|
Can someone give me a summary of the cases agains SSV, BK, and Anon? I've been trying to keep up with the thread over the weekend and I remember getting a gut feeling on BK and Anon but I haven't completely followed the bickering that's been going on day 1 because tuckfard posted:Day 1 is about people making small cases seem bigger than they are, people argue, and then someone gets bandwagoned at the last minute.
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:This day 1 is lasting forever uuuuuugh. It's actually kind of close to being over, and there are 8 players (including you) who don't have a vote out on anybody at all. We don't even have enough votes among the top 3 candidates to lynch someone. I'm becoming concerned how the deadline is going to play out at this rate. Jose Valasquez posted:Can someone give me a summary of the cases agains SSV, BK, and Anon? I don't like anon because they've spent all day posting insincere-feeling "oh woe is me these votes on me are bad this is why I don't play anymore" type posts rather than giving any actual opinions or or looking for scum or playing the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
WeLandedOnTheMoon! posted:Why would an actual townie even have the mentality to assume that another townie would willingly sabotage the team? That moronic statement that SSV made is rooted in an "us vs them" mentality, since a legitimate townie wouldn't think that another townie is actively trying to sink the ship. I then read the whole slapfight and still find I still agree with WLOTM, but there's no reason not to also post reads on alternative players and that's a whole lot of posts of WLOTM not doing that. tuckfard posted:You know that I'm not very good at this game but aside from that I would expect you to tell us how a post made you feel a player's motivations were more or less scummy. I mean, your post consists of 'I agree ANs big post was bad and would vote AN. That said I agree with AN regarding BK though, so I'm voting BK.' What's your read on Vines? (Once I'm caught up, I will either do the same, or move my vote)
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
I mentioned yesterday that I find QuoProQuid to be scummy, and I want to clarify why. If you look over the early game, his first vote was on Tuckfard for some really slight meta comment regarding second posts. Alongside that vote he has some dismissive comment that does nothing to actually justify his vote, and I don't think Tuck's original comment is all that self explanatory. After that QPQ spends some time prodding both me and SSV (which could be a bit of distancing or vote justification depending on how our interactions played out). I don't like how he jumps from that moderate stance on SSV to vote for him based on a single SSV post. After that he spends some time prompting several people to speak on specific posters, which does nothing to contribute on its own. It seems like something that someone would do when they want townies to generate content for them to attach themselves to. Then he engages in what is essentially a lurker callout presented as a case with verr. As far as I see it QPQ has: 2 lurker callouts, including votes (tuckfard and verr) A bunch of questions asked to other people with no initiative shown on his own part One vote on SSV that seems to go against the image he was portraying earlier in the game. He then dips back to the well with a second vote on SSV without justifying why he is going back there. That's why I would be willing to vote QPQ.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
King of Bleh posted:I don't like anon because they've spent all day posting insincere-feeling "oh woe is me these votes on me are bad this is why I don't play anymore" type posts rather than giving any actual opinions or or looking for scum or playing the game. The "this always happens to me" stuff smells like emo townie more than caught scum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Ok I'm caught up.Opopanax posted:Nah, I'm good with what I've got. Tinkering is only confuse things, I trust my gut I would really like you to give us some other reads at this point. For now, my vote stays on Vimes: "This post is trying to look like it's creating content, without any content in the post itself. Kind of scummy, unless there is more effort coming in the immediate future." I didn't like it when it was posted and I still don't like it "you have to be town because that is too dumb to be scum. I just can't imagine a scum player being reckless enough to announce that. Although even if you aren't scum, you are actively sabotaging us so. ##vote welandedonthemoon" Posted literally in that order, feels like an out when WLOTM flips. SirSamVimes posted:A lot of people are saying that Moon seems like town, so I guess I have been tunneling them. ##unvote SirSamVimes posted:Also WeLandedOnTheMoon! but I'm trying to avoid beating that drum for now. SirSamVimes posted:Both. He isn't getting lynched today and when almost everyone says he seems townie it makes me wonder if I'm just fixating on a bad read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
Note: we have about ONE DAY left before the deadline. The thread leaders should submit their battle plans within the next 24 hours to their appropriate moderator. The leader who finally wins this intense rock-paper-scissors match will get to pick the battlefield. If you both continue tying I will flip a coin. Thank you for your time! e: EccoRaven posted:If you both continue tying I will flip a coin. I have flipped a coin. Quandary gets to choose the battlefield first! EccoRaven fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Tentative idea that people may or may not like but could be a good play for at least this first day: Our front row in battle will potentially be taking hits from all 4 ranks (rear ranged scum, front melee scum, opposing melee Praetoriennes, opposing ranged Praetoriennes). Given this, anyone valuable to the town in the front row is nigh guaranteed to get pasted. Seems, then, like we should fill the back row with trustworthy players and the front row with 100% untrustworthy, highly lynchable targets, who will give us information on death. E.g., no matter how the lynch plays out, SirSamVimes and AnonymousNarcotics are not going to be good targets for nightkills OR the opposing team in battle, so we put them in the front line. This means the battle plays out in one of three ways: A) front rank is 100% scum -- absurdly unlikely, but actually great for us, because their actions are essentially wasted, possibly they could be forced to target the opposing team. B) front rank is a mixture of scum and suspicious town -- front-rank scum are forced to target, potentially even kill, players they ordinarily would have hoped to see mis-lynched. C) front rank is all town -- we are optimally effective in battle, suspicious players potentially redeem themselves via battle actions, we still gain information if any die. The obvious downside is that a scum-heavy front row weakens our ability to hurt the opposing side in battle, but I personally think the information gain day 1 offsets that. I also am happy volunteering to join this first fight, and can contribute from either rank (although, if we were to follow the above tactic, consider myself a poor choice for front row since I've drawn relatively light suspicion so far this game).
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
I wouldn't put me into battle tonight IMO
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Note also that my suggestion is predicated on the assumption that the mechanics rule of "ranged must fire forward, melee must target own rank" is correct, and scum don't have powerful wildcard abilities that let them, e.g., fire backwards into the rear rank, or attack our entire battle group while ignoring ranks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Atoramos posted:I don't like this at all. Verr has obviously been paying close attention to the thread, considering he posted a compilation of battle posts. But gives a single read on a player, and that read amounts to 'give us more information on your role'. Where's the scumhunting, you're obviously reading the thread. i am reading the thread. sorry to be dead weight but i haven't had any reads on anyone that someone else hasn't jumped on first. day 1 is hard. my two reads: anon is strangely absent despite her impending lynching, and she hasn't responded to my request for more battle-role info, so i'll ##vote AnonymousNarcotics quidproquid is a cool guy for not voting me because i'm a newbie. you should all take notes. and i'm with you Bleh, I think battle is a great way to scumhunt. our choices for round 1 should be carefully chosen so that we can use day 1 batttle as a litmus test for the rest of the game. don't be weird about this boss Quandary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
If battle plans are being done, I'd like to request again that I get put in the frontline.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
I think that I can help us win the first battle, and I think that backline would be better for me, but I could realistically do frontline if Quandary wanted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
Front line please.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
merk posted:Front line please.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Back row please *pew pew*
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
i can do aither
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
I perform best from the back row.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Front Line: SirSamVimes (Frontline Marksman, something about testing people?) CCKeane (No Further Detail) Spoonsy (No Further Detail) Verr (Front Line Support) Tremendous Taste (No Further Detail) Tuckfard (No Further Detail) Versatile: Imgay (No Further Detail) The Lord of Hats (Beefy Inaccurate Ranged) AnonymousNarcotics (No Further Detail) Meinberg (Best at range, some personal defensive abilities) Bottleknight (No Further Detail) Back Line: QuoProQuid (No Further Detail) Fits (Sick Snipez, "Throw me to the wolves so  doesn't kick in)Puntification (No Further Detail) The Ninth Layer (No Further Detail) Sinistral (Can't melee for poo poo, minor healing ability) We Landed on the Moon (Could do front, back is better, weird vig-ish ability?) Jose Valasquz (No Further Detail) Atoramos (No Further Detail) Non-Combat: Quandary (Protect the Precious Wizard) Opoponax No Info: Kaschei CCKeane Chaoslord King of Bleh
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
i prefer front line action but i am effective either way
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:09
|
|
I just got back from the woods and I'm catching up on the thread. Be prepared for my hot takes as they happen during my catch uptuckfard posted:You know what, I looked at Meinberg too because I don't remember anything about what he's said. Well, it's because he's said nothing. He's apparently gone for the weekend LARPing, which is probably worth a vote right there, but I agree that his post on WLOTM was shady, and everything else he's posted is worthless. Something feels off. Just for your information, LARPing is good and also cool. You should try it sometime. AnonymousNarcotics posted:The votes on me are bad. I'm good in battle and if you lynch me you'll be losing out on a good soldier. Yo, this is a really lovely post. Reacting to votes by engaging with the battle mechanics makes me hella shady about AnonNarc. SirSamVimes posted:Finally, Meinberg. Also doesn't have a lot to go on. I should have worked harder to make my chain of thought logical there. The "I miss Capps" was due to him being someone who would have understood my reasoning. The death of jokephase comments were to explain my unvote. WeLandedOnTheMoon! posted:Furthermore the entire thing is entirely hypocritical. SSV decries me as a "townie working to hurt the town," then he votes me (actively hurting the town). This logic is also bad. A reckless vigilante can be dangerous to the town, and while it's not scumhunting, I agree with: Quandary posted:To me the SSV attacks on WLOTM scream bad townie play, not necessarily scum play. I don't know why as scum SSV would jump immediately on WLOTM. What motivation does he have there to do that? And it's probably just me, but WLOTM's defensiveness is another thing that doesn't vibe with me. I've just found from my personal experience that those who are most eager to vigorously defend themselves, especially on D1, are the scum. QuoProQuid posted:dumb joke. I kinda like the argument put forth here, but I think it's a little too early at this point, what with Verr's limited post history. I want to see if he actually plays Mafia first. WeLandedOnTheMoon! posted:I can't remember how long you played mafia, but I know you arent a noob. You know that calling out a lurker is unproductive white noise. Cut it. And maybe I just have a tone issue with WLOTM, because again this is coming off as way too aggressive in my eyes. Opopanax posted:If it makes you feel any better I'm sorry I hurt your widdle feewings Everyone is so mean this game! Tremendous Taste posted:I think moon is town lying about certainty toward Ssv and is too caught up in his own shtick to back down now Taste is being quite reasonable and logical about things.  Tremendous Taste posted:I'd like members of the proud qal horde to sign a pact to ignore moon and Ssv for today. Be better than this mess, friends. Signed- Meinberg WeLandedOnTheMoon! posted:I don't want to pile on Meinberg at the moment, plus he will hopefully defend himself when he returns, but I also dont like this post. Okay, so I was referencing SSV calling his vote on Quandary a turbo. In a large number of games that I've played that have started with a jokey turbo, they have included the video for that song Rolling Start, which would often result in other people also calling "rolling start" when making their joke votes. And thus, I decided to rib SSV for not including that video with a joke vote on him. I don't see how you can see any seriousness there? Like, maybe it's just you and me that aren't vibing. It's like we're on different levels here. King of Bleh posted:For my part I was pretty careful to characterize his post as "weird in a syntactic sense" (doubtless what everyone else picked up on) but not to call him scummy. He'd be far down my list currently, though his lurking is crummy. If you want to see weird in a syntactic sense hoo boy are you in for a wild ride through my excessively stilted way of expressing myself. Verr posted:i am reading the thread. sorry to be dead weight but i haven't had any reads on anyone that someone else hasn't jumped on first. day 1 is hard. For what it is worth, this feels like a super newbie town post to me. Maybe it's just because I can sympathize with the sentiments. King of Bleh posted:Tentative idea that people may or may not like but could be a good play for at least this first day: Our front row in battle will potentially be taking hits from all 4 ranks (rear ranged scum, front melee scum, opposing melee Praetoriennes, opposing ranged Praetoriennes). Given this, anyone valuable to the town in the front row is nigh guaranteed to get pasted. Seems, then, like we should fill the back row with trustworthy players and the front row with 100% untrustworthy, highly lynchable targets, who will give us information on death. E.g., no matter how the lynch plays out, SirSamVimes and AnonymousNarcotics are not going to be good targets for nightkills OR the opposing team in battle, so we put them in the front line. This means the battle plays out in one of three ways: But it made me go back and look at this post which feels super sketchy to me, between the whole "let's use the battle mechanics to scumhunt," "it's all cool to kill town, because we would have killed them anyway," and the "put me in coach!" bits.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
I submit you're falling prey to the classic "I disagree with this train of logic, therefore it must be scummy" fallacy, but I made my suggestion in full awareness that I'd get responses like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
I went larping once and it was fun. Best part was being the super fit guy there wrecking noobs. Heh heh heh. Anyway, yeah, I'm not feeling meinberg at all so welp.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
I, CCKeane, was there to witness the majesty of kaschei's total domination of ill-formed wrecks of humanity like myself in God's own sport, LARP
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
I can be good in battle, or I can be great in battle, depending on where I stand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
Combo breaking CCKeane's posts
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Now, and only now, do I briefly miss my old angry potato avatar.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
I think opopanax is scum and may find an opportunity to do more than handwave my feelings about it soon! ##vote opopanax
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
I will handwave your feelings. Handwave them away!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:05
|
|
|
I'm phone posting before bed but atoramos, here are some vines thoughts. On the surface I agree that what WLOTM pulled is lovely and not helpful to the town. I'm all about that and honestly I don't disagree with that vote. I think that as town, a day action (presumably harmful) that early in the day is reckless and very likely harmful and should not be tolerated. I don't know much about vines but he comes across as new at this point. I love (almost prefer) to be "assigned" by the thread people to look at because it's overwhelming and I'm terrible. I think he posted a thought about WLOTM's action and then admitted that the majority thread opinion swayed him and I see nothing wrong with that. I'll post more tomorrow around lunch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:33
|
|
|
chaoslord posted:The point was to show how many people have taken a negative view of Meinberg, which I could have stated better. It's easy to say "A lot of the thread has been down on him" but I think having it laid out like that with proof is better than reporting a general vibe. It also allows for accountability with opinions on him. In a game where we need 13 votes to dunk, 9 people (8 without BK) have been suspicious or commented negatively toward Meinberg but only two votes have come from it. Why is that? If he's just a #2/3 option for everyone who is negative on him like with you, that's fine and dandy. It just seemed weird to have so little action. Having the names is kind of a call out about where he stands on folks lists and also allows them to correct me if I've mischaracterized their stance. Do you have a conclusion there at all or is that an honest question
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
merk posted:Looking back, I think this was a good vote at the time and mostly ignored by the thread. Everyone should go back and read fits' post here. lol this is the first time you've actually acknowledge me merk, I'm honored
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
Quandary posted:It's this one I don't like this vote. I didn't see it but then his immediate next post King of Bleh posted:I've seen the "not really saying anything" point come up re: me a couple times in this game now and I'm not really sure where people are getting that from. I'm not the most verbose poster, but I think I've been pretty consistently responding to other players and posting my own reactions to stuff going on in the thread. You say "wishy washy" but I think you could easily scan through my post history and reconstruct all my alignment reads, and that they would all be pretty explicit in terms of which way I was feeling and how sure I was. This is exactly my frustration when I'm scum. I have the mindset of I'm here, I'm posting my honest reactions, why are people casing me? But you can't get actually mad or it's flailing. This is exactly the kind of self-awareness post that I would have as a scum player. He talks about himself in the context of the game as if he's planning his meticulous play, not just scumhunting. It's not a town mindset. ##vote KoB
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
Atoramos posted:Actually, scratch that. This is now page 17 and Opop never goes back to discuss his original lurker vote at all. Lord of Hats has given enough content where that vote does deserve more of a justification after being directly asked 'Why are you still voting for Lord of Hats', and Opop gives no reason at all. thank you for agreeing with me, I guess? I don't see what you originally found wrong with me hounding him for that though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Opopanax posted:I believe you misread, I'm not calling him a lurker, I'm voting for him because he was calling out lurkers way too early. It feels like fake content no other reads? like at all?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
King of Bleh posted:I don't like anon because they've spent all day posting insincere-feeling "oh woe is me these votes on me are bad this is why I don't play anymore" type posts rather than giving any actual opinions or or looking for scum or playing the game. which part of this is the scum part, because that seems alignment-neutral. Is this one of those "even if they're town they won't be helpful to the game so lynch them now" posts?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
WeLandedOnTheMoon! posted:After that he spends some time prompting several people to speak on specific posters, which does nothing to contribute on its own. It seems like something that someone would do when they want townies to generate content for them to attach themselves to. Just curious, why would scum do this? scum are presumably trying to fake their own content, and generally look bad when attaching themselves to others content.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
merk-"blah blah bk blah blah" bk- sempie noticed me
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
Also I really don't like how Sinistral basically stopped posting with no excuse after mild suspicion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
BottleKnight posted:Just curious, why would scum do this? scum are presumably trying to fake their own content, and generally look bad when attaching themselves to others content. Because simply saying, "bottleknight, could you tell me about x and y?" is not actually helpful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 11:40
|
|