For the record, I respect Not_Mafia as a player and genuinely think he is a good scumhunter.
However he is also the exact type of player who is a good scumhunter in part thanks to his vote.
He does actually post content, but the majority of his threat comes from his vote.
Thus why he is a bad stump in my opinion. Not because he's a bad player (he's not, he's a good player), but because he's a bad treestump given his natural pressure.
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2021 11:46 am
by Jingle
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2021 11:47 am
by Not_Mafia
I will never surrender
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2021 11:51 am
by NorwegianboyEE
My political campaign has strong indications of imminent victory.
Give up N_M.
In post 343, House wrote:A vote is not the deciding factor that mastina is claiming. Pressure is. An immortal town scumhunter with the ability to constantly influence votes is much more beneficial than a single vote that can be killed off.
And I am arguing that an immortal town scumhunter who lacks votes innately inherently has less ability to influence votes and generate pressure than a town scumhunter who has a vote, especially when that player is a pressure/high-aggro style player.
Constant influence might be constant, but it is something that generates a different aura. There is a big difference between influence without a vote and influence with a vote.
There is also a big difference between pressure with a vote and pressure without a vote.
I am also arguing that forcing scum to kill players whose votes are a threat is a feature not a flaw, and that treestumping said players is doing the scum a favor by removing the votes they would be most afraid of.
Your concern is negated by the fact that players who know a skilled scumhunter is confirmed town are much more likely to sheep their push which gives the immortal voteless player multiple votes.
I recently played a game where he was even more wrong than me, so I am going to nope Norway Dude.
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:52 pm
by Mia and Maya Fey
Ya tbh if norwee is stump im like... not really gonna follow him since i never do in games
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2021 3:34 pm
by Moongrass
Being 100% right every game is an unreasonable expectation to have of players, even the like of nsg.
This would be good practice for those who fail to factor in others' voices, having a confirmed town voice or two to reason with.
In post 343, House wrote:A vote is not the deciding factor that mastina is claiming. Pressure is. An immortal town scumhunter with the ability to constantly influence votes is much more beneficial than a single vote that can be killed off.
And I am arguing that an immortal town scumhunter who lacks votes innately inherently has less ability to influence votes and generate pressure than a town scumhunter who has a vote, especially when that player is a pressure/high-aggro style player.
Constant influence might be constant, but it is something that generates a different aura. There is a big difference between influence without a vote and influence with a vote.
There is also a big difference between pressure with a vote and pressure without a vote.
I am also arguing that forcing scum to kill players whose votes are a threat is a feature not a flaw, and that treestumping said players is doing the scum a favor by removing the votes they would be most afraid of.
I can persuade others to sheep me which is actually better than having an actual vote.
It's not like I'm frequently sarcastic, or anything.
I frequently miss sarcasm and have actually gotten wrongly pushed for that. “Like you didn’t instantaneously get the joke, clearly you’re not of the allignment known as town”.
It's not like I'm frequently sarcastic, or anything.
I frequently miss sarcasm and have actually gotten wrongly pushed for that. “Like you didn’t instantaneously get the joke, clearly you’re not of the allignment known as town”.
