Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2022 2:38 pm
Oop
because early game is lowinfo? like is that a real question?In post 297, Gamma Emerald wrote:I think what you said feels off from youIn post 295, PenguinPower wrote:because that's what i saidIn post 294, Off The Hook wrote:okay cool, I'll only skim and take in the bare minimum needed to process what's going onIn post 292, PenguinPower wrote:Having a good understanding of the game state this early on points to informed knowledge. yes - that's weird.In post 291, Rad wrote:Wait, so having a strong understanding of what's happened so far in the game is SCUMMY to you? lolIn post 289, Frogsterking wrote:I can argue that this is showing a higher awareness of the gamestate which can be viewed as cautious/scummy.
Is this a common belief?
~GE
why do you think gamestate knowledge this early is scummy
also I wouldn't even call what I was talking about that frogster took issue with gamestate awareness, it was just a post that I read
~GE
In post 299, T-Bone wrote:I was gonna vote but Pooky talked me out of it.
okay, and being keen on the gamestate early vs, later on is scummy how?In post 301, PenguinPower wrote:because early game is lowinfo? like is that a real question?In post 297, Gamma Emerald wrote:I think what you said feels off from youIn post 295, PenguinPower wrote:because that's what i saidIn post 294, Off The Hook wrote:okay cool, I'll only skim and take in the bare minimum needed to process what's going onIn post 292, PenguinPower wrote:Having a good understanding of the game state this early on points to informed knowledge. yes - that's weird.In post 291, Rad wrote:Wait, so having a strong understanding of what's happened so far in the game is SCUMMY to you? lolIn post 289, Frogsterking wrote:I can argue that this is showing a higher awareness of the gamestate which can be viewed as cautious/scummy.
Is this a common belief?
~GE
why do you think gamestate knowledge this early is scummy
also I wouldn't even call what I was talking about that frogster took issue with gamestate awareness, it was just a post that I read
~GE
I wasn't referring to whatever "frogster took issue with" - I was making a general point.
I was distracted by TFTIn post 303, T-Bone wrote:Yeah but I took the pagetop. Who has the real power?
Because. As. The. Game. Moves. Foward. More. Information. Comes. To. Light. And. It. Makes. Sense. For. People. To. "Be Keen." On. The. Gamestate. Later. On. While. That. Information. Does. Not. Exist. In. The. Early. Game. To. Uninformed. Players.In post 306, Off The Hook wrote:okay, and being keen on the gamestate early vs, later on is scummy how?
Also I brought up the frogster thing because and marci were both like "lol we're getting SR for READING"
~GE
did you roll mafia you can tell meIn post 312, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I'm just here to chill
Lmao, I don't think you appear even remotely defensive.In post 296, Frogsterking wrote:I can checkIn post 290, Bell wrote:@Frogster have I not seemed defensive?
okay yeah I don't think that matches my idea of itIn post 313, PenguinPower wrote:The overall understanding of the game?
that's fair - i wasn't responding to thatIn post 319, Lukewarm wrote:Penguin, I think your point makes sense in a general statement context.
But frogster's example was that OTH was aware of the C+G hydra having a posting restriction.
So I don't think it makes sense in this specific case