The Syndicate

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I got a role from another game. Do you think llama messed up?

So what happened? Did he?

I don't think he did. I did roll-claim earlier, so I'll just let you guys decide.

Snow Dog wrote:Right I'm gonna hit the sack. See you all tomorrow.

Linki. Because as you said, why would a baddie vote for himself when he can throw his vote on a civ.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I got a role from another game. Do you think llama messed up?

So what happened? Did he?

I don't think he did. I did roll-claim earlier, so I'll just let you guys decide.

Nachomamma8 wrote:Baddies

MovingPictures - With Moving talking about how excited he was to get the game moving, I expected more of that excitement to leak out into the thread; I expected him to take a more active role in guiding the game forward and pushing reads. I thought that his post asking a couple people questions and asking about gut reads in general was a step towards that, but I found it odd that he didn't offer his own leans while asking for others to give theirs; to me, it seems like maybe he was pretty okay with the gamestate (which he would be if a baddie, stagnation is fantastic for those on team evil) and wasn't making an honest effort to get it going. I felt better about this post when I started writing this post, but then I saw a couple of his recent posts, and I'm doubting myself, but I'd still like this addressed.

Long Con - Long Con baddie read doesn't have an intense amount of substance; in fact, I liked his early post talking about how he expected to get scumread for his role speculation (if he was afraid of taking heat for it as baddie, I expect he would either not do it in the first place or post it and try to keep a confident face on). I didn't like him calling Wigly a "suspect" for not reading his role PM, though; there isn't really a reason why not reading your role PM is scummy, just boring (since you're not playing towards one win condition or another). Scum motivation for that attack is taking advantage of an easy target early.

If I had the ability to change my vote after making it, I'd probably be voting MovingPictures right now; I don't feel particularly confident in the read, but again, MovingPictures is a player who I expect to be active and fairly transparent so I'd be pretty confident in firming up the read well before the end of the day.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:Right I'm gonna hit the sack. See you all tomorrow.

Linki. Because as you said, why would a baddie vote for himself when he can throw his vote on a civ.

Not sure what "linki" means.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Vompatti wrote:As for the lynch, are there any volunteers?

There's a lot of fluff happening so far (which I don't mind, just an observation), so it's possible that I'm clinging to anything that seems the slightest bit alignment indicative, but I liked this. I think it's something that baddies would be less likely to do than goodies, but don't have anything backing me up on that except for instinct.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I'd volunteer, but I promised myself I wouldn't be lynched Day 1.

And, since I'm explaining gut reads, this reads along the same lines.
I find that "I won't be lynched Day 1!" is more commonly a baddie goal than a goodie one (people are usually more afraid of being lynched instantly when they lack the power of the truth on their side), and generally baddies don't like sharing their goals in thread unless I've stumbled onto a much different meta than I'm used to.

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I got a role from another game. Do you think llama messed up?

So what happened? Did he?

I don't think he did. I did roll-claim earlier, so I'll just let you guys decide.

WTF?

Ok i'll have to read back tomorrow.

MovingPictures07 wrote:I'm already being held to a lofty standard

Snow Dog wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:Right I'm gonna hit the sack. See you all tomorrow.

Linki. Because as you said, why would a baddie vote for himself when he can throw his vote on a civ.

Not sure what "linki" means.

My bad. I thought that was what we did.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Vompatti wrote:As for the lynch, are there any volunteers?

There's a lot of fluff happening so far (which I don't mind, just an observation), so it's possible that I'm clinging to anything that seems the slightest bit alignment indicative, but I liked this. I think it's something that baddies would be less likely to do than goodies, but don't have anything backing me up on that except for instinct.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I'd volunteer, but I promised myself I wouldn't be lynched Day 1.

And, since I'm explaining gut reads, this reads along the same lines.
I find that "I won't be lynched Day 1!" is more commonly a baddie goal than a goodie one (people are usually more afraid of being lynched instantly when they lack the power of the truth on their side), and generally baddies don't like sharing their goals in thread unless I've stumbled onto a much different meta than I'm used to.

What if Vompatti and I are teammates and this is all part of an elaborate scheme?

I like you nachomamma. Have we played together before?

Linki:

Linki x2: Sometimes when you make a post, you'll submit it, and someone else will have posted while you were typing your own. Linki is the tag for responding for that intermediate post.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:Right I'm gonna hit the sack. See you all tomorrow.

Linki. Because as you said, why would a baddie vote for himself when he can throw his vote on a civ.

Not sure what "linki" means.

My bad. I thought that was what we did.

It was, I just didn't know what it meant when you posted it.
Thanks MM!

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I got a role from another game. Do you think llama messed up?

So what happened? Did he?

I don't think he did. I did roll-claim earlier, so I'll just let you guys decide.

WTF?

Ok i'll have to read back tomorrow.

no he posted a picture of a roll
he "roll claimed" as in claimed to be a roll

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I got a role from another game. Do you think llama messed up?

So what happened? Did he?

I don't think he did. I did roll-claim earlier, so I'll just let you guys decide.

WTF?

Ok i'll have to read back tomorrow.

no he posted a picture of a roll
he "roll claimed" as in claimed to be a roll

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Vompatti wrote:As for the lynch, are there any volunteers?

There's a lot of fluff happening so far (which I don't mind, just an observation), so it's possible that I'm clinging to anything that seems the slightest bit alignment indicative, but I liked this. I think it's something that baddies would be less likely to do than goodies, but don't have anything backing me up on that except for instinct.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I'd volunteer, but I promised myself I wouldn't be lynched Day 1.

And, since I'm explaining gut reads, this reads along the same lines.
I find that "I won't be lynched Day 1!" is more commonly a baddie goal than a goodie one (people are usually more afraid of being lynched instantly when they lack the power of the truth on their side), and generally baddies don't like sharing their goals in thread unless I've stumbled onto a much different meta than I'm used to.

What if Vompatti and I are teammates and this is all part of an elaborate scheme?

I like you nachomamma. Have we played together before?

Linki:

Linki x2: Sometimes when you make a post, you'll submit it, and someone else will have posted while you were typing your own. Linki is the tag for responding for that intermediate post.

MovingPictures07 wrote:To elaborate further: I suppose I've enjoyed the fluffy and slow paced nature of the game so far.

Golden wrote: This interests me, because at this point in the thread these are my only two reads, and I ping town on both.

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:To elaborate further: I suppose I've enjoyed the fluffy and slow paced nature of the game so far.

Me too. The recent lull in games filling up have reminded me that a game doesn't need 800 pages for you to find the baddies, and a slower pace can actually be fun!

Besides, I'll be getting distracted every 10 minutes by this -

Nachomamma8 wrote:At this point I also feel obligated to apologize for how frequently I post, have tried to artificially reduce the number of times I post in the past but I find playing unnaturally kills the quality of my play and I'd rather not do that in my first game on this site (and am generally not convinced that my megawalls are any easier to parse than my large # of posts). If I'm annoying you or ruining your experience, don't be afraid to tell me!

Nachomamma8 wrote:At this point I also feel obligated to apologize for how frequently I post, have tried to artificially reduce the number of times I post in the past but I find playing unnaturally kills the quality of my play and I'd rather not do that in my first game on this site (and am generally not convinced that my megawalls are any easier to parse than my large # of posts). If I'm annoying you or ruining your experience, don't be afraid to tell me!

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:And, while I'm at it: MovingPictures, would you mind elaborating on your LC town lean a little more? I understand there might not be much behind it, but what do you think of him scumreading DrWigly early? It seems to me that DrWigly doing something weird (like not reading his role PM) isn't really unexpected and I don't actually think there's any scum motivation behind not reading your role PM; why don't you think that he's pushing on an easy target early?

If I was able to vote and change my vote, I'd be voting Long Con for those reasons; MovingPictures is a civilian read at this point.

Yeah, there really isn't much behind it, and LC is historically difficult for me to read. LC's post history has seemed genuine to me; I like the way he handled Mac's "you're trying too hard" with "try harder", he handled the accusation well.

You make a good argument as to why Wilgy's not worth scum reading though; that's why I didn't find it worth any read personally. I've been wrong about LC before for what seemed like manufactured or opportunistic early suspicions though.

Nachomamma8 wrote:At this point I also feel obligated to apologize for how frequently I post, have tried to artificially reduce the number of times I post in the past but I find playing unnaturally kills the quality of my play and I'd rather not do that in my first game on this site (and am generally not convinced that my megawalls are any easier to parse than my large # of posts). If I'm annoying you or ruining your experience, don't be afraid to tell me!

MovingPictures07 wrote:Looking back over earlier d0-d1 material and I'm really not finding anything but inconclusive fluff. There's just nothing here.

Boomslang wrote:

Quin wrote:I self-voted for the sake of figuring out whether they're changeable or not. Votes are not changeable.

It seems like there's some disagreement over whether this is a good or bad move. I find it rash; why vote solely for that purpose when there's still over 24 hours of daytime to go? Surely someone else would vote for suspicion reasons in that time, then report as to whether that vote was changeable. My gut says this is a convenient way for Quin to get out of voting for anyone else Day 1, and thus drawing early aggro.

Linki w/ Nacho: See, I take the opposite read here. A self-vote just to self-vote might fit your justification, but Quin's rationale isn't logical to me.
Linki w/MP: What's up is I'm trying to post :P Yeah, the Quin thing is a bit WIFOMy, but I think the explanation pushes it more toward a baddie read.
Linki w/Snow Dog: AHHHH LET ME POST

Golden wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:And, while I'm at it: MovingPictures, would you mind elaborating on your LC town lean a little more? I understand there might not be much behind it, but what do you think of him scumreading DrWigly early? It seems to me that DrWigly doing something weird (like not reading his role PM) isn't really unexpected and I don't actually think there's any scum motivation behind not reading your role PM; why don't you think that he's pushing on an easy target early?

If I was able to vote and change my vote, I'd be voting Long Con for those reasons; MovingPictures is a civilian read at this point.

Yeah, there really isn't much behind it, and LC is historically difficult for me to read. LC's post history has seemed genuine to me; I like the way he handled Mac's "you're trying too hard" with "try harder", he handled the accusation well.

You make a good argument as to why Wilgy's not worth scum reading though; that's why I didn't find it worth any read personally. I've been wrong about LC before for what seemed like manufactured or opportunistic early suspicions though.

I'm historically pretty damn good at reading LC - defending him against bad accusations, attacking him when no one else will listen..

For right now I think he is town. His role analysis shines more when he is town, I think. I can't put it into exact words, but there is a depth to it that indicates genuine thought an desire to get the answers.

Nachomamma8 wrote:I'm liking Boomslang coming into thread and pushing back, though and am excited to see more from him - if he clears himself sufficiently, the probability of a successful drunk darts game jumps up to 44% and I'm one step closer to that elusive 50% (which is probably the best I can hope for at this point in the game).

MovingPictures07 wrote:Hey guys, unfortunately I'll BBL.

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I got a role from another game. Do you think llama messed up?

So what happened? Did he?

I don't think he did. I did roll-claim earlier, so I'll just let you guys decide.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:Right I'm gonna hit the sack. See you all tomorrow.

Linki. Because as you said, why would a baddie vote for himself when he can throw his vote on a civ.

Not sure what "linki" means.

Nachomamma8 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:

Snow Dog wrote:

Metalmarsh89 wrote:I got a role from another game. Do you think llama messed up?

So what happened? Did he?

I don't think he did. I did roll-claim earlier, so I'll just let you guys decide.

WTF?

Ok i'll have to read back tomorrow.

no he posted a picture of a roll
he "roll claimed" as in claimed to be a roll

Nachomamma8 wrote:I don't mind slower paces but I get antsy as shit when deadline approaches and I don't have a vote I feel even vaguely positive about.

Nachomamma8 wrote:This is reassuring; I did like LC's questions and thoughts about baddie roles in particular but wasn't sure how comfortable he was mimicking his role speculation as scum.

Golden wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:I don't mind slower paces but I get antsy as shit when deadline approaches and I don't have a vote I feel even vaguely positive about.

So do I and it is a problem when there is less than 24 hours and I don't have a single bad lean yet.

Golden wrote:Especially in the early game, when you are bad you want to hang on to every advantage you have and see how the game is playing out before you commit yourself.

Soneji wrote:@Nacho : You look to rely a lot on an ability to townread and then use PoE, even this early. How much weight do you give to conscious vs unconscious scum moves? I have noticed that you approach people's posts as if you were scum in their shoes and make your read based on if you think they'd consciously post what they did with the proposed scum intent, in my experience this is rare.

Mafia generally don't purposely post as if they are mustache twirling villains even if it comes off that way in someones scumread. Their subconscious guilt is how these slips are made.

Black Rock wrote:I'm here and so happy this is game is running at a slower pace.

Snow Dog wrote:

MovingPictures07 wrote:Just a little over 24 hours remaining and we've had hardly any on-topic discussion. Let's change that.

Mac, tell me why Epi is bad.
LC, what did you gain from your role analysis?
Everyone else, do you have any thoughts on anyone's alignment so far for even weak reasons/pings? If so, what are they?

Epi is always bad. Even when he's good.

MacDougall wrote:Oh my fucking lord I am 30.

Nachomamma8 wrote:Town is a word that's interchangeable with civilian, apologies for failing my vocabulary test there.

I think that my train of thought is pretty weird - there's no reason for Quin to expect anyone like me to exist of have that train of thought, is there? I find voting to find the answer to whether votes are changeable or not is completely reasonable; do you disagree?

Nachomamma8 wrote:It was a rash move, but I don't really think that rash is equivalent to "more likely to come from a baddie".
I think that asking someone to wait until they have real suspicion in order to figure out votes are changeable or not is pretty unreasonable.

Boomslang wrote:

Nachomamma8 wrote:Town is a word that's interchangeable with civilian, apologies for failing my vocabulary test there.

I think that my train of thought is pretty weird - there's no reason for Quin to expect anyone like me to exist of have that train of thought, is there? I find voting to find the answer to whether votes are changeable or not is completely reasonable; do you disagree?

Nacho, you're defending this a lot more than I think it warrants. And you're conflating voting to find the answer with self-voting to find the answer. The former would be a side benefit of an early vote aiming to build momentum against a suspect; the latter is throwing away the power of the vote, possibly with less than honest intentions, to find the answer.

Nachomamma8 wrote:It was a rash move, but I don't really think that rash is equivalent to "more likely to come from a baddie".
I think that asking someone to wait until they have real suspicion in order to figure out votes are changeable or not is pretty unreasonable.

Why do you think that's unreasonable? If you have real suspicion of someone, it shouldn't matter if votes are changeable. You would gain that knowledge without sacrificing the efficacy of your vote.