Mafiascum.net

rawr

In post 1970, Titus wrote:

In post 1966, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:you should be more interested after the rules change than before the rules change if you're a town 1-sharder because risk/reward just took a big swing.

you feel less interested to me which feels like what a scumbag would feel cuz their win con just moved from really easily attainable to way less attainable.

That's utter bullshit you're arguing I am less interested.

I'm not sure what you mean by a 1-sharder. We should all be one-sharders.

Anyway, since my gambit caught Pooky, I will partially claim. In my demonic form, I am a friendly neighbor.

I know this group of players struggles to read me, and would eventually wagon me. So I figured I'd bait a scum to come up with

a shitty reason to get on

and Pooky took the bait.

UNVOTE:

What about OUR vote on you?

I'm not caught up but spiffeh beating down the budding cw is something

HURT: titus

see wasn't that way easier

lets see if you can read this crumb : LEGAL DOCUMENT + SHIP

and no we aren't all one-sharders because this game would be a joke if we were.

In post 1971, Spiffeh wrote:Titus can you elaborate on why you're scum reading me? What about the wagons makes me possible scum?

Your tone just feels off. It's weak (hence why I just moved to Pooky). You're a counter to Madea who is frankly obvtown. The game stalled and scum plopped a vote on another alternative wagon.

I think it's Pooky, Lukewarm and you atm. You and Lukewarm are weaker because my reads on you two are tonal and unflipped wagon analysis.

In post 1978, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:HURT: titus

see wasn't that way easier

lets see if you can read this crumb : LEGAL DOCUMENT + SHIP

and no we aren't all one-sharders because this game would be a joke if we were.

My role PM mentions nothing about the shard amount needed. I'm a default sharder, whatever that means.

In post 1976, Medea the Alien wrote:What about OUR vote on you

I already discussed why your vote on me was fair.

In post 1974, Spiffeh wrote:1970 is not a post Titus makes as scum

I agree, though I suspect for different reasons than yours, but who knows?

In post 1978, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:see wasn't that way easier

If I outright claim, I don't net scum. It's a small contribution but it's useful in catching opportunistic votes, which I knew would happen.

anyoneee wanna talk abt my new and improved readslist

In post 1967, Medea the Alien wrote:

In post 1964, Annie Edison wrote:ignored by pooky, sad. we must be in the lead for pagetops

hi PA how does luke's current wagoncomp affect the bottom tier of your reads?

Right now it's just ManateeGirl, but I'll count Titus as being on there too for this.

I'm not partner hunting at this point, so I'd say minimally. I'd also say after watching Warehouse 13 go with dueling scum wagons Day One I don't put nearly as much faith in the wagon/counterwagon dynamic these days. I also suspect there may be places in this set-up where bussing is helpful, so I'm not ruling anything out on the basis of impacting partner pairings.

Right now my ManateeGirl and Lukewarm reads are independent of each other. If one flips scum, it would of course impact my read of the other, but that's true for about half the players here to varying degrees.

Titus, I don't see scum-her as believing she's influencing the gamestate here, whatever else is going on, so also not really AI for me.

That does remind me that something else I disliked in Lukewarm's ISO was the sense that he was all 'woe is me, Medea scumreads me --> I get voted and elim'd' when we weren't voting him. Felt disingenuous again.

Actually (I assume this is Bulge) what's your take on Lukewarm right now? Independently of notscience and independently of game expectations for him (which I'm going to try to set aside myself for the rest of the day)

--PA

In post 974, Annie Edison wrote:I guess the real difference I'm trying to get at luke is that in the situations you referenced, you were pushing scum for misplays. that's what I mean by focused on the right things. i'm not saying "scum luke hones in and town luke doesn't". I just think you're focusing on pointless bull and coming off somewhat defensive in the process, and it's jarring to me.

this still sums up my thoughts on luke well. I haven't thoroughly read anything past this point yet but up to my last exchange with him i feel strongly about it. my luke read is entirely independent of notty's, we've talked about him some but haven't put much focus there or on any slot in particular really until I'm fully caught up.

his response to this felt disingenuous as well. Luke tried to give examples of things/slips he picked up on in previous games that led to scum eliminations as if to imply anything he's done in this game is similar. I've never seen him so defensive, and usually when he catches something and sticks to it, I'm nodding my head along the whole time, but he hasn't sunk his claws into anything this game.

In post 1980, Titus wrote: My role PM mentions nothing about the shard amount needed. I'm a default sharder, whatever that means.

In post 2, borkjerfkin wrote:Unless otherwise specified, a player is considered "Demonic" if they have two or more shards, otherwise, they are classified as "Human". Players may start with 0 or more shards per their role.

In post 1979, Titus wrote:The game stalled

sad i missed this

In post 1980, Titus wrote:

In post 1978, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:HURT: titus

see wasn't that way easier

lets see if you can read this crumb : LEGAL DOCUMENT + SHIP

and no we aren't all one-sharders because this game would be a joke if we were.

My role PM mentions nothing about the shard amount needed. I'm a default sharder, whatever that means.

Town players who have not absorbed bork's setup info post (including the PMs but not EXCLUSIVELY the PMS) really should do that.

I'm not a setup-breaking mechanics player so I tend to gloss over a few things, but dayum you're making me look like a mechanics genius this game and that's just wrong.

You're leaving yourself with a totally correctable disadvantage to players who DO read and think about the setup info.

@Snarky, that's fair. I'll look it up when I get the chance. Right now, I am posting between court dates.

What do you think of Pooky's jump on?

In post 1952, Medea the Alien wrote:sympathy for the dynamic of taking two people who may be quite complementary IRL and making their games mesh for the thread's consumption

Is this why you've been scumreading us previously? I'm being a better hydra partner than usual, but that's not saying much

In post 1952, Medea the Alien wrote:I don't like that he jumped into my line of questioning at Dunnstral

Is this a behavior you've actually noticed coming from scum or just something that feels bad? I'm sympathetic because I had to get yelled at a few times to stop doing this

In post 1970, Titus wrote:

In post 1966, PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:you should be more interested after the rules change than before the rules change if you're a town 1-sharder because risk/reward just took a big swing.

you feel less interested to me which feels like what a scumbag would feel cuz their win con just moved from really easily attainable to way less attainable.

That's utter bullshit you're arguing I am less interested.

I'm not sure what you mean by a 1-sharder. We should all be one-sharders.

Anyway, since my gambit caught Pooky, I will partially claim. In my demonic form, I am a friendly neighbor.

I know this group of players struggles to read me, and would eventually wagon me. So I figured I'd bait a scum to come up with a shitty reason to get on and Pooky took the bait.

I dont understand:
-how this is a gambit
-how this being a gambit meshes with 1965

Explain?

In post 1993, Here There Be Dragons wrote:I dont understand:
-how this is a gambit
-how this being a gambit meshes with 1965

Explain?

Slayer's gambit is a thing. Drawing FoSes and votes deliberately is a gambit.

rhea's point about medea is salient and making me wonder but i still like medea's content

titus's gambit seems like it would catch someone irregardless of their alignment

~std

In post 1940, Lukewarm wrote:I saw ffery in data aquisition mode, and my first thought was "then I should give ffery more time to sort medea" hense the unvote, but when I asked her if I should stop voting him it just wasn't there.

I would have needed a near-mod-confirmed level townread of medea at that point to want to dissuade someone from voting them to E-2. Votes ARE data and so are reactions to votes. In some game situations maybe I don't need that data, but in this game and with medea? I need it. If that wagon had gone through, I would have been pissed if they're town and pissed about the game day ending so early, but I also would have gotten about half my brain cells refunded.

1240 - I am also confused by this, and would like some insight on it. I think that their explanation for their pre-break play slimy. A couple of other people (ceph and lld off the top of my head) seem to think so too, so I am curious what you are seeing that we are missing?

In a nutshell, it made sense of their playing from the back foot.

wincon-->role-specifics-->personality-->play-development-goals-->motivation-->in-thread-behavior.

That's the long form. We get to see in-thread behavior and reverse engineer that data to our best guess of someone's alignment.

For me, the role specifics made sense of the in-thread-behavior and that was a HUGE relief.

Ceph's concerns resonate, though. and my background paranoia about Cabd probably magnifies that resonance.

1523 stands out to me tho. The "If you only knew how dangerous that actually is" feels like bravado hinting at a powerful role to get unwnd to back off, but all the way back in 1013 she describes her ability as "it's hard to imagine a more useless one. But it's not a poison doc"

Not going to explicate this. It will become clear with our flip why (as opposed to generic mafia player X) would view our ability as useless while also seeing a corner case where it ~could~ come into play.

In post 1940, Lukewarm wrote:I already talked about 1621's read on me being shocking for a town ffery, but she has somewhat walked that back. None of the other reads stand out too much to me, other then ffery wanting medea in the top tier, and I still don't feel like I understand that. Would very much like ffery to talk more about that read, specifically what resulted in the hard switch before and after break.

I'm no longer there (though gawd the relief of their role making sense of their backfootedness was awesome while I had it) and am wondering if they're too high in our list currently. I don't think I've used this word in a mafia game for a long while but my reads usually form as a gestalt. sometimes one post will illuminate/change the entire body of work. That post initiated a gestalt.

Dunno how clear all this is and I doubt I can make it more clear.

I'm thinking about ways I can insulate my processing of the rest of this game from the ridiculous and illogical swirl of the medea read, at least until it resolves.

In post 1984, ManateeGal wrote:anyoneee wanna talk abt my new and improved readslist

I plan to spend some time with yours and PAs lists tonight.

Every time I return to the thread the 2181 parallels continue.

In post 1994, Titus wrote:

In post 1993, Here There Be Dragons wrote:I dont understand:
-how this is a gambit
-how this being a gambit meshes with 1965

Explain?

Slayer's gambit is a thing. Drawing FoSes and votes deliberately is a gambit.

Hmm. I guess I'm not sure I believe that gambit actually works, but okay.

In post 1995, Here There Be Dragons wrote:rhea's point about medea is salient and making me wonder but i still like medea's content

titus's gambit seems like it would catch someone irregardless of their alignment

~std

You cant post "irregardless" from an account with my name on it :v