agleaminranks wrote:Dragon D. Luffy wrote:@Gleam
Did you actually post civ reads on anyone though? Other than me? Please show because I think I missed those.
I didn't. I don't have solid reads on people apart from how they normally act in other games.
I think Matt is being a bit more quiet than normal, I think I remember him being a little more pandering for discussion than usual. But I have no reason to suspect him as being bad.
Scott and Epignosis are both acting pretty typical, even if they're somewhat low posters for the game right now.
The only other people I have played games with before (Mongoose, llama, zebra) have all been pretty inactive in the game right now. I'm inclined to say civilian just because their contributions seem normal.
I think S~V~S has a false read on me but I don't have reason to suspect her as bad.
Sloonei wrote:agleaminranks wrote:Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Agreeing with what you are saying doesn't equal reading you as a civ.
SVS and Sloonei pointed out something I hadn't yet noticed. I then read your posts and concluded that indeed, you were saying a lot without actually getting yourself involved in the actual game (hunting baddies).
When we're this early in the game and far more likely (statistically) to lynch a good guy,
I'm more focused on minimizing civilian deaths than actively trying to suss out the police. That's just my strategy. You can agree with it or not, but that's what makes the most sense to me. Granted, once a day or two goes by and we have some patterns to examine, then the baddie hunt needs to become the main focus. If I'm still being noncommittal at that point, you can criticize me of not getting involved all you want. But I've certainly been participating in the discussion. Going all gung-ho and throwing accusations left and right isn't the only way to get involved.
What exactly do you mean by this? Are you saying you'd prefer not to lynch anyone today?
Ideally, I think it would be best if no one got lynched the first day.
Think of this mathematically. I'm of the firm opinion that no one has enough concrete evidence on anyone else to make more than, say, a 10 or 20% educated guess on alignment. We're close to lynching at random here. It's no different from a first day lynch. Statistically then we are more likely than not to lynch someone good. Then we wait for the results of the night actions to formulate more solid theories.
These are the two scenarios at this point:
1. The lynch vote ends up being civilian. The night phase happens, the Police Chief (unless they target the Don) is probably going to succeed in arresting someone. We're down two noble mafiosos/mafiosas.
2. The lynch vote ends up being police. Unless the Chief is lynched (a one in thirty chance), some mafia is probably going to be arrested. One baddie is down, we're down one good guy.
The first scenario is more likely to happen by a factor of 5. I agree that if a baddie is lynched this early, yes, it will go a long way towards helping the mafia teams in the long run. But. You risk civilian death as well. Some people might argue that it's worth the risk of killing a civvie if the chance of taking down even one baddie is there, I just don't agree with that strategy. Maybe it's a matter of personal taste to want to be more restrained. If we were able to somehow avoid lynching someone Day 1 then we would most likely be down one civvie but we also wouldn't be down two, probably. But that's not part of the rules, so I have to come up with my best educated guess.
you just won't let this go, will you?
. Come on, why is it suspicious to be asked to be replaced? There were a bunch of pages after he voted for you, and I'll admit I was thinking the same thing: "holy camoley Batman, how am I gonna keep up with this" so this seems legitimate to me and says nothing about his alignment. He, like me, found you suspicious.
), but the Don role descriptions conflict with that, so idk.