Total posts: 6,549
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
How would scum preferring one lynch to another not be strong evidence that the lynch they prefer is more likely to be town?
I agree that, if I know someone is scum and they prefer a lynch, that suggests the person they prefer to lynch is more likely to be town. I don't know how that applies here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Interesting... Like this reads as scum buddying (to me the reasons people are scum reading savant seem pretty valid) but you've also been accused of scum buddying him multiple times at this point, and you'd know how this stance would look as scum, so maybe it's legit?
I've watched Savant play often enough by now that I have a pretty good idea of the differences between his scum and town behaviors. If that reads as scum buddying, I don't know what to tell you.
If savant is refusing to fake claim, its not for lack of "being able to find a fake claim" imo, it's just that its clearly working for him. Threatens town with a d1ck comparing contest and towns too nervous to mislynch to take the contest. Okay but that breeds a lot more of that behavior in the future, it's something we've seen time and time again with people (even myself).Personally if I am getting pushed to claim early and I do not agree with the reasons, I'd just lie as town about my role (if I am a power role, otherwise just be truthful). Refusing to claim outright is almost always scummy, or seen as scummy, if we don't lynch him now he's gonna be on the back of half the playerlists minds the whole game. I think there needs to be a clear line with this drawn. If savant had a very good reason drawn out for why he shouldn't claim that is different, but if he is playing drastically different that needs to be addressed. And I take that even acknowledging the comments he made dp1 about no doing his list thingy. Savant has historically stuck to his guns more often like this in defending himself as scum than town, so no matter what its a tough pill to swallow.
Yeah... I've had a chance to think about this overnight and the more I've read through the responses to his behavior this DP, the more I'm coming around to this opinion. It's standing on principle to a certain extent, but I agree that we don't want to encourage this kind of behavior and, as you and others have mentioned, he's far from the first to operate this way and get his comeuppance for it. I also get that he's going to remain in PoE regardless just for being this intransigent, so there's a valid reason to consider taking him off the table for that reason alone.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I just straight up disagree with setting things up as a 1v1 situation, though you continue to make it out that way.
Anyway, it's late, and I'm not going to continue arguing this at the cost of a good night's sleep. I'll reconsider the Savant lynch in the morning.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
So your point is "lynch your townread because I believe scum will be on whatever other lynch is setup." That's not a super convincing argument for why Savant is scum.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I've stated my reasons for opposing his lynch now several times. If you want to respond, please refer back.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I still don't think Savant is scum. That's my perspective, and it's not going to change just because there's more people on his wagon or because I should just trust you to know. Pie's willing to vote based on principle, but I'm not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
1) Savant is scum2) Scum is inactive (aka Lunatic)3) RM is scum4) Scum want to keep Savant alive for possible buddying/towncred
That list of choices basically encompass everyone.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
If you oppose it, vote Savant. Its that binary.
You keep saying some variation of this. I'm opposed to the massclaim strategy. I'm not voting Savant. It's not binary. The decision is not his or mine alone to make.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Then you are enabling Savant to do what he is doing. You are emabling the massclaim.
The majority of players are enabling the massclaim. I'm opposed to it and I've stated my opposition, but I'm not going to lynch someone based on principle.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Vote Savant or you are support him helping engineer the massclaim with Mikal.
Just because I oppose the massclaim strategy doesn't mean I'm going to lynch one of the people behind it, dude.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
At least I'm getting a head's up for this one. Last time was the Game Show Mafia and I got lynched because I happened to be driving when everyone decided it was time to claim together.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
I still don't love the idea of a mass claim, but if we're going to do it, I need some clarity on what's expected. A softclaim giving some vague idea of what the justification looks like, is that right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I get that you’re frustrated with him refusing to claim, though he made clear that he wasn’t going to do that under pressure. He’s hardly the first and won’t be the last. If that was part of a pattern of behavior he was trying to blend in or at least not stand out from past play, I would probably have voted him already, but I’d have to believe that he drew attention to himself as scum by changing up his style substantially, then essentially dared us to lynch him. I just don’t buy that view. It’s possible, but not the most likely explanation.
I take him stalling as him needing time to fake. Therefore no matter what he claims now I stick to it.
So he’s scum, he’s had almost 24 hours to come up with a fake claim, but hasn’t quite managed it yet and is daring us to lynch him just to gather some more time to… decide to claim all of a sudden? If he does suddenly relent, he still has to somehow avoid getting CC’d, which isn’t going to get any easier without more claims ahead of him. It would also come off as pretty scummy after being this intransigent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
…why are you making this 1v1? And why are you rushing this at all?
Created:
Posted in:
Alright, I’m caught up and while I understand where these votes are coming from, I can’t agree to voting Savant. This frustration and his responses so far come off as a townie who doesn’t give a damn about being the lynch if he’s backed into a corner like this again, and considering how I saw that play out last game with the Enabler claim, I can see where it stems from.
If he’s doing this as scum, literally making his responses as frustrated and obviously scummy (like that Godfather claim) as possible, then props to him for making this look like an authentic townie meltdown. I just don’t buy that he’d do all this after shifting up his gameplay for much of the game, especially at L-1.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Casey_Risk
Big reaction to a tilt scum...
Wouldn’t call questioning the read a “big reaction” but fine.
It's a combination of you providing a very large spectrum for your softclaim (A-M is half the alphabet) combined with not really giving me any particular reason to townread you yet.
I’m hardly alone on the first, as you acknowledge. I guess that explains the “tilt,” though the person who suggested that wide range in the first place is somehow among your townreads. Weird delineation. Haven’t had much chance to post today, so I can at least understand the second.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Casey_Risk
Maybe they weren't super accurate, but the utility in giving your reads isn't just so that you can try to convince others to vote for who you suspect, it's also to have a clearly described thought process that others can follow, allowing them to point out any weird pivots or changes in playstyle. Even if it can be done as scum (and of course, scum often do give detailed reads), it still takes a lot of effort, as you yourself just admitted to. The fact that Savant is backing out of taking that effort is worthy of suspicion imo.
The difference is notable, but what you said was that it takes more effort for him to do this as scum, which just isn’t true. All that would change is the way he interprets each line that’s coming from his partner, and not necessarily even that. He could interpret everything the same way he would as town, even if that means bussing his partner.
As for whether the lack of effort makes him scummy, I guess that’s up to some interpretation, but I don’t think Savant would make shifts like this as scum. Dude knows well enough that he gets targeted for those shifts.
Lest I be labeled a hypocrite, however, I do have reads of my own to share now that we're a few pages in and there's some substance to comment on. A detailed reads list will have to wait until later, but for now, my top town reads are Wylted and Pie, while my top scum reads are Savant and Owen. Also, tilt town on Mikal and tilt scum on WF. I'll expand on my read on Owen in my next post, probably during my 'lunch' break (it's not really lunch since it's in the evening but I consider it my lunch anyway). I think there might be something there.
So why are you scumreading me, exactly? Because I’m defending Savant and you’re scumreading him? This is a lot to drop without much explanation as to why.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Well, then it's up to you whether you'll support it, preference or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I didn't say it was dirty, that's not my problem with it. We clearly disagree on what strategies we prefer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mikal
@AdaptableRatman
I gave my reasoning for not supporting it. Regardless of whether it's actually successful, it's not how I want to win. I'd rather figure the game out behaviorally and enjoy the time than put everything on a gambit that places everyone's claims out in the open. I've never supported a massclaim in DP1 before and that's not changing now.
If you guys want it, get enough support behind it. I'll live with being frustrated if that's what a majority of players decide they want.
Created:
Posted in:
As a general rule, I'm opposed to massclaims in DP1. It's not how I'd want to catch scum in any game because it doesn't require anything beyond just parsing how well scum can fake a claim in short order and putting it up to luck that they can avoid a CC. I get that it would probably be effective, but this kind of meta strategy just rubs me the wrong way. All I can see this doing is essentially requiring mods to give scum fake claims, since it just penalizes scum for not having access to them.
If we want to do this in DP2, we can discuss it then. And if a majority want to pursue this strategy in DP1, then I'll go along.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Casey_Risk
I agree that the frustration reads as genuine, but I could see him avoiding doing the percentage thing as scum largely because it would be hard to fake. I feel like it would require more effort as scum.
Considering how inaccurate his percentage reads have been in previous games (he spent much of the Game Show Mafia game scumreading me), I don't think these would be hard to fake at all. If anything, all he'd need is the right slant and plenty of posts he'd claim to use to "back up" his views. I get that it's a lot of effort, but that effort can be put to legitimate and illegitimate use with relatively similar investment.
Created:
-->
@21Pilots
Just wondering: What is your viewpoint in the website as a MOD. Not emotionally or personally, like technically, as in control panels and such.
The setup we have is functional, works OK for what we need on a basic level. There are a lot of things I'd prefer to be able to do, including removing votes after the voting period for a debate has ended (there have been instances of people taking advantage of that loophole) and expanding the voting period on a debate or just allowing voting to continue past the end of the voting period. I think the site could also benefit from making some elements of what we do automatic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ultracrepidarian
As for Savant, based on what he's said so far about his willingness to claim his role in particular (I get it, that was pretty rough last game), I don't think early pressure on him is going to help us this game. At best, we'll get a character claim and then be forced to make a call. I agree with Adaptable that Savant hasn't played as logically as he has the last couple of games, though I chalk that up to frustration over last game and uncertainty regarding his recent change-up to his strategy. It's different, sure, but it doesn't come off as scummy.
Given that Ultra hasn't posted a whole lot yet beyond a pretty equivocal response to the Adaptable vs. Pie/WyIted situation, I'd like to see him more involved. Ultra, you asked Adaptable why he's sussing Savant after he gave a short but pretty clear read on him. What are your thoughts on Savant?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
cant remember who else to tag, maybe it was casey? But Ill say I was mostly joking about earlier. Mostly. If AR is going to play normally and not throw that is, if he is going to play or act like he normally does though I am down to do it still. Anyways, my initial thoughts are that he is probably town and not being a massive cuck yet, so I am willing to give him a chance.
Fair enough. I'll drop my sus, I do buy that he's likely town based on his behavior so far. If WyIted and Pie are willing to set aside their concerns, I am as well.
Created:
Posted in:
It's late and I have to get up earlier than usual tomorrow, so I'm going to head off.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mikal
I get that there are lots of characters, but I doubt most of them have any chance of being in this game. If scum has someone well versed in who the major characters are, they're likely going to have an easy time limiting the pool of characters, which is especially important in a game where we know they don't have fake claims.
Created:
Posted in:
I'm sticking with the letter range. I think we're giving too much away about our characters if we restrict them to single letters, especially given that we already have two E's on the table. I'm A-M.
Created:
Posted in:
So... yeah, this is really frustrating. We have two claims on the table:
Adaptable has Esbern as the Dreamer. He said off the bat that he's a "Blade in hiding" and... I don't know what to make of that. Everything I've read does say he's a member of the Blades and an archivist, but I don't see anything using that specific language. Maybe that's paraphrasing, but it's weird if so.
As for WyIted, if I have this right, he's Balgruuf as the Deputizer. Heard of the Deputy, but this is different, apparently functions as a kind of day Mason who can turn the ones he recruits into Cops... I think. Not really sure, but with Pie confirming it, he's either tying himself really tightly to his scum partner or there's something else going on here. I don't see the two of them doing this as a scum team, so I'd like to at least see what the hell they're doing.
Regardless, at the very least, WyIted seems pretty clear that he's an investigative role. Maybe this is just to cover up for what his actual role is, but I don't see him pushing this hard for Adaptable's lynch without some good reason. Doesn't help that the justification for Adaptable's Dreamer seems pretty loose, though my PM makes me suspect he's not alone in that.
I've still got stuff to do before I can get some sleep tonight, but I'll give this some thought. At the very least, I think we can tease this apart with Adaptable's lynch and if he flips town, put WyIted and Pie under the spotlight next DP. I'm loath to risk an investigative role, but this might be worth the risk.
Created:
Posted in:
Checking in. Full disclosure: I haven’t played any of the three games in the sign-up, this is just the one I know something about instead of nothing. Going to do my research here to make sure I’m not totally useless regarding theme.
Anyway, busy for a bit tonight (thought we had longer to go before starting), so I’m just checking in for now. I’ll come back before the night is up.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
I agree there's a big issue with debates going unvoted. That's something that we're hoping to address when site ownership changes, which will require changing the way the site is coded, whether that is done by extending voting periods, sending out messages to voters at a certain point when the clock is ticking down, or having the site automatically give points to a side based on a full forfeit. It's something that could be managed to some degree by having one of us regularly check the debates page and send out PMs when time's getting low, but I doubt any of us are going to be that consistent about it.
As for changing the way voting is regarded, that's something I'd like to see too and it will definitely require some changes to how the site is setup.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
And this is why I love our talks.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
And apparently my sarcasm doesn't translate. Good to know.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Good talk.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Leave me in charge.2 weeks.Whole site will be tamed.
Not going to happen.
Created:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
@AdaptableRatman
The mods enforce rules to suit users posting depraved things in the forums while dissuading serious sophisticated 1v1ers from ever sticking around a place that allows n words and other vile content.Thanks for reading. Use your brains and protest the moderation.Or... You know, worry more about sone trolls than userbase retention.Hey whiteflame.AdaptableRatman had a concern he wanted to address with you, regarding the number of trolls driving people away from the site by posting vile content.
Alright, let's discuss it then. What policy change would you like to see when it comes to addressing trolls? No trolls at all, or focusing on issues that encompass "vile content"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
This utterly vile troll is trying to frame me for something I didnt do. Give 2 week ban please.
...Seriously? You think we'd buy this as a legitimate attempt to frame you and not just trolling? Looks pretty silly to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Casey_Risk
Yeah, I wouldn't have gotten that, lol
Fair, scum didn't get it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Ya definitely a tough one lol for someone with only 9th grade biology experience lol
True. Probably could have kept it less technical, but this was about as minimal as I could get in that department and not just be blatantly obvious.
Created:
Posted in:
What was theme split?
Obligate anaerobes (can only survive and thrive without oxygen) vs. anything else (aerobes/facultative anaerobes). Stuck with something in the description near the top of each Wikipedia page, actually pretty close to the Gram stain result.
And what did scum guess for characters and roles?
Characters: Staphylococcus and Micrococcus
Roles: Vanilla and Watcher
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
@ILikePie5
@Mikal
@WyIted
@iamanabanana
Endgame
Created:
Posted in:
1st place: Town (Pie, Savant, Mharman, Banana, Casey, WyIted, Earth)
2nd place: Mafia (Lunatic, Mikal)
Roles: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uyAbsTGOpS7oskFDIfB3u5DLbXsDyvfbjFY52e3er8I/edit?usp=sharing
Night Actions (NP1):
Pie gave Earth Justice
Earth Justiced Mharman and Casey (silenced by Freezer)
Casey used Pathologist on Pie
WyIted Avoided Earth
Lunatic Froze Earth
Mikal NK'd Casey
Night Actions (NP2):
Pie gave Mharman Tracker
Lunatic Silenced Pie
Lunatic NK'd Earth
Mharman Tracked Pie
Easy MVP was Mharman. Baiting out the fake from Luna and Mikal was particularly inspired. Mikal did have it called in the scum chat, but ended up being convinced to go with Luna instead of bussing him.
As for looking back on the game, I'll start by just owning up to it, I did make some errors this game.
I'll start with the basic transcription error. I copy-pasted the Silencer from mafiauniverse and that included the "no vote" aspect. I was tempted to roll with it, but it would end the game one DP early, which would have made the game absurdly scum-sided, so I swapped it for "one vote." Sorry for the error, not sorry for the change.
I also made a couple of calls during the game that are bound to be controversial, so I'll discuss the "why" and my feelings on it in retrospect.
I prioritized Pie's Inventor role so that it couldn't be directly prevented. This was an attempt to balance a game where I only had one town player with any strong investigative role (I'd consider the Pathologist role pretty weak). That, coupled with the fact that Pie could have given any of his roles to a scum player and that they could themselves be roleblocked or killed made me think I needed to give this role some leg up. That might have been too much, and I think in retrospect it would have been better to just change up the Pathologist role to make it stronger and make Pie an investigative JOAT (as Mharman suggested). This was me trying something that was always going to be difficult if not impossible to balance.
As for the second issue, I decided ahead of the game that a roleblocked role was just not going to be used up, and I do think that was a mistake as applied to the roles granted by Pie's Inventor in particular. At minimum, I should've been looser on how that perspective applied in this game, and I think the Freezer should have resulted in Earth having used up the Justice role. It just made Pie's role more powerful than it should have been by NP2. Apart from that, it probably would've been best to leave Pie's Inventions at 2. I think altogether, these decisions did make the game town-sided, so my balance was off.
Anyway, I'll leave the self-flagellation there and focus on the game. I was surprised people were so ready and willing to lynch Savant that early, particularly with a claimed Doctor on the table. I get that scum could ask about two roles and could have designed this claim knowing there was a Doctor in the game, but it seemed particularly risky, especially coming from Mharman who stood to lose his role.
As for WyIted in the second DP... yeah, it was a bit painful to read his paraphrasing of my PMs. I probably would have townread his being so flabbergasted with so much of the terminology, but I get why he was being scumread, even if the "scumslips" were reaching.
I think town also gave both Luna and Mikal way too much leeway in those first two DPs. I get that Mikal was absent for a lot of that first DP, but he barely posted in the second and Luna didn't have to do too much to keep attention off of him.
Luna and Mikal definitely had some opportunities to win out in the end, but their concern over the Justice role ended up winning out over some more promising strategies. That's partially on me for reasons I've already described, though I think the risk of the Justice was pretty low given what they had on hand with an Ascetizer and the Even Night Godfather. They pushed a little too hard for the DP3 win, but especially on those last two nights, they were putting in solid effort to design fake claims and run through a lot of potential night actions. Props to them for putting it all on the line.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Fair enough. I'm going to go ahead and cut off discussion here, then. Pick this back up in the Endgame.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
Lol, not wrong. Working on it now, might just do that.
Created:
Posted in:
Just to be clear, the DP and game are over with Mikal’s forfeit.
Created: