad and the balance at the gate at least shifts more toward 50/50.

The scum motivation for an imaginality team is clear, and not at all clear for a VP team. I would have no reason to be impatient as scum.

You say this like Luke didn't get the idea and go ahead before discussing it with you. It's clear he was feeling under pressure, we agree it wasn't a great move but there's a clear added benefit to it if he's partnered with you rather than me

I post like 75 times a day and was very clearly online when Luke did that. Why would I not be talking to him in the scum PT at that very moment? And the benefit is clearly to imaginality scum, not VP scum.

okay, here's a thing that's genuinely been confusing the hell out of me this game. implo offered if i want to flip the wall first, in order to prove that he's town, and that the split was 1-1-1 pre-night. because that is a point in scum!baltar's favour (because why does scum!imaginality voluntarily walk into a 1v1 where the other two players proclaimed that they're good at being townie and townreading each other). but, when i asked him what's the point because he's currently saying vp is town, he said that he finds vp more townie, even with the above information calculated in. why would he then be offering to get flipped so that i have that information, if he deems it to not be *that* valuable?

Tanner, I am confused.

What are you saying exactly about implosion?

the question was not aimed at you >_>

In post 1947, Tanner wrote:the question was not aimed at you >_>

Sorry, Tanner.

In post 1944, Tanner wrote:but, when i asked him what's the point because he's currently saying vp is town, he said that he finds vp more townie, even with the above information calculated in. why would he then be offering to get flipped so that i have that information, if he deems it to not be *that* valuable?

If he is scum, I think he believes he wins wall. Then the score is 1-1 and maybe there's a chance you side with imaginality.

It's harder to see a reason as town.