In post 739, Roden wrote:It seems clear now that we do have a Tracker, otherwise T3's death makes no sense.
just read the second part, sorry for taking ur post out of context.
but how does that tell that we have tracker?
Why else does scum kill T3 after he just got accused of being a potential deep wolf and Nancy got town locked by basically everyone? Unless scum is just trying to lead us into believing they're PR hunting...that could be a possibility actually. But even then, Nancy would've been a better kill if we're in a 2 Goon or Friendly Neighbor set up.
isnt there like a 200 iq play where scum kills t3 because they want us to think there is tracker in the game? and so when push comes to shove... scum can easily claim tracker without a cc and have a better liability of staying alive?
this is probably unlikely tho.
I literally just said this in the post you quoted...
In post 749, GrandpaMo wrote:but wait if there were is a tracker, why didnt they kill t3 instead of psyche that night?
We already discussed this back on Day 2. Scum has to kill protective roles before they can kill investigative roles. In addition, Psyche was a guaranteed PR and he counter claimed a protective role, so of course he was going to die. T3 randomly claimed Tracker, which meant he wasn't a guaranteed PR. And Psyche would most likely protect T3 anyway, so targeting T3 makes zero sense for scum to do. Why target a Tracker when a Doctor/Jailer just successfully counter claimed scum?
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2021 4:22 pm
by Roden
In post 737, GrandpaMo wrote:NO I THOUGHT T3 WAS TRACKER. WHY DID T3 DIE AT NIGHT.
i think everyone should rr now!
Wait, Grandpa you literally just said here that you thought we had a Tracker lol. Why are you acting like it's weird for me to think there's a Tracker?
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2021 7:14 pm
by ClarkBar
Late D2 I had real reservations but I didn't have time to make a meaningful post.
Reservations= I had real issues with Chuck and felt that was a good place to start. I was worried that the back and forth between me and Chuck went completely ignored. Was my case against Chuck any good? Was it bullshit? Were the counterpoints brought up by Chuck worthy of discussion? We got none of that. There was discussion about PoE. D2 was lazy and I'm part of the problem.
711 is all you would really need to know. I don't know who scum is, but I wish I had unvoted earlier when I saw a wagon grow without anyone give a clear reason why they were voting Chuck over me.
In post 739, Roden wrote:It seems clear now that we do have a Tracker, otherwise T3's death makes no sense.
just read the second part, sorry for taking ur post out of context.
but how does that tell that we have tracker?
Why else does scum kill T3 after he just got accused of being a potential deep wolf and Nancy got town locked by basically everyone? Unless scum is just trying to lead us into believing they're PR hunting...that could be a possibility actually. But even then, Nancy would've been a better kill if we're in a 2 Goon or Friendly Neighbor set up.
Not if my reads were wrong. In the game I played with Mo, scum pocketed me so well, it was inevitable I made it to Elo, so if Mo is wrong, then that’s the only thing that would make sense.
I know I’m town and I feel pretty confident Mo is as well. As far as the rest of you go, one of you could be fooling me. And I already explained why I’m pretty confident it isn’t Mo. I doubt Blurry would have said what he said about Mo if he were a buddy.
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2021 10:57 pm
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 131, BlurryX wrote:Sorry, folks. It was a busy weekend for me so I wasn't particularly active, but I read through the last few pages and I have some thoughts I want to get out there:
In post 62, Nancy Drew 39 wrote:
We have 8 days guys, no need to rush anything. Wrt to Mo, I miselimed him in a past game. He could be scum here or limbait. Some people are naturally scummy players. It would be nice if we had some time to actually see he’s really the best elim or not.
He isn’t playing extremely differently here from the game I miselimed him in so I’m wary.
This post suggests town to me. If someone were scum, I don't know if they would be wanting to inject doubt into the primary bus this early on. It could be waffling, but to me the more likely scenario is town trying to play carefully and make sure that they aren't just getting rid of someone who is unlikeable but isn't scum.
The E-1 early on is probably a good thing, because it's the catalyst that is getting people talking (provided no quick-hammer). Without it, I'm not sure people would be talking as much this early on in the game (although I'm not super familiar with how the early games really go usually).
Thoughts on some other players:
@Psyche
Hasn't really posted anything of substance. Hopped on the wagon early (I guess technically started it, was he 2nd vote on Grandpa?) but I feel like RVS doesn't go anywhere without those first few steps. A few jokes, but nothing that can really be analyzed other than #67. Writing that, but not unvoting could be a way of distancing himself from any blame if wagon ends up lynching town. Kind of like a "see, I'm not a scum who was pushing the wagon, I had doubts about it".
@Clarkbar
Contributing more of substance than the others. I buy his reasoning for putting someone to 4 votes, as has been proven, it is a good way to provoke discussion, which gives more information to work with. I don't think there's anything I want to specifically highlight in his posts, he seems to be asking questions and sharing his thoughts, but I don't think there's anything I can see that tells me anything about his particular leanings.
One thing that did strike me was in
@T3
Similar to Psyche in that there wasn't much substance there, just hopping on the wagon and pressing it. Could be Psyche/T3 scum team (can two SEs be mafia in the same game?) but that would be kind of convenient.
@Grandpa
I don't interpret him voting for himself as scummy as you others do. If I could summarize his defense it is: nobody has built a convincing case on me yet and hammering me early cuts off any further discussion for the day, neither of which tell me anything one way or another. I'm curious to see how this develops over the course of the day.
@LunarEclipse
Self-deprecation aside, they've had one post of any substance #79. I'm not as convinced as Nancy is that this is a town-leaning post, because I think that assuming someone can't put themselves into the mindset of town just because this is their first game on this forum. I think I need to see more posts from them before I develop any ideas of leaning.
I think that covers everyone so far. For now I think keeping Grandpa as the lead contender for the guillotine is the right move, as they do have an erratic posting style that may cause confusion later in the game, but hopefully there is something more substantive to base a day 1 lynch off of in the next few days, and we haven't yet heard from the two AFK players.
In post 520, Val89 wrote:I do think we need a claim here, James. You are at E-1. It looks like a damn serious wagon to me, and Nancy isn't the only one driving it.
I don't feel good about the fact most of reason you are up for the chop seems based on a single post by your predecessor, and what may well be chalked up to communication issues anyway, but that doesn't negate the fact you are up for the lim here, and I don't exactly have a townread on you myself right now. My vote isn't the only possible source for the hammer either.
The only scum case people have on me is one unclear post by my predecesor, which isn't even scum indicative it just isn't helpful, and mainly the fact there is 1 unfinished sentence. There exists an actual scum case on Nancy. I'm certain there's at least 1 scum on my wagon. T3's vote is just a prod vote as far as I can tell, so it's only E-2. I'm not worried about someone quickhammering me, I know nobody would have an explanation for it and would be policy hammered D2.
In post 416, JamesTheNames wrote:@Chuck obviously I can't tell you what Blurryx my predecesor was intending with his 1 actual post, if you ignore Blurryx's comment, can I get your opinion on my slot? It's a pain in the rear to be scum read / scum leant because of a predecesor and to not be able to do anything.
I implore both Psyche and Roden to answer this pretending the @was their name, then to ask themselves if they actually have a case against me that isn't from Blurryx being weird or unhelpful.
I wish I had been trying harder on D2 or I would have noticed this. :/
Well congrats, you just made the Doctor get hammered. He isn't a Jailkeeper. Even if it was possible that he was telling the truth, you as a tracker should have known instantly that it could have been either, yet you somehow didn't.
It’s possible scum believed this. I don’t think Mo thinking this is weird.
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:19 pm
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 380, JamesTheNames wrote:Part of me dislikes the fact I've come to town read/lean both T3 and GrandpaMo...
Trannslation: I probably have to write them off as miselims.
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:27 pm
by Nancy Drew 39
In post 333, JamesTheNames wrote:Regarding the votes on me, one is a prod vote, Psyche's was something I unfortunately can't answer, and Roden seems suspicious. 233 feels like he null reads Blurryx here, 258 feels like he scum reads here. I just find it strange how he appears to have a case on Nancy, but when it doesn't cause a wagon he jumps onto Blurryx's. Scum lean.
While my predecessor did place his vote during the RVS stage, I think it was actually well placed unknowingly. 73 and 269 strikes me as rather hypocritical, it was addressed, kind of. I'm very curious why Psyche in 310 claimed he was being overeager. You agree with whom? I reread every post between 269 and 310 any a time and didn't see anyone bring up 269 nor comment on it. I honestly feel like this is a scumslip that was meant to be in the scum chat but they messed up.
As such my vote is staying here.
314 is scummy. The only reason to hide reasoning would be because you'd be outing a power role. This clearly isn't the case. You have a scum read and 2 nulls.
Nancy is null, her whole reasoning for town reading Mo is meta, that isn't valid in my eyes, most certainly not as a main justification.
In post 739, Roden wrote:It seems clear now that we do have a Tracker, otherwise T3's death makes no sense.
just read the second part, sorry for taking ur post out of context.
but how does that tell that we have tracker?
Why else does scum kill T3 after he just got accused of being a potential deep wolf and Nancy got town locked by basically everyone? Unless scum is just trying to lead us into believing they're PR hunting...that could be a possibility actually. But even then, Nancy would've been a better kill if we're in a 2 Goon or Friendly Neighbor set up.
isnt there like a 200 iq play where scum kills t3 because they want us to think there is tracker in the game? and so when push comes to shove... scum can easily claim tracker without a cc and have a better liability of staying alive?
this is probably unlikely tho.
I literally just said this in the post you quoted...
you did where ?
In post 749, GrandpaMo wrote:but wait if there were is a tracker, why didnt they kill t3 instead of psyche that night?
We already discussed this back on Day 2. Scum has to kill protective roles before they can kill investigative roles. In addition, Psyche was a guaranteed PR and he counter claimed a protective role, so of course he was going to die. T3 randomly claimed Tracker, which meant he wasn't a guaranteed PR. And Psyche would most likely protect T3 anyway, so targeting T3 makes zero sense for scum to do. Why target a Tracker when a Doctor/Jailer just successfully counter claimed scum?
okay that makes sense, i never thought about scum killing because it was a better kill. i forgot that psyche eventually did claim doc so it was best for scum to kill.
In post 737, GrandpaMo wrote:NO I THOUGHT T3 WAS TRACKER. WHY DID T3 DIE AT NIGHT.
i think everyone should rr now!
Wait, Grandpa you literally just said here that you thought we had a Tracker lol. Why are you acting like it's weird for me to think there's a Tracker?
yea because of the claim, you were saying it in the setup wise i believe
Well congrats, you just made the Doctor get hammered. He isn't a Jailkeeper. Even if it was possible that he was telling the truth, you as a tracker should have known instantly that it could have been either, yet you somehow didn't.
It’s possible scum believed this. I don’t think Mo thinking this is weird.
wait james claimed doc not the other way around?
i keep getting that confused.
t3 claimed tracker.
james claimed doc
psyche claims jk
i cc doc
correct?
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2021 4:43 am
by GrandpaMo
holy fuck why does reading james iso makes u wanna say there is scum between roden nd chuck lol
Well congrats, you just made the Doctor get hammered. He isn't a Jailkeeper. Even if it was possible that he was telling the truth, you as a tracker should have known instantly that it could have been either, yet you somehow didn't.
It’s possible scum believed this. I don’t think Mo thinking this is weird.
wait james claimed doc not the other way around?
i keep getting that confused.
t3 claimed tracker.
james claimed doc
psyche claims jk
i cc doc
correct?
Psyche technically never claimed a specific role. He just counter claimed the Doctor claim and said his role made it impossible for James to be the Doctor.
Nancy Drew 39 wrote:
In post 333, JamesTheNames wrote:Regarding the votes on me, one is a prod vote, Psyche's was something I unfortunately can't answer, and Roden seems suspicious. 233 feels like he null reads Blurryx here, 258 feels like he scum reads here. I just find it strange how he appears to have a case on Nancy, but when it doesn't cause a wagon he jumps onto Blurryx's. Scum lean.
While my predecessor did place his vote during the RVS stage, I think it was actually well placed unknowingly. 73 and 269 strikes me as rather hypocritical, it was addressed, kind of. I'm very curious why Psyche in 310 claimed he was being overeager. You agree with whom? I reread every post between 269 and 310 any a time and didn't see anyone bring up 269 nor comment on it. I honestly feel like this is a scumslip that was meant to be in the scum chat but they messed up.
As such my vote is staying here.
314 is scummy. The only reason to hide reasoning would be because you'd be outing a power role. This clearly isn't the case. You have a scum read and 2 nulls.
Nancy is null, her whole reasoning for town reading Mo is meta, that isn't valid in my eyes, most certainly not as a main justification.
My null read is
Nancy
, my scum leans are Roden and
Chuck
and my scum read is
Psyche
What do people make of this?
Looks like he put his scum partner in his town reads to me. Not particularly unexpected for Day 1.
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2021 11:03 am
by Marashu
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2021 12:55 pm
by Roden
Since the game's just slowing to a crawl here, can I ask everyone to give an updated reads list?
Nancy and Val are my current town reads, while Clark and Grandpa are my scum reads. I can explain this in further detail but I don't want to influence scum's reads, so I'll go into detail once everyone else posts.
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2021 1:00 pm
by Val89
Nancy and Roden are town, Clark and Grandpa scum. Call me a copy cat if you like.
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2021 1:02 pm
by Val89
I really need to hear fom Grandpa on what's in James' ISO that makes him think {Clark, Roden}.
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2021 4:23 pm
by GrandpaMo
In post 768, Val89 wrote:I really need to hear fom Grandpa on what's in James' ISO that makes him think {Clark, Roden}.
yea i just came back with work...
expect like a complete analysis on james readlist on why i do expect its clark / roden in a couple of hours
tldr; this is manly based on james interactions with clark nd roden (the post that nancy pointed out of james) i noticed it from that and started quick skimming jame's iso and seeing their reads.
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2021 4:24 pm
by GrandpaMo
In post 767, Val89 wrote:Nancy and Roden are town, Clark and Grandpa scum. Call me a copy cat if you like.
In post 768, Val89 wrote:I really need to hear fom Grandpa on what's in James' ISO that makes him think {Clark, Roden}.
yea i just came back with work...
expect like a complete analysis on james readlist on why i do expect its clark / roden in a couple of hours
tldr; this is manly based on james interactions with clark nd roden (the post that nancy pointed out of james) i noticed it from that and started quick skimming jame's iso and seeing their reads.
Oh, you actually are suspecting me. I guessed that was a typo because your earlier post said Chuck instead of Clark, and it looked like you were accusing Nancy of thinking that.
Either way, we've already been over this. For me to be scum I'd have to have hard bussed Blurry/James before the replacement even came in. Psyche had scum read Blurry first, but the wagon didn't start until I repeatedly kept bringing attention to Blurry and soft accused Val of trying to divert attention by arguing with Nancy. Even when James subbed in, I kept my vote on his slot and continued to pressure him.
It's not like I couldn't pivot out to another wagon either. Nancy had multiple people going after her and I'd already stated that I didn't trust Val's intentions at the time. If I was scum, all I'd have to do is completely ignore Blurry and help Val put pressure on Nancy. Literally all I'd have to do is shut up and James would likely still be in the game.
If you don't believe me, go look back at what happened. It starts around page 10 I believe. I specifically say that I think the early wagon on you was bad and that we should look more at Blurry.
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2021 4:53 am
by GrandpaMo
if nancy is scum, they already won. and also im down to vote clark
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2021 4:53 am
by GrandpaMo
also sorry for not giving the analysis. just felt unmotivated to play anymore ; was like this sitewide.