Re: Cerberus Tribe - Night 4
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:37 pm
I townread all three of those players but not INH.
Normally, mafia gets a nightkill and town eliminates a suspect (who is or isn’t guilty).Marmot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:05 pmI don't understand this statement. What do you mean that nks are free?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:53 pmWe lynch some people twice.
Currently, enemy nks are free (provided mafia isn’t killing themselves).
Let’s end that.
You’re not helping yourself.insertnamehere wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:30 pmSo, 1/3 random bloodlust, 1/3 suspicion of me dying weirdly (?), and 1/3 resentment over me voting for him when he didn't show up on Day 1 of the Game of friggin' Champions?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:00 pm Cause it eliminates a player, revealing actual alignment.
Cause he seemingly wasn’t killed by the mafia.
Cause I still think his reason for almost getting me lynched Day 1 was dishonest. I backed off cause he was cursed but that’s not really a good reason.
Yeah, this is BS.
The Day 1 lynch appeared to be an accident. They were trying to keep the tally close to test the haiku protection thing, or something like that, and some last-minute confusion pushed votes onto Quin. I don't know what happened with speedchuck, but he seemed to be widely town-read when I was there.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 10:04 pm I would love to know why the Pikachus got cold feet on Quin and Speedchuck. Sloonei
Sure. There’s that theory that civs could flip to mafia or indie in their 2nd role, but I am most interested in finding a role on an initial reveal that makes me go “huh. That doesn’t look town.”
I'm not sure. I'm not inclined to think that his first role was anti-town, and I don't see why his second incarnation must be evil
In reading LoRab's response to me from last night, I realized that these comments are about me. I had interpreted them as being about sig. I really wasn't sure what she was getting at because I am a big dope. I've gathered at long last that she's saying I reversed my opinion of sig, I think, and that that is something she viewed as suspicious. This makes much more sense than what I was trying to piece together of LoRab's Day 1 vote and subsequent posts. I've been struggling to come up with suspects, so I feel like I've been trying to read LoRab as bad because in my head it just has to be her. But as I'm looking at her posts I don't really think I can make a convincing case right now.
In reading LoRab's response to me from last night, I realized that these comments are about me. I had interpreted them as being about sig. I really wasn't sure what she was getting at because I am a big dope. I've gathered at long last that she's saying I reversed my opinion of sig, I think, and that that is something she viewed as suspicious. This makes much more sense than what I was trying to piece together of LoRab's Day 1 vote and subsequent posts. I've been struggling to come up with suspects, so I feel like I've been trying to read LoRab as bad because in my head it just has to be her. But as I'm looking at her posts I don't really think I can make a convincing case right now.
what is sigging?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 7:02 pm Boomslang who is basically Sigging vs Wilgy who is basically Wilgying.
Is that the arguments I’m looking at?
Sorry for the confusion. I forget that we don't all share mafia language. More specifically, and for future reference, in the mafia culture that I come from switcheroo is the genrally used term for what "traditional" mafia calls OMGUS.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:01 amIn reading LoRab's response to me from last night, I realized that these comments are about me. I had interpreted them as being about sig. I really wasn't sure what she was getting at because I am a big dope. I've gathered at long last that she's saying I reversed my opinion of sig, I think, and that that is something she viewed as suspicious. This makes much more sense than what I was trying to piece together of LoRab's Day 1 vote and subsequent posts. I've been struggling to come up with suspects, so I feel like I've been trying to read LoRab as bad because in my head it just has to be her. But as I'm looking at her posts I don't really think I can make a convincing case right now.
I don't have a suspect right now. It's Day 5 and I have no confidence in any vote that I might cast. That means I can go anywhere.
Marmot's a player I'd be interested in looking at. At certain points he's been solidly involved in driving the discussion, but that hasn't really been a consistent position of his, and sometimes he just appears to be coasting. I could see him as a baddie that's trying to stay just a little bit ahead of things, but not so much that he risks sticking his neck out. Maybe I'll vote for him. Yeah, let's vote for Marmot.
[aubergine]Marmot[/aubergine]
It's pretty simple — I was a prime suspect, and I wanted to see if she would take that opportunity to jump on the wagon. I like that she didn't, both for obvious reasons and for the larger reason that she's choosing to engage with the thread beyond the surface level.
This is faulty reasoning. The mafia have to kill a player twice to make a full elimination — they're in exactly the same boat as town. I don't see how we're "giving away" kills by not lynching someone fully.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:54 pmNormally, mafia gets a nightkill and town eliminates a suspect (who is or isn’t guilty).Marmot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:05 pmI don't understand this statement. What do you mean that nks are free?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:53 pmWe lynch some people twice.
Currently, enemy nks are free (provided mafia isn’t killing themselves).
Let’s end that.
As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.
That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.
Bob and Tony aren't here.Sloonei wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 10:47 pmThe Day 1 lynch appeared to be an accident. They were trying to keep the tally close to test the haiku protection thing, or something like that, and some last-minute confusion pushed votes onto Quin. I don't know what happened with speedchuck, but he seemed to be widely town-read when I was there.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 10:04 pm I would love to know why the Pikachus got cold feet on Quin and Speedchuck. Sloonei
I've seen no one else propose your strategy. I've been waiting for the merger to start killing people fo real.
How are you going to catch scum if you never fully lynch anyone?Boomslang wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:19 amThis is faulty reasoning. The mafia have to kill a player twice to make a full elimination — they're in exactly the same boat as town. I don't see how we're "giving away" kills by not lynching someone fully.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:54 pmNormally, mafia gets a nightkill and town eliminates a suspect (who is or isn’t guilty).Marmot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:05 pmI don't understand this statement. What do you mean that nks are free?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:53 pmWe lynch some people twice.
Currently, enemy nks are free (provided mafia isn’t killing themselves).
Let’s end that.
As long as we don’t actually lynch a player all the way dead and learn an alignment, we are not trading lynches for nightkills. We are giving away free nightkills.
That doesn’t mean there are only a few players we can lynch today. We could vote out anyone but if they have two lives now, we should then vote them out again tomorrow.
Your first role was pretty anti town. Should we lynch you eh?Scotty wrote: ↑Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 pm Cool cool. I’m not dead, so thanks for not killing me.
We need a lynch today. Preferably someone that looks scummy.
The thing about jack’s advice is based on an assumption that alignments are randomized among all roles no matter the design. I’m not so sure. There are a total of 46 (or 45 with DDL’s missed reveal) which does add credence to the idea that there might be a possibiliry for all roles for each faction. But I trust that Golden’s balanced the game enough that it wouldn’t be such a large variance.
But a role like speedchuck’s as a doctor aligns much more toward civilian vs mafia. It would make no sense for it to be indie. I don’t think i would lynch someone like Speedchuck again if I could help it.
I do agree with Jack however that if the people that have been killed so far on this tribe, his wasn’t via NK which keeps him in grayer territory than all fifty shades available.
I’ve said it before but his 1st role was a Nurse-lite. How does that fit into the mafia archetype?
Making little inaccurate comments. Being the only one to hold certain opinions. Being a bit blendy, a bit vaguely scummy feeling.Kylemii wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:48 amwhat is sigging?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 7:02 pm Boomslang who is basically Sigging vs Wilgy who is basically Wilgying.
Is that the arguments I’m looking at?
This brings me to a question. Who was voting me for being me? I'm somewhat unsettled by this.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:07 pm I actually don't know why people were voting for Sig.
I know people were voting for Wilgy cause he was being Wilgy.
Is your frustration because it's Day 5 and we have nothing? Like if you got lynched Day 1, would it be this frustrating? Cause this is essentially still Day 1 as far as town information goes.insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:20 pm I’m quickly approaching “Chicka Chicka 1, 2, 3” levels of frustration and pissed off-ness with this game.
So, apparently JoH and Scotty want to lynch me so I can become, I guess, a death patsy, and “gain information.” Unfortunately, the only information they’ll gain is that they lynched a civilian for dumbass reasons.
According to JoH, my Day 1 vote for him was some calculated burst of opportunism, when, as I’ve stated multiple times, I didn’t feel strongly about anyone during that day, and my vote for JoH was to get him to show the fuck up.
It seems like there’s no way to defend myself against people attacking me, not because their logic is ironclad, but because there is no logic. It’s just emotional reads, all of which seem to be hostile towards me. I don’t know if I need to get my chakras fixed or what, in order to get rid of this negative aura people apparently feel when reading my posts.
The natural response would be to baddiehunt, and find a an actual scummeister. But, of course, all of my reads are seemingly diametrically opposed to the (Sloonei, Scotty) braintrust taking the thread by storm, so all I can do there is just put my vote on someone and watch as no one even acknowledges my suspicions or my townreads.
The best case scenario for me is to wait until their flighty methodology of suspicion randomly shifts onto another poor sap.
Basically, screw all y’all, and I hope all you sons of bitches get the plague that I could have inoculated you from had I not been killed.
I’m gonna go stand facing a wall like a schizophrenic homeless person, loudly yelling about my Spacedaisy and Sig suspicions while passerbys all attempt to ignore me the best they can.
Re: The first paragraph. No, I’m frustrated at people deciding that random, emotion-based reads are more valid and more lynch-worthy than other reads.Jackofhearts2005 wrote:
Is your frustration because it's Day 5 and we have nothing? Like if you got lynched Day 1, would it be this frustrating? Cause this is essentially still Day 1 as far as town information goes.
Did your vote get me to show up? Looks like what it did was lynch me except Quin had more votes.
Point me towards the valid and lynchworthy reads that are being ignored.insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pm Re: The first paragraph. No, I’m frustrated at people deciding that random, emotion-based reads are more valid and more lynch-worthy than other reads.
We don't have a flip.insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pm Deciding that “this is essentially Day 1” is a toxic cop-out. We’ve been posting and interacting for 13 or so days. Disregarding all that content is downright ignorant.
You only get flips if you make sure a player is really dead.insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pm Pushing and pushing towards a “kill” for “information” and telling people to fall in line behind you if they know what’s best for the thread, is downright idiotic at best and anti-civ at worst.
I don’t understand the merits of making sure that a civilian is really “dead.”
So do it. What's stopping you?insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pm I’d rather take time, gather as much info from interactions as possible, and lynch someone that I’m reasonably sure is bad, instead of pursuing a half-assed case out of empty, pointless bloodlust.
Disregarding one of two lives any given townie has is silly. When I played this style before and the town won at 3 vs 1, 2 of the 3 townies had lost a life. If we had lynched one of their lives earlier as a penalty (and given the mafia an extra kill by doing so), that would have caused a town loss. This practice is antitown. If you're going to lynch me, lynch me. Get a flip. Learn something. Don't give me a slap on the wrist that serves to do nothing but give the mafia a free kill and make me easier to eliminate later, when you might have figured out I'm town and have room to regret it. Why are you assigning penalties instead of scumhunting?insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pm Re: The second paragraph. As you yourself are aware, we have two lives in this game, so I wasn’t killing you “for real.” Plus, me and a lot of members view the game of champions as a big mafia “event,” and not showing up for Day 1 was an annoying enough action for me to not mind having you lose one of your lives as penalty, especially when there was no one else I was reading as bad. It was a shot in the dark directed at someone behaving, IMO, against the spirit of “championship” by not showing up.
Your constant weasel wording and misrepresentations, as follows:insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pm Do you have other reasons for suspecting me, or are you just gonna keep harping on this?
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pmpeople deciding that random, emotion-based reads are more valid
insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pmI don’t understand the merits of making sure that a civilian is really “dead.”
I don't think you really think I'm saying or doing any of those things, particularly the second quote.insertnamehere wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:41 pmpursuing a half-assed case out of empty, pointless bloodlust.
Where do these bad feelings come from? And I don't understand your position on sig. You'd be willing to lynch him if there was an entirely different case on him? So you don't suspect him, but you could?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:02 pmBad feelings about him. Gut read. I'd maybe lynch him over INH. Maybe Sig, too, if the argument against him wasn't purely Sig being Sig related.
Idk. I should probably ISO him. I remember reading some stuff yesterday and thinking Marmot could be bad.Sloonei wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:17 pmWhere do these bad feelings come from? And I don't understand your position on sig. You'd be willing to lynch him if there was an entirely different case on him? So you don't suspect him, but you could?Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:02 pmBad feelings about him. Gut read. I'd maybe lynch him over INH. Maybe Sig, too, if the argument against him wasn't purely Sig being Sig related.
Tell me about that. #slooneiingSpacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:34 pm I just did an ISO on Marmot and for once I think I agree with Sloonei. Marmot is talking but not taking any real solid consistent stance. He casts votes with little or no explanation, asks questions of people and never seems to really go anywhere with moves that he tries to cast as being for some purpose or gambit or something. I am unimpressed with Marmot. And since INH's first death I'm a lot less inclined to think he is bad so I don't like the train on him currently.
Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only? If so, why aren't you voting for Scotty?Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 2:50 pm I think the role didn't make sense as anything but a civ role. My suspicion of him was mostly based on a loose idea he might be teammates with Wilgy, who I still strongly suspect and would rather we lynch today so if anyone is on board with that I am down to move to Wilgy. But INH's role reveal looked civ. So why would I now want to lynch him? Any real suspicion of him I had before is negated by the role reveal. His new role could have changed his alignment, but I don't see any reason to believe that over any of the other people who are in their second role. And I feel like his emotional response is real. I don't know if it is alignment indicative or not, but I see no good reason to vote him.
I still solidly believe Wilgy is bad. And I resent that you keep saying people are voting for Wilgy being WIlgy when I am voting him for the exact opposite reason. I think we are seeing a more serious gameplay Wilgy and it makes me believe he is bad as per meta I have observed from him as previous Baddie Wilgy.
Did Blooper ever respond?Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:59 pmGiven that fact, two baddies who are in separate tribes make perfect sense. Again, it helps them to make up for their disadvantage. Additionally, Blooper's response to Scotty pointing out that her first role had BTSC with someone from the other tribe seemed very odd to me. If you were given BTSC with someone else, what is the first thing you would want to know?
Who are you?
Or, what thread are you in/what information do you have that I might not have?
The fact she said she didn't even know she was talking to someone from the other thread is really odd to me. How?
Do you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:11 pm Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.
As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.
No, because I just saw this (I think I skipped a chunk or two of a page). To answer as best I can, I had one day of being able to talk to the person (who I now know was nutella), and I was SUPER busy that Day period (as my parents were in town) before I lost the role. Like, I think I had time to check in with her twice, and that was combined with reading the thread and actually, y'know, responding to stuff. I didn't expect to get friggin' NK'ed Night 1. Like, I was really shocked when I saw the post. And sad, because I really didn't have time to even use the BTSC. That's my best explanation for why I didn't ask the questions that you would've liked I'd have asked.LoRab wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:54 pm Daisy: What are your current thoughts on this?
(quote clipped for the relevant part)Did Blooper ever respond?Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:59 pmGiven that fact, two baddies who are in separate tribes make perfect sense. Again, it helps them to make up for their disadvantage. Additionally, Blooper's response to Scotty pointing out that her first role had BTSC with someone from the other tribe seemed very odd to me. If you were given BTSC with someone else, what is the first thing you would want to know?
Who are you?
Or, what thread are you in/what information do you have that I might not have?
The fact she said she didn't even know she was talking to someone from the other thread is really odd to me. How?
Not that im aware of and I still feel suspicious of Blooper because of this. But I'm kind of hoping she will comment on it still.LoRab wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:54 pm Daisy: What are your current thoughts on this?
(quote clipped for the relevant part)Did Blooper ever respond?Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:59 pmGiven that fact, two baddies who are in separate tribes make perfect sense. Again, it helps them to make up for their disadvantage. Additionally, Blooper's response to Scotty pointing out that her first role had BTSC with someone from the other tribe seemed very odd to me. If you were given BTSC with someone else, what is the first thing you would want to know?
Who are you?
Or, what thread are you in/what information do you have that I might not have?
The fact she said she didn't even know she was talking to someone from the other thread is really odd to me. How?
I didn't say INH was good based on his first role! I said I hadn't seen anything in his behavior since his new role thstmakes me suspect him. And my previous suspicions of him in his first role were incorrect judging by the role he had so I don't old them in any bearing on INH in his new role. Stop putting words in my mouth, it makes me seriously istrust you.Jackofhearts2005 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:55 pmDo you think Juliets and Golden are making alignments clear based on the first role only?Spacedaisy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:11 pm Look, you can go through my posts I posted a whole thing linking to his ISOs from games where he was bad, good and even one 3P game. So I have already given my thoughts on this, I don't have time to repeat myself. Clearly I do think he is playing to his Baddie meta.
As to the first point, you don't get what I'm saying. My point is my previous suspicion is negated by the fact I feel he pretty much flipped a civ role. And I have nothing since then that leads me to suspect him for being bad. So why would I vote for him? Just because he is in a second role? Is that what you are suggesting? If so I disagree. To borrow a sentiment from 3J, I am not playing against the hosts, I am playing against the mafia. I will cast my vote against those I suspect, not against those that I think the theories on setup could possibly make bad. That is not a solid reason to do anything IMO. I am not voting for Scotty because I don't suspect Scotty's play like I do Marmot's. In fact, I have for the most part felt like Scotty was giving me civ vibes.
Isn't Scotty's first role bad?
If you're going to say that INH is good because of his first role, then you have to say Scott is bad because of his first role.
You're the one playing against the mods. You're basically saying "I don't think Golden and Juliets would give this power to a baddie."
I'm playing against INH and Scotty. I'm ignoring their powers and voting based on what they're saying.