[END] Turf Wars: Battle of the Hosts

#401

I like roleplaying.

votes Gleam

#402

GO TEAM SOCKFACE!

#403

I wonder who is hosting for the police.

#404

Right now I think gleam is most likely to receive my vote unless something changes. We've still got four hours, but I've only got two until I have to leave for work.

#405

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I wonder who is hosting for the police.

Both of us, really, in addition to Blooper.

I don't want them to win though.

#406

S~V~S wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
S~V~S wrote:In Zodiac I was AFK and made one post before I missed the vote and was subsequently NKed. Not a good comparison, my boy.
Which is fine, but you were mafia and I can generate a gut feel from it.
Comparison is this:
- Little content early game focusing around singular topics.
- This game being my ideas regarding the traitor role, and that game being you addressing a kindness issue.

I do also believe that you like being bad, so seeing you afk as a baddie gave me a spook. "Perhaps your meta had changed?" was my reaction, and I'm sure it played into why I was pinged.
Right this game it was an ON TOPIC focus, that game it was an OFF TOPIC focus, so no comparison there. Although I did mean it and was serious about it in that game. I would have said that regardless of alignment. There is no need to say mean things; one never knows who they may be maligning.

And I do like being bad, this is known. I was AFK for work related issues. Again,not seeing how that applies to here.

OK, I am not totally comfortable discussing who I feel good about. It is a left over from where I come from,and one I am not sure I will ever get over. One reason I will never be posting a rainblow list.

I am going to drop a vote on Gleam for now, he made a lot of assumptions based on incorrect role reads, then backtracked them, and if you cancel all that out, he made a lot of posts comparative to others at this early stage, but did not say much.

I was also pinged by Diiny, specifically where he says Goldens post content =/= what research led him to expect. Research? What kind of research? Has he done this research on other people, or just Golden? To me this kind of comment reads as "research = told by BTSC partner". But we have civ BTS in this game, and I don't want to drop a third vote on the guy for a weak ping. Those who know him, is this kind of research something Diiny typically does?

I will be out a few hours in the afternoon, but should be back in plenty of time to place a final vote, if I do decide to change it.

Consider my ping pong'd.

#407

Matt wrote:I think that's odd.

Why? Diiny asked me to think about my reads, so I did. Putting LC on my list was reactionary to a specific post. The rest were me putting thought into the vibe I was getting from people.

#408

S~V~S wrote:I am going to drop a vote on Gleam for now, he made a lot of assumptions based on incorrect role reads, then backtracked them, and if you cancel all that out, he made a lot of posts comparative to others at this early stage, but did not say much.

Well, hang on. Yeah, I misread a role, but it didn't change my assumption. It actually helped further my point. Which wasn't all that big of a point to begin with, all I was doing was pointing out that Dragon's (day 1, mind you) strategy for helping the Don was moot, but you clearly didn't read my posts if you missed that.

What do you mean by comparative posts? I pointed out how some people were acting and tried to consider how they acted in previous games, which is literally about all you can go on logically on the first day. I try to think a bit more cautiously in the early days when peoples' actions haven't built up a recognizable pattern, although apparently people in mafia like big, brazen claims based on next to nothing. You know what big, bold, brazen, and unbacked claims result in? Good guys getting lynched.

Dragon, you were seemingly on board with what I was saying and then all of a sudden decided to flip a vote on me. Am I sensing some camaraderie between you and S~V~S? How's that for a bold claim?

#409

The only other suspicions I have so far are about llama, I know they said they were out of town but they never explained their vote either. And sloonei, who has only really been asking coy questions and agreeing with whatever the popular opinion seems to be of the time.

#410

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).

#411

DId you suddenly theorize me and SVS being on the same mafia team just because we both voted for you?

#412

agleaminranks wrote:The only other suspicions I have so far are about llama, I know they said they were out of town but they never explained their vote either. And sloonei, who has only really been asking coy questions and agreeing with whatever the popular opinion seems to be of the time.

Asking questions is my thing. What popular opinions have I been in agreement with? My vote is currently on a player no one else wants to lynch and I've been a vocal opponent to the traitor/don discussion.

#413

Sloonei wrote:
Golden wrote:
Diiny wrote:Reading back, I'll also extend that question to Golden, who posted a lot about the setup/plan but not much about players which research shows is a tad out of character.
I hadn't bothered reading much of the thread. I've just sat down to do my first read through now. I am getting quite a few non-null reads. Unless something happens to change my mind, I won't be voting for LC, DDL, sloonei, mongoose, epi, SVS or silverwolf. I don't really have much in the way of pings yet, but I'll see where I'm at when I'm caught up.
The reads I'm most interested in here are mongoose, SVS, and myself. Epi has said Mongoose doesnwhat she's done so far in every game, so I guess other familiar players might also express that. But I've seen nothing remotely definitive from SVS. And then me because I'm always interested in myself. That guy's really something.

I get good vibes from you all. SVS willingness to try Wilgy's plan in particular felt civvish SVS to me, I don't know Mongoose or Silverwolf at all so with the pair of them it is all tone. You, I like the effort you are putting in despite being in Canada, it reminds me of civ Sloonei. Although I've been fooled into defending you hard before (Watchmen

)

#414

There's another player I meant to call out yesterday but then I fell asleep. I'm awake right now, so let's all look at Bullzeye's posts and count the number of serious game-related things he's said.

#415

research = looking back at early game posts from games we've played together, yes. Not sure what else it could mean.

#416

Sloonei wrote:There's another player I meant to call out yesterday but then I fell asleep. I'm awake right now, so let's all look at Bullzeye's posts and count the number of serious game-related things he's said.

I noticed, but that's basically a series of Day 0 posts. Won't suspect anyone for that. I need to see more.

#417

Golden wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Golden wrote:
Diiny wrote:Reading back, I'll also extend that question to Golden, who posted a lot about the setup/plan but not much about players which research shows is a tad out of character.
I hadn't bothered reading much of the thread. I've just sat down to do my first read through now. I am getting quite a few non-null reads. Unless something happens to change my mind, I won't be voting for LC, DDL, sloonei, mongoose, epi, SVS or silverwolf. I don't really have much in the way of pings yet, but I'll see where I'm at when I'm caught up.
The reads I'm most interested in here are mongoose, SVS, and myself. Epi has said Mongoose doesnwhat she's done so far in every game, so I guess other familiar players might also express that. But I've seen nothing remotely definitive from SVS. And then me because I'm always interested in myself. That guy's really something.
I get good vibes from you all. SVS willingness to try Wilgy's plan in particular felt civvish SVS to me, I don't know Mongoose or Silverwolf at all so with the pair of them it is all tone. You, I like the effort you are putting in despite being in Canada, it reminds me of civ Sloonei. Although I've been fooled into defending you hard before (Watchmen )

I am back in America now, unfortunately. I am willing to take everyone else's word for it when they say Mongoose's behavior is ordinary so far, but I don't think "ordinary" means the same as townie/civ. I'd like to put my vote elsewhere but I'm struggling to come up with a better option.

What do you think of Gleam?

#418

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Sloonei wrote:There's another player I meant to call out yesterday but then I fell asleep. I'm awake right now, so let's all look at Bullzeye's posts and count the number of serious game-related things he's said.
I noticed, but that's basically a series of Day 0 posts. Won't suspect anyone for that. I need to see more.

Agreed, that's essentially why I'm pointing it out. I want him to say something.

#419

Golden wrote:
Matt wrote:I think that's odd.
Why? Diiny asked me to think about my reads, so I did. Putting LC on my list was reactionary to a specific post. The rest were me putting thought into the vibe I was getting from people.

C'mon dude, like I said, within 11 minutes or less you went from having your first rainbow read to declaring seven players you wouldn't vote for.

Just a small ping, but it's there.

Anyway, thanks for responding. Nobody else commented on my brilliant case

#420

Anyway, I have little time before work today and still have to look over another game, so I gotta vote now. No worries, Golden, nobody else seems to think I'm on the right track here.

#421

This game has way too many posts for day one... Guess I need to catch up.

#422

How fitting that that should be my 3000th post on this forum :P

#423

Matt wrote:
Golden wrote:
Matt wrote:I think that's odd.
Why? Diiny asked me to think about my reads, so I did. Putting LC on my list was reactionary to a specific post. The rest were me putting thought into the vibe I was getting from people.
C'mon dude, like I said, within 11 minutes or less you went from having your first rainbow read to declaring seven players you wouldn't vote for.

Just a small ping, but it's there.

Anyway, thanks for responding. Nobody else commented on my brilliant case

Well, I went down the entire poll list figuring out who I had reads on in those 11 minutes. Don't say come on... why is it suspicious?

#424

Golden wrote:
Matt wrote:
Golden wrote:
Matt wrote:I think that's odd.
Why? Diiny asked me to think about my reads, so I did. Putting LC on my list was reactionary to a specific post. The rest were me putting thought into the vibe I was getting from people.
C'mon dude, like I said, within 11 minutes or less you went from having your first rainbow read to declaring seven players you wouldn't vote for.

Just a small ping, but it's there.

Anyway, thanks for responding. Nobody else commented on my brilliant case
Well, I went down the entire poll list figuring out who I had reads on in those 11 minutes. Don't say come on... why is it suspicious?

It's suss because at one point, you were just entering the first player on your rainbow list, and then suddenly you felt good enough about 6 other players that you wouldn't vote for them. And in between, you were making suss face joke posts and talking off topic about Canada, so I don't know exactly how you developed those reads.

Derp. Anyway, gotta go. If we're both still around, we can discuss this later tonight.

#425

Matt wrote:
Golden wrote:
Matt wrote:
Golden wrote:
Matt wrote:I think that's odd.
Why? Diiny asked me to think about my reads, so I did. Putting LC on my list was reactionary to a specific post. The rest were me putting thought into the vibe I was getting from people.
C'mon dude, like I said, within 11 minutes or less you went from having your first rainbow read to declaring seven players you wouldn't vote for.

Just a small ping, but it's there.

Anyway, thanks for responding. Nobody else commented on my brilliant case
Well, I went down the entire poll list figuring out who I had reads on in those 11 minutes. Don't say come on... why is it suspicious?
It's suss because at one point, you were just entering the first player on your rainbow list, and then suddenly you felt good enough about 6 other players that you wouldn't vote for them. And in between, you were making suss face joke posts and talking off topic about Canada, so I don't know exactly how you developed those reads.

Derp. Anyway, gotta go. If we're both still around, we can discuss this later tonight.

Do you know exactly how anyone else developed their reads? If you genuinely found any of them suspicious and wanted to test how I generated them, why not do as sloonei did and ask about the specific reads, instead of pointing out the timing to the world and just calling it 'odd'? I could have told you why I had a slight town lean on any of them.

Your suspicion of me feels to me way more like trying to get others to see me in a strange light, and far less like you actually found something suspicious.

#426

I feel mostly unpinged by most of the content in this thread so far. I find myself gravitating toward the strategy of voting for a low poster. soneji's two posts just cast shade on Dragon because of the traitor chat, and then denies having any sort of meta read on him. I might vote for him. soneji, I mean.

#427

SCREW IT, moving my vote to soneji. There can be only one S-O-N-E-I name!

#428

Not that I have any read on him, but Soneji's post count is hardly an indicator of his alignment.

His strategy as a civ is to lay low for a few days until he can form reads on everyone, which is when he comes in with a bunch of TL;DR exposing the baddies.

While as a baddie, he will try to do the exact same thing to avoid people reading his meta.

#429

Still trying to figure out what to do with his claim that he doesn't know my meta though. It's hard because I was mafia or indie in most games I played with him. I need to research that.

#430

If you had to pick a non-low-content poster, Sloon?

#431

Then maybe I'll vote for agleaminranks instead since he's currently here and he can respond to my response to his latest post.

#432

Diiny wrote:If you had to pick a non-low-content poster, Sloon?

You, but I don't want to lynch you right now since it's too early to really tell. Some of your posts have felt only to be having the appearance of scum hunting, but I can't say that I feel a lot more confidence than your posts seem to express either. I'd like to see how your reads develop on Day 2.

#433

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.

#434

Sloonei wrote: I can't say I know exactly what he means though, I don't remember Golden ever being opposed to discussing the setup and mechanics of a game.

There's a substantial player focus and drive to scumhunt on day one that I'm not seeing in this game but that I did see in past games. I'm not saying I think he's scum because he's discussing the setup per se, just uncomfortable that there's no driven scumhunting alongside it.

#435

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?

#436

Sloonei wrote:
Diiny wrote:If you had to pick a non-low-content poster, Sloon?
You, but I don't want to lynch you right now since it's too early to really tell. Some of your posts have felt only to be having the appearance of scum hunting, but I can't say that I feel a lot more confidence than your posts seem to express either. I'd like to see how your reads develop on Day 2.

Which ones? If you're accusing me of the same lack of focus that you're admitting I'm confused as to why that accusation is happening in the fist place if you're scum.

#437

@Gleam

Did you actually post civ reads on anyone though? Other than me? Please show because I think I missed those.

#438

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.

The best way to minimize noble mafioso deaths is to hunt the cops. I'm glad you're admitting you're being noncomittal even now. who, out of the people with decent content, is most likely to be scum, even if you don't want to hunt them to instead focus on protecting mafia (

)

#439

Diiny wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Diiny wrote:If you had to pick a non-low-content poster, Sloon?
You, but I don't want to lynch you right now since it's too early to really tell. Some of your posts have felt only to be having the appearance of scum hunting, but I can't say that I feel a lot more confidence than your posts seem to express either. I'd like to see how your reads develop on Day 2.
Which ones? If you're accusing me of the same lack of focus that you're admitting I'm confused as to why that accusation is happening in the fist place if you're scum.

This one didn't seem to bring anything new to the thread:

Diiny wrote:
Golden wrote:Voting Diiny for now

He reminds me of the game where we were bad together, getting stuck in and creating a supatown image very early. If we are talking about there being meat to the bones, I think Diiny has been happy chasing bones with no meat at all.

Diiny - which bones that you've been chasing do you actually think have meat? You seem to be asking a lot of questions of people to provide reads, but the only read I really get a sense of from you is ika (I don't even know if you genuinely suspect wilgy). What are your current views on who seems good and bad?
What about all those games where I'm just supatown?

I think often the best way to find out which bones have meat on them in the first place is to chase them, provoke activity and reactions from things that may only be partially suspicious.

That said, I think there's certainly meat on the ika bone, but I want to hear back from silverwolf. I don't suspect wilgy that much, and the oinking doesn't bother me. That said, thinking about it I'm not sure how much I like his plan shenanigans taking the focus of most of day one. His response to my dumb vote was what it probably should be, though. I'm still a tad iffy on you, and although you have some people you won't vote for your only ping is town.

I was unsure on sloonei earlier so I pushed and prodded him a bit, but I'm not getting that distinctive armoatic scum sloonei flavour. His response to ika's latest post reflected pretty much what I thought.

Zeb hasn't hounded me yet, which is odd, and isn't at the head of the game so far as I'd expect her to be, but I've read through her PH with her last (scum) game in mind and none of her posts have pinged me at all so far.

And I also didn't feel like your questioning of me earlier was all that strong. Granted I wasn't being very forthcoming, but that was again because I didn't think they were strong questions. I'd say it's more a lack of conviction than a lack of direction.

#440

Sloonei wrote:
agleaminranks wrote:The only other suspicions I have so far are about llama, I know they said they were out of town but they never explained their vote either. And sloonei, who has only really been asking coy questions and agreeing with whatever the popular opinion seems to be of the time.
Asking questions is my thing. What popular opinions have I been in agreement with? My vote is currently on a player no one else wants to lynch and I've been a vocal opponent to the traitor/don discussion.

Sloonei wrote:The Luffy Dragon has been all over the place in agreeing with every plan or strategy that's been proposed in the thread. This has caught my eye. I'll put my first vote on Dragon D. Luffy until he explains why he's so easy to convince.

I was going to say this was my first criticism but you actually posted it before me, so I'm the follower here, unbeknownst to myself even.

Sloonei wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:With that, a few points.

- Enrique has posted nothing but smilies and refuses to answer anything. I don't think this is enough for a lynch, but I wish he started being more helpfun soon.

- Ika made a vote for Silverwolf just for the sake of "getting her to talk". Which is pro-active, but not really necessary, and reeks to me of an attempt to look like he is doing anything. Of course it's mostly paranoia, but I might as well point it out.

- Sloonei doesn't have the time to participate but he apparently has time to read the thread, think I'm suspicious and demand answers from me. I find that curious.

- Matt was way more active last game I played with him. he couldn't shut up. Now he only made one post, about how he intends to read Zebra. I know this is too soon for make such demands, but I miss active Matt.

Don't know if any of those are useful but we might as well discuss them. 28 hours to go, let's move guys.
My behavior is curious in that I am curious about the game, sure. I'm not sure what else you could mean by that.

Sloonei wrote:
Diiny wrote:You know exactly what he means but you disagree, why pretend otherwise?
Perhaps I was feigning aloofness.

Sloonei wrote:
Diiny wrote:Silverwolf, are you giving your friend advice because you think they're town or are you saying you think they're scummy?

Linki: a read on you.
Thoughts so far?

Sloonei wrote:
Quin wrote:
Sloonei wrote:
Quin wrote:
At day 1 I think we should be addressing even the minor concerns. I'm aware that in the long run the traitors are going to be triggered regardless, but even so, I think we should be trying to delay that risk for the safety of the dons.
I've got no problem with it being addressed, but I think the proposals being made in the thread were over-reactions to a very minor point and there is no need to continue discussing it beyond what has been said. So I should stop saying things about it now.
How's your first Big Game going so far?
I feel like this game could go on for weeks, I'm curious to see how the dynamic changes over such a long period.
How are things at this beginning period, though? Which players have caught your eye?

Mostly you've just been kind of reposting questions or trying to get other people to speak out. Normally that's fine, and any sort of attempt to encourage discussion is good. As I said, there are other ways to play than just making accusations. It just also seems to me like you've been skirting under the radar by doing this, and avoided saying anything about your own opinions. I didn't really see you address Epignosis' vote for you.

I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for at least trying to give way to meaningful discussion. But I've also seen that be a baddie strategy in most games I've played.

#441

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.

Heck, even your read on me was pretty noncommital and indecisive. You didn't call anyone a civ. You made a bunch of posts about the traitor thing, then poked llama, said you forgive people for thinking you are inactive, speculated a bit on why I was focusing on the traitor thing... and that's it. And when people started voting for you, you loaded the OMGUS machine gun and started firing it at literally everyone who suspected you.

So how is that "trying to prevent civ deaths"?

#442

He asked me where I thought the meat was, I answered. that wasn't meant to be an investigative, scumhunting post. I was answering a question and sharing how I feel about certain people.

As for my questioning of you, I got all I needed from you not being forthcoming, so I let off.

linki: epi voted for me? and I shared my views in response to golden. Shared em on you, zeb, golden, ika. And my stance on Enrique should be pretty clear. I've asked people for information aside from accusing people, namely silverwolf for her stance on ika. I'm playing mafia

#443

Ignore the linki, I thought the bottom of gleam's last post was sloonei in response to me. lol

#444

Point is: I'm totally fine if your plan is to loom for civs instead of looking for cops. It can be pretty helpful. But you haven't done either.

#445

My questions will turn into more substantive reads if I'm given the time, but I have a tendency to die early in every game on the Syndicate. I did address Epi's vote for me here. The vote, as far as I can tell, was just based on me voting for Mongoose, so I don't know what else there is to address. Other than that, I can respect your thoughts on me and I don't think I'll be keeping my vote on you today. But I need to make a decision in the next 45 minutes.

#446

sig and enrique's names have been hanging out at the bottom of the page for a while but neither of them are saying anything. No one likes a tattle tale, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

#447

Dragon D. Luffy wrote:Point is: I'm totally fine if your plan is to loom for civs instead of looking for cops. It can be pretty helpful. But you haven't done either.

I endorse this statement

#448

Sloonei wrote:My questions will turn into more substantive reads if I'm given the time, but I have a tendency to die early in every game on the Syndicate. I did address Epi's vote for me here. The vote, as far as I can tell, was just based on me voting for Mongoose, so I don't know what else there is to address. Other than that, I can respect your thoughts on me and I don't think I'll be keeping my vote on you today. But I need to make a decision in the next 45 minutes.

this post was directed @ gleam and his last post on the previous page.

#449

EBWOP, meant to only include the you haven't done either part. This game is about scumhunting.

#450

Diiny wrote:He asked me where I thought the meat was, I answered. that wasn't meant to be an investigative, scumhunting post. I was answering a question and sharing how I feel about certain people.

As for my questioning of you, I got all I needed from you not being forthcoming, so I let off.

linki: epi voted for me? and I shared my views in response to golden. Shared em on you, zeb, golden, ika. And my stance on Enrique should be pretty clear. I've asked people for information aside from accusing people, namely silverwolf for her stance on ika. I'm playing mafia

What about my unforthcomingness made you think I'm not bad? I think I'm usually more open than that.

It's over! Would you play a sequel?